marriage break up and sale of house

C_Mababejive

To the OP..have you discussed with OH what his expectations are with regard to divorce,house sale and any benefits flowing from that?


Note...Anyone who enters into a house purchase with another party and provides a greater contribution eg by way of deposit,should register that greater interest at the time of purchase. This will save a great deal of potential difficulty should the relationship fail at a later date. Any solicitor worth his salt would have/should have consulted you about this when you bought the property.

As i say,a lot depends on what his expectations are.

As others have said,a mutually agreed and DOCUMENTED settlement is preferable to sparring solicitors.

Solicitors are not interested in you,your husband the children or any emotion.

Their goal is to make money and win the case.

Rich22

When I originally bought my house some 16 years ago, I had just started a relationship with my girlfriend.....soon to be ex.

As she was at the time going through a divorce with her previous partner and already had one child with him we agreed that neither of us knew where our new relationship would go or for how long and that as I was buying a house she could come and live with me for convenience as she needed a place to live and I was looking for a lodger.

I was not prepared to enter into a relationship then get taken to the cleaners owing her half of what I had after being together for just 6 months as common law husband and wife so I got a deed drawn up by the solicitors. It is as follows:

"THIS DEED is made the 9th day of April 1996
BETWEEN (1) my name of my address ("the owner") and (2) her name of ("the Cohabitant")
WHEREAS:
(1) OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY

The owner is sole legal and beneficial owner of the property known as my addresshaving bought the property on the 29th February 1996 subject to a mortgage dated the 29th February 1996 ("the Mortgage") made between (1) the Owner and (2) National & Provincial Building Society

(2) COHABITATION

The Owner and the Cohabitant intend to live together at the property

(3) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP

The Cohabitant acknowledges that she does not own any beneficial interest in the property

NOW THIS DEED WITNESS as follows:

1. RIGHT TO RESIDE

The owner now consents to the Cohabitant living at the property until her right to reside is terminated in accordance with clause 3.

2. PAYMENT OF OUTGOINGS

Until the right of the Cohabitant to reside at the property is terminated or the Cohabitant ceases to live at the property (whicherver is the later) payment of outgoings shall be as follows:

2.1 The Owner shall pay all outgoings in respect of the property including the mortgage repayments, building insurance premiums and any sums in respect of the decoration maintenance or repair of the property.

2.2 The Owner and the Cohabitant shall contribute in equal shares to their common household expenses including charges for Council Tax, Water Rates, Sewage Charges, Gas, Electricity, Telephone and Food.

3 OWNERSHIP OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST

The Cohabitant acknowledges that she has not acquired and will not acquire whether by contributions aforesaid or by any other contributions howsoever made any beneficial interest in the property or in its proceeds of sale and that the ownership of the beneficial interest will remain unchanged

4 TERMINATION

The right of the Cohabitant to live at the property shall be terminated upon the happening of any of the following:

4.1 The expiration of one month following the death of the Owner
4.2 The expiration of one month following the service by either party on the other of written notice of termination
4.3 The Owner and the Cohabitant having lived apart for three months

5 EXPIRATION

This deed shall cease to have effect at the expiration of two years from the date of purchase of the property or upon the earlier marriage of the parties

IN WITNESS whereof this deed has been executed by the parties the day and year first before written."


Now my concern is with clause 5 although it has expired it clearly shows that we both entered into this agreement. Now the letter that she got from her solicitors reads:

" The property is held in my name sole name, although you instructed me that this has been purchased by you jointly some 16 years ago. You advised me that this had been purchased in his sole name due to concerns about you having a bad credit rating. You confirm that whilst you each have Bank Accounts in your own names, your incomes have always been utilised jointly and you have each put everything you have into the relationship and your home, and your home has always been treated as your jointly owned property. No statements to the contrary have ever been made by my name."

Well as you can see from the deed I had drawn up we didn't purchase my house jointly some 16 years ago.
Our bank accounts have always been separate.
We did jointly contribute to the household but no more than the deed says
We have never been engaged or married

I wont see her go without, I am prepared to pay child maintanence and set her up in her new place whereever that may be, but her solicitor made the suggestion that she could take me to court and end up pushing me out of MY house because we have a child together or take a settlement figure of around £ 30000 !

What are your views/advice ?

GDB2222

Check out Kernott v Jones

http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2011/05/04/kernott-v-jones-supreme-court/

Different in one very significant way, but probably relevant.

C_Mababejive

Why was the expiration clause written in anyway?

You say you are prepared to pay child maintenance. Presumably you are saying that as well as her child from a previous relationship,you both have a child together?

That being the case, her sol will suggest that whilst the property was originally bought by yourself,and the period in clause 5 having expired,and further that you have a child together,

a) That whilst you are not child no 1's natural father, you have acted as his father and by default,have assumed a level of parental responsibility

b) Since you conceived a child whilst you both lived at the home,the home now serves as a home for the family


Of course we are talking about expensive and lengthy litigation under TOLATA and so you might like to seek out case law which matches your situation. Stack v Dowden is oft quoted but there are others.

Another tack which she might take is to seek an occupation order under the Family Law Act ,often done by making suggestions as to the additional stress being put on her and the children by your presence..hence you must leave.

Cunning solicitors,often funded by legal aid..often lash the threat of an occupation order together with some overtures of TOLATA settlements in order to put pressure on errant partners such as yourself.


Do you both still live in the property and does that arrangement work?

Perhaps you need to shimmy over to Wikivorce forum to read similar tales of woe and associated commentary..

Rich22

yes we do still live in the property.....she seems more uneasy living here than I do. I don't know why? There is no pressure on her to do anything...and I pay to keep us all each month. At the moment I am looking to buy her out but this will take time to arrange.

I want us to stay together....it is her that want to leave the family home.

When I asked her for this weeks contribution of £ 93 she got so angry. Which made me feel like saying forget your payout lump sum, but I kept my cool. I only wanted it to buy our food and petrol.

hcb42

Rich, it would be better to have started your own thread, as this is now confusing.

Not sure why so many insist the original OP should have gone to a lawyer though, surely if they can resolve things amicably and in a way THEY feel is fair, why line the lawyers pockets unnecessarily.

I realise they might need a bit of protection, but not during negotiations - if they choose not to.

C_Mababejive

Rich22 wrote: »

yes we do still live in the property.....she seems more uneasy living here than I do. I don't know why? There is no pressure on her to do anything...and I pay to keep us all each month. At the moment I am looking to buy her out but this will take time to arrange.

I want us to stay together....it is her that want to leave the family home.

When I asked her for this weeks contribution of £ 93 she got so angry. Which made me feel like saying forget your payout lump sum, but I kept my cool. I only wanted it to buy our food and petrol.

Maybe she is angry and resentful because it isnt quite working out as she had hoped? Maybe she thought you would leave and she would be left with the home which you would largely pay for? Its quite possible that once she gets chatting to her mates and sees a Sol that that is how it will end up anyway..

Maybe you need to ask her what she is angry about?

After all,you have professed your love for her and you are wanting her to stay. If she isnt happy,then why doesnt she leave? We all know why of course but it would be nice to hear it from the horse mouth. Do you think she has a secret lover or has perhaps had a tryst which has left her riven with guilt?

GDB2222

hcb42 wrote: »

Rich, it would be better to have started your own thread, as this is now confusing.

Not sure why so many insist the original OP should have gone to a lawyer though, surely if they can resolve things amicably and in a way THEY feel is fair, why line the lawyers pockets unnecessarily.

I realise they might need a bit of protection, but not during negotiations - if they choose not to.

The problem arises if one partner is dominant and browbeats the other into an unfavourable agreement. If they then seek advice on that, the whole agreement falls apart.

Rich22

There is no way I would give up my house without a fight....I except that I should pay for her to re-start in a new place of her own as she has contributed to things over the years. And seeing as I have put most the money into it, as I earn 4 times what she does I think that is fair.

I think a £25,000 pay off with child maintenance on top is more than fair.

She is only getting legal aid as she is a low earner. If I go to the solicitor I will pay to fight. However I don't want it to get to that as I don't want her to be without. And I know a solicitor will tell me not to give her hardly anything.

I could understand it if I'd had an affair !!!!

GDB2222

Rich22 wrote: »

However I don't want it to get to that as I don't want her to be without. And I know a solicitor will tell me not to give her hardly anything.

You are so sure of what the solicitor will say, but I don't see how that can be, as the law is in a state of flux. Even if a solicitor 'told' you to give her 'hardly anything' you could just face up to him and give her lots anyway. However, in practice, I think you will find that the courts will not award her 'hardly anything', and you are on a path which is going to cost you a fortune in legal fees.

For goodness sake, she's put up with you for 16 years and your child will need to be properly housed and maintained. The courts will make you do this.

I strongly advise you to seek paid-for legal advice and to listen very, very carefully to what you are told, even if you don't like to hear it.

I could understand it if I'd had an affair !!!!

You can be impossible to live with for various other reasons. To be perfectly frank, you come across as a terrible bully. Maybe that's because you feel so wronged, but I think that maybe you need to look inside yourself.