Divorce and financial settlement

shoe*diva79

I think you are being perfectly reasonable. Seeing as you appear to have put in 100% to the household, getting a 50% return is acceptable. Your ex will have 7 years to work out what to do. My OH has a similar agreement with his ex... A monetery figure to go to him on the triggers youngest turning 18, her moving someone in/marrying and another which escapes my mind at he moment. She bought him out he mortgage when they split and he got some cash then, with the rest to follow as outlined.

January20

M00se, the problem with you arrangement is that it doesn't show that you are paying for the mortgage, so your ex could just say that she is now paying for the mortgage herself, and therefore your entitlement to equity from the house could (would?) stop from the moment it appeared that you stopped paying the mortgage.

Also, by allowing your ex to pay the mortgage herself you lose control and what if she decided not to pay it anymore? Do you realise how it could affect you? I think you need some seriously good professional advice otherwise you could end up bitterly regretting it!

She is committing benefit fraud by asking for more money from you and not telling the relevant authorities that you pay the mortgage. That's not right!

And you do realise she had no right to throw you out if your name is on the deeds don't you? It is your house as much as hers!

daska

Setting cutoffs is nothing to do with throwing kids out on the street, it is simply a means to prevent an 'ongoing stationery situation' that has no chance of resolution. Setting the cutoff date to when the youngest finishes education doesn't mean they will be homeless because, in the eventuality that she hasn't planned ahead, there are a number of ways you can move forward from that. You could force her to sell, leave it as a charge on the property, or buy her out, or whatever is most appropriate! No-one here can second guess what your financial situation will be at that point, or hers! And your obvious commitment to your kids will presumably mean your kids will be welcome at your place so it won't be that they become homeless.

Personally, if she doesn't like the 50:50 offer I would suggest working out what the CSA figure is and, if you are paying more than that, paying her the CSA rate as one sum and then paying the mortgage separately, direct into the mortgage a/c so that there is no dispute over how much you are contributing to the house. She may not like that because it will affect the benefits she receives but it may focus her mind on how much she wants to keep the house and make your negotiating position stronger. When it comes to the divorce/financial settlement don't commit to paying more than the CSA rate as you don't know what the future will bring. You can then choose to pay more if it's appropriate but you can't be forced to.

M00se_2

January20 wrote: »

M00se, the problem with you arrangement is that it doesn't show that you are paying for the mortgage, so your ex could just say that she is now paying for the mortgage herself, and therefore your entitlement to equity from the house could (would?) stop from the moment it appeared that you stopped paying the mortgage.

Also, by allowing your ex to pay the mortgage herself you lose control and what if she decided not to pay it anymore? Do you realise how it could affect you? I think you need some seriously good professional advice otherwise you could end up bitterly regretting it!

She is committing benefit fraud by asking for more money from you and not telling the relevant authorities that you pay the mortgage. That's not right!

And you do realise she had no right to throw you out if your name is on the deeds don't you? It is your house as much as hers!

My understaning is my legal rights to the house are secure regardless of who actually pays the mortgage. I do check she pays it as both have access to it online. I have had legal advice and im reasonably sure of my ground, dont worry thou i dont plan on signing anything without running it past a Solicitor first.

As for her committing benefit fraud, thats down to her not me, I dont know if she delcares my CM or not but I know she got caught still claiming WFTC after I left.....

And yes know I now she couldnt throw me out, at the time I didnt and tbh was the last thing on my mind, again my understanding is that leaving the home does not in anyway affect my rights to it.

Advice from wikivorce is 35% is fair due to our circumstances.

Appreciate all your advice, some of you might think im just trying to make a quick buck but im not, im an ordinary dad who got thrown out of the life he had known for 20 years & now just wants fair for my kids and myself.

princessdreamer

From a completely cold legal standpoint the worst she could expect at court would be a 60/40 split in her favour.

SandC

Your request sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Anyone considered that by the time the youngest has turned 18 years old one or more or all of them might've decided to live with their dad anyway?

There's two parents here and a single parent with 4 children by the point the youngest is 18 probably does not need to remain in a house that formally housed a total of 6 including both parents. It's quite normal these days to see the kids moving from one house to another or half of them staying with mum, half with dad etc., especially if they go off to uni, they'll choose the place that suits their social life best I guess while home on hols.

M00se_2

ok so Im going to ask for 40/60 but will go as low as 35/65. What about the triggers, if I dont budge I assume mediation will end up in deadlock & it will end up in front of a judge. Anyone advise how likely a judge is to add those triggers ?

Before someone says see a Solicitor, I already have but dont have one right now, I really want to keep a Solicitor out of this from my side cos I believe that this can be sorted easily once myself and my ex talk it thru. Once Solicitors get involved it has a habbit of getting nasty imo...

princessdreamer

I think you have covered the standard triggers, child turning 18, new partner, coming into money and such.

janninew

Once again I am amazed by some of responses the OP has received and how bitter some posters sound. It is clear that some people have had a bad time with ex partners, so now all men are the big, bad guys no matter what. They need to stop being some blinded by their own experience and actually read what the OP is saying.

I read the OP to be a perfectly reasonable question and his expectations aren't asking that much. I wonder at what point some would think its ok for him to stop paying half the mortgage and be able to release some of the money from the house? When the youngest gets married? Buys their own home? Draws their pension? There simple has to be a cut off point somewhere.

OP you don't have unrealistic expectations and I don't see what you wanting to do is trying to 'get your pound of flesh' as somebody said.

Good luck.

choccybuttons

Hi

I think its perfectly reasonable to have a 7 year cut off when youngest turns 18. Your ex wont be homeless, she will have the profits from the house to buy another home, or rent or even put her name on council housing list.