seperation time, who leave the house?

DS4215

Get a couple of independent quotes from estate agents - while you are both there, so no "He Said, She Said". Once you have the quotes, and your mortgage figures you can see who can afford to buy out the others equity in the house. If neither of you can get a mortgage high enough then sell it and split the proceeds.

benb76

HappyMJ wrote: »

And if both can afford to stay then it's whoever accepts the offer from the other person first. Most people when leaving want the property to be valued very high but if they want to stay they want a low valuation. You both want to stay so the offer either of you make to the other should be around the actual valuation anyway.

i.e you think the property is worth £100,000 less £80,000 mortgage. You offer £10,000 but they think it's now worth £95,000 less the £80,000 mortgage so they offer you £7,500. Sensibly if they think it's undervalued they should accept the £10,000 as a good offer and leave.

This is the correct answer. Not much a solicitor can do in this situation, apart from charge you £200 per hour.

Gloomendoom

JMHB wrote: »

Doesn't anybody decide by who did ALL the decorating and chose ALL the furniture? That's how 'we' decided... well at least that's how my exH did anyway. (And not that he did do all the decorating either, though he did choose most of the decor and furniture. It is true to say I did have little say in it.)

I have to say that this is the most bizarre concept I have ever heard of.

kingfisherblue

In my case, my ex left the house and then tried to force me to sell (with him getting the lion's share of the money!). What actually happened was that we went to court and as I am primary carer for our children, and the house has been adapted for our older son's disabilities, I have the house. He will get a share of the equity when it is sold, but the judge put a Mesher order in place and it is likely to be several years before this happens.

RichGold

helenathena wrote: »

if both are on the mortgage, both want to stay but cant live with the other, how is it decided who goes?

Paper, scissors, stone.

Caroline73_2

I'm always amazed by the number of women who decide they should stay in the marital home following separation despite the fact they can't afford it and expect their ex to fund it.

I lived in a lovely rural area in a great house with my ex and our son, but when we decided to split up I moved to a house I could afford. I think there's something really tragic about being funded by your ex.

I wouldn't want to live in a house where I'd had a bad relationship. Selling and both going different ways is best IMO. My mum moved into the house my stepdad shared with his ex previously. Weird.

Person_one

Caroline73 wrote: »

I'm always amazed by the number of women who decide they should stay in the marital home following separation despite the fact they can't afford it and expect their ex to fund it.

Where did the OP say either of those things? It looks like she can afford and just wants him out, not to fund her!

Women expect the ex to help in funding the home when they are raising their children in it. That's not so unreasonable.

princessdreamer

As the mother and the sole carer for my children I expect to keep the house but I pay for everything myself. he just wastes his money on his girlfriend.

Caroline73_2

Person_one wrote: »

Where did the OP say either of those things? It looks like she can afford and just wants him out, not to fund her!

Women expect the ex to help in funding the home when they are raising their children in it. That's not so unreasonable.

Sorry that was just a general musing rather than a dig at the OP. The OP didn't say children were involved, her original post was very vague. So I answered in a general sense.

Like I said (which you didn't quote) I think selling up is the best option. Maintenance payments are their to fund the child's welfare. I'm not saying the NRP shouldn't pay towards their children!

JMHB

Caroline73 wrote: »

I'm always amazed by the number of women who decide they should stay in the marital home following separation despite the fact they can't afford it and expect their ex to fund it.

I lived in a lovely rural area in a great house with my ex and our son, but when we decided to split up I moved to a house I could afford. I think there's something really tragic about being funded by your ex.

I wouldn't want to live in a house where I'd had a bad relationship. Selling and both going different ways is best IMO. My mum moved into the house my stepdad shared with his ex previously. Weird.

I have to say I do agree with this. My exH has the house (that he allegedly decorated...) but any future girlfriends are taken back to what was "our" house, "our" bed etc. He wanted it that way though probably only so that I couldn't.

I feel I can hold my head up high that I have brought my son away from a moody controlling atmosphere to a place of peace and can soon buy us somewhere funded by my half share of the family home and by my working which I have done for 28 years.

The advantage of one buying the other out, of course, is that it can be settled sooner than waiting for a buyer.

I must admit it had never occurred to me to stay in the house until I'd bought somewhere else - that would have made for a very trying 6 months or so but some do.