Divorce and financial settlement

January20

It is unfair to say that if the OP wants the house to be sold when the youngest child is 18, this child will be homeless. We don't know the value of the house. It could be that half the value allows the OP's ex to buy another house outright? Or she could rent?

Surely the ex, although disabled and unable to work, is a grown woman who is able to get on in life? So she would have 7 years to plan what she would do when the youngest child became 18?

A lot of teenagers I know are getting ready to go to university when they reach 18. It doesn't matter so much then. No need to be dramatic and say "the child" (who will legally be an adult remember!) will be homeless!

OP, I don't think you are being unreasonable asking for 50/50 but can you clarify what you pay your wife. You first said that you pay her maintenance according to CSA, then that she pays the mortgage out of that. Do you pay her extra for the mortgage or just the flat CSA rate? because really your entitlement to any profit from the house should stop as soon as you are not paying the mortgage anymore. The maintenance is for feeding and clothing your children only.

Mara69

princessdreamer wrote: »

So she pays the mortgage too, classic. You pay for your children guess what you are supposed to.

In life we make choices. By the way it is not bricks and mortar to the children and they will know it was you who took it away no matter how old they are.

Bitter, much? Not to mention hypocritical given your signature. You have no idea how much the OP pays his ex - he could actually be paying all the mortgage via her maintenance.

OP, I dislike the trigger of 'unless she remarries'. Nothing to stop her moving another man into the former family home and just choosing not to marry.

GotToChange

Personally, I think this locks you into a continuing financial connection for too long.
As upthread, it needs to be clear what you are actually paying -
CSA - as per guidelines AND the (full?) mortgage payment?
AND - you are required to be unable to liquidate your (half-)asset for several years....??? Does not sound very fair to me.
I take it that you are able to put a roof over your own head for the foseeable future and that any return on property sale/buyout is not immediately necessary to you? (Which is unusual.) If your wife knows this, she is sneakily capitalising on your ability to separate yourself out without actually NEEDING to sell the house.
If she is on benefits, there is a very strong chance that the lender will not sanction your name being taken off the mortgage - which anyway has far far greater implications that siimply streamlining paperwork - and may even negate some of the triggers that you mention (sorry, I am too lazy to check what they actually are).
So, even if the lender okays it (which I repeat, I doubt they will), do.not.do.it. It will backfire on you; trust me.
Whilst I applaud you for taking your children's interest seriously, I don't agree with those who are saying that your obligation to them continues in any way other than morally after the age of 18, and certainly nothing can be enforced legally at this time. There does have to be a cut off point - and I do believe that your wife is using them - and will continue to - as a rope in this particluar tug-of-war. Not good. Or right.
I would have another think if I were you.

(Female - badly scarred by a divorce, so not totally impartial.)

princessdreamer

Mara69 wrote: »

Bitter, much? Not to mention hypocritical given your signature. You have no idea how much the OP pays his ex - he could actually be paying all the mortgage via her maintenance.

OP, I dislike the trigger of 'unless she remarries'. Nothing to stop her moving another man into the former family home and just choosing not to marry.

Nope honest, he expects her to use CSA to pay the mortgage instead of supporting the children he is financing his own savings pot.

Plus in no way hypocritical I pay for my children 100% pretty much everything I have is spent on them not a pittance of 20% like NRP are forced to pay. unlike the OP I do not intend to stop when they reach 18 to start lining my own pockets. Heck I will somehow have to fund them trough uni, help them save a deposit fr their own home and set it up. Then there will be the grandchildren, being a parent never stops.

January20

princessdreamer wrote: »

Nope honest, he expects her to use CSA to pay the mortgage instead of supporting the children he is financing his own savings pot.

.

No! You are twisting his words! he said:

M00se wrote: »

@Molly41 I pay her maintainance out of which she pays the mortgage, she asked for this as she said the social needed to see that I wasnt supporting the home directly. The mortgage is in joint names and so I am still responsible for it (which I have no objection to)
[/FONT][/SIZE]

He pays maintenance out of which she pays the mortgage. He DIDN'T say how much so you can't judge him - yet!

She asked him to do it because of her benefits so she is also committing fraud! (presumably!)

Now, stop being so biased and start reading properly please! You're only going to make a fool of yourself! Would be a shame

princessdreamer

CSA is not counted against benefits so no fraud. I never twisted anyones words I pointed out not only is he escaping paying for his children he is also building up a savings pot for himself by doing so.

princessdreamer

Plus he has not returned to clarify his position so I can only go on what has been said.

January20

princessdreamer wrote: »

CSA is not counted against benefits so no fraud. I never twisted anyones words I pointed out not only is he escaping paying for his children he is also building up a savings pot for himself by doing so.

The fraud is by her asking him to pay for the mortgage through CSA payments. And we don't know how much he is paying. Are you so biased towards the woman in this story that you can't actually understand what people are writing?

princessdreamer wrote: »

Plus he has not returned to clarify his position so I can only go on what has been said.

No, he hasn't returned. He could be avoiding the question or he could be busy. It hasn't stopped you from deciding that he was guilty anyway has it?

M00se_2

Well I have now returned, tbh I was annoyed with the attitude I got back from a lot of you guys, you dont know me but seemed to be implying that I didnt care for my kids, I can assure you that is not the case, I love for my kids a great deal and have no wish to take their home from them, I am more than happy for them to grow up there but on the same count I dont see that I should be tied to the house for the next 15 years until the mortgage is paid. There have been lots of replies and to many for me to reply to at once so will start with the one i just picked out.. I currently pay £450 per month in maintainance, out of this ex pays the mortgage of £230 ish per month. I cannot afford to pay maintainance and the mortgage, if I could I would but still have to live myself. I object to being told that I am "financing my own pot" this is not the case, I am not a materialistic type of person but I dont see why I should just give the keys of my fmh to my ex !!

M00se_2

princessdreamer wrote: »

Nope honest, he expects her to use CSA to pay the mortgage instead of supporting the children he is financing his own savings pot.

Plus in no way hypocritical I pay for my children 100% pretty much everything I have is spent on them not a pittance of 20% like NRP are forced to pay. unlike the OP I do not intend to stop when they reach 18 to start lining my own pockets. Heck I will somehow have to fund them trough uni, help them save a deposit fr their own home and set it up. Then there will be the grandchildren, being a parent never stops.

I`ll have you know up until I got thrown out last year, note THROWN OUT not choose to leave I paid 100% of everything for my children. I am not being forced to pay anything, I choose to pay for my kids as I am committed to them, If I really didnt want to support them I could quit my job and pay virtually nothing but I wont. For the record my ex and I agreed maintainance last year but then she insisted on more money twice which I was happy to agree to, the only ones effected by this were my kids, they are the ones I can no longer afford to take out. Also for the record my eldest told me 2 days ago that his mum has taken money off him twice for his provisional driving licence which still hasnt materialised... so please stop making me out to be a bad uncaring parent.