Child maintenance with regards to a shared mortgage.

cpisthedbb

Me & my partner (not married) separated a few weeks ago, we have a 2 year old child and a joint mortgage. I initially tried to take the mortgage on in my name after my ex agreed I could try to do this. I then couldn’t get a mortgage due to the LTV been too high.

I’ve decided I want to now sell the house as there is maybe a little equity in it and it makes for an easier break as she can’t afford it on her own (working part time).

I want an easy separation and have gone along with everything she’s asked for so far.

The current situation is that she is living in the house and I’m paying the full mortgage on this property. I’m living at my dad’s and look after our daughter 2 nights a week. We both agreed that by me paying the full mortgage it would cover the maintenance costs for out daughter as she is basically living rent free.

She is now been awkward about everything and is taking legal advice. She has been told by a couple of friends that she should be able to set something up which in effect means I have to pay the mortgage until our daughter is 18 and I can’t sell the house.

I’d never heard of anything like this but speaking to someone else they had heard of similar stories.

I’ve searched the forums and on the internet but can’t find anything relating to this.

Could someone please give me advice as she is seeing a solicitor this week and I’m worried about this. I can’t afford to pay the mortgage and then get a place of my own in the future.

DUTR

Your real obligation will be to stump up 15% of your net salary, there will be a little reduction for overnight stays, if neither of you can afford the mortgage payments then the house will have to be sold, you can't live with your parents forever, you can both rent property seperately and your ex will get plenty of help with things like housing benefit etc.
You are both responsible for the mortgage payments but only at 50%. The child support is seperate.

cpisthedbb

DUTR wrote: »

Your real obligation will be to stump up 15% of your net salary, there will be a little reduction for overnight stays, if neither of you can afford the mortgage payments then the house will have to be sold, you can't live with your parents forever, you can both rent property seperately and your ex will get plenty of help with things like housing benefit etc.
You are both responsible for the mortgage payments but only at 50%. The child support is seperate.

Cheers for the quick reply.

So what people are telling her is incorrect? I'm more than willing to keep up my maintanence payments but was worried about the mortgage payments because it would basically mean I would have to live at my dads for the next 16 years which doesn't bear thinking about.

I can actually afford the mortgage on my own but the mortgage company wont lend me the money on the re-mortgage (but that's a different story)...

kingfisherblue

I'm a PWC and as one of our children has complex needs, I receive income support. I get help with the mortgage (from the DWP) and I pay the remaining amount, pus the endowments and insurance, myself from my benefits.

My ex wanted me to sell the house as soon as he left, but I was reluctant to do this as it is also my children's home. It has been adapted for our son's needs as well. I was informed by my solicitor that I would almost certainly be able to stay in the property until the youngest is eighteen (that will be the school leaving age by then, as it is increasing from 16 in a few years time). This is, of course, providing I keep up the payments. In court, the judge agreed that this is normally the case (we had been married for 16 years and have three children - I don't know if this makes any difference). However, as my son will always need to be looked after, and the house has been adapted to his needs, in my case I am able to continue living in our home for many years after this, providing I meet certain criteria. My ex has had his name removed from the mortgage by order of the judge.

Certainly in most cases that I know of, the PWC remains living in the property with the children until the youngest is 18, but the NRP does not pay the mortgage (or even Child Support in some cases :think:). I wouldn't expect my ex to pay the mortgage as he has to pay to live elsewhere.

kelloggs36

It depends on whether she gets a court order for you to pay the mortgage - you need to seek legal advice.

spider31

If you have no legal interest in the house and you pay the mortgage you can apply for a variation. The CSA will take you salary and deduct the mortgage payments from it then do the standard calculation.

To prove that you have no legal interest may need a letter from a solicitor that states this has been agreed.

I did this a few years ago, I was paying my ex 600PM and she wanted more so she went to CSA and got 800PM then I applied for a variation and it reduced to around 400PM

I don’t think a judge would agree to you paying the Mortgage until the children are 18. Off course everyone circumstances are different.

Get some legal advice

Thanks

speedster

easiest way is to put the house on the market. is your name listed first on the paperwork?

my guesss is, she'll get down off her high horse when she sees a for sale board outside.

and as stated, all she is legally entitled to is 15% of your net income, she's in for a big shock if she thinks she can force you to pay the mortgage and her live rent free for the next 16 years.

worse case scenario is if you stopped paying the mortgage and it gets reposessed. not a good ending though.

kelloggs36

If she applies to the courts you could find that you have no choice but to pay the mortgage until youngest child reaches 18. If you have a legal interest in the house then you will be stuck paying both CSA and the mortgage, so as I said, seek legal advice.

DUTR

kelloggs36 wrote: »

If she applies to the courts you could find that you have no choice but to pay the mortgage until youngest child reaches 18. If you have a legal interest in the house then you will be stuck paying both CSA and the mortgage, so as I said, seek legal advice.

Kelloggs36 I know you are a respected member here and know your stuff regarding the csa, I cannot help feel though that the replies are intended to scare the OP, as whilst partly feasable, I'm sure all know that he will not have to pay a mortgage AND CS, they are not even married . The child is young so the OP can only be on CS2 or later, hence a % of his net pay is due and whether it be mortgage or cs , one will overide the other, many many many people would be up in arms if things were as you are implying here. What court is going to suggest that the NRP pays mortgage and CS in the above scenario?

kelloggs36

Not at all - I'm merely suggesting that to avoid the worst case scenario, they seek legal advice! If the OP has a legal interest in the property they will not get any variation on the child support and that is already set. The courts and the house are a separate issue. OP needs to ensure that they get the best possible outcome by seeking legal advice. You will find many NRPs who have to pay both!!

DUTR

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Not at all - I'm merely suggesting that to avoid the worst case scenario, they seek legal advice! If the OP has a legal interest in the property they will not get any variation on the child support and that is already set. The courts and the house are a separate issue. OP needs to ensure that they get the best possible outcome by seeking legal advice. You will find many NRPs who have to pay both!!

I see what you are saying, I just recall my mate being in a similar situation and by choice was paying his ex's half of the mortgage and giving her an allowance, but then her friends filled her head with rubbish and she went to the csa, he decided to re-allign his budgeting which resulted in him paying only his half of the mortgage and the CS payments (which was less than her half of the mortgage) once the house was sold the equity was split proportionally with him ending up with more as his ex had to re-pay her part of the arrears, the episode wasn't without the contact blocking games etc but the courts and cafcass saw to it that the child has contact with both parents