Separation money question

Bubby

victory wrote: »

In my brothers situation at mediation I think he insisted the house be sold and go 50/50 on the sale so that 'they could both start again afresh' whether my SIL wanted to stay in the house I am not sure on that one but they sold and got two seperate individual houses from the sale of the family home

Were there children involved?
I think it is one of those situations that really depends on the individual circumstances, some people feel that their divorce was biased one way and others feel differently. Depends on money, solicitors, judge etc etc etc

victory

..................................................

princessdreamer

flame suit on. If the person living in the home with the children can afford to and is willing to pay the mortgage on their own. Then I feel they should be allowed to keep it until the youngest child reaches 18. I feel in this situation if the other party tries to force a sale it is pure greed and their priorities are all wrong, either NRP either male or female should put the childrens needs first above all else.
This is my current position and until a judge orders a sale which would mean ex husband is throwing the children out to gain money (he pays nothing for them) I will not move. Oh he refused mediation so there is no option of talking, his GF didn't want us to be alone together .

Marisco

princessdreamer wrote: »

flame suit on. If the person living in the home with the children can afford to and is willing to pay the mortgage on their own. Then I feel they should be allowed to keep it until the youngest child reaches 18. I feel in this situation if the other party tries to force a sale it is pure greed and their priorities are all wrong, either NRP either male or female should put the childrens needs first above all else.
This is my current position and until a judge orders a sale which would mean ex husband is throwing the children out to gain money (he pays nothing for them) I will not move. Oh he refused mediation so there is no option of talking, his GF didn't want us to be alone together .

I can understand what you're saying pd, but if the ex needs the money to get another place, what's the alternative? I know you probably don't care if he's on the street, but everyone has to be practical in these situations. If he's "rich" enough to not need the house money, then go for it. Otherwise it's only fair that each of you start with a "pot" of money (assuming there is equity in the house) to start "afresh".

princessdreamer

In most cases the NRP can afford to go on to buy another house while the RP cannot. The RP ends up in rented accomodation with the money running out fast, high childcare costs and the childrens quality of life suffers. Unless there is over 100k equity in the property it is highly unlikely that they can both start again. The NRP has holidays cars and treats his new family, the RP is left with their life in ruins.

Marisco

princessdreamer wrote: »

In most cases the NRP can afford to go on to buy another house while the RP cannot. The RP ends up in rented accomodation with the money running out fast, high childcare costs and the childrens quality of life suffers. Unless there is over 100k equity in the property it is highly unlikely that they can both start again. The NRP has holidays cars and treats his new family, the RP is left with their life in ruins.

Yes, I did say if the NRP needs the money. If not, then go for keeping the house. My ex did not need the money to start again, so he left the house, as he knew I couldn't afford to move. But if he had needed the money, then I'm sure he would have forced a sale as well. And although I'd have been as mad as a box of frogs, I wouldn't really have blamed him, as I'd have probably done the same myself!

angela110660

Please can you advise where you find mediation people as discussed above as that does seem a sensible way forward. Also is it wise to have your own valuations of ex marital home for financial purposes?