Separation and Second Charge(?) on a New Property

AnnKittenplan

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I assume that you've taken advice from a family law solicitor with regards to the division of assets. A conveyancing solicitor isn't the right person to be consulting. As you need a Consent order to protect your interests. This does not necessarily involve a charge on the property but is a legally binding agreement.

I've had advice from a matrimonial solicitor who has been largely competent, though there have been a couple of absolute howlers.

As I said I think we're closer to a resolution.

Thanks

AnnKittenplan

mgdavid wrote: »

I think your situation is most unusual; the Charges and Triggers you learnt about at mediation ARE common but only where one party stays in the current house and the other is moving out (and retains an interest / share of the equity).
Where parties both agree to sell and split the equity it usually results in a clean break financial agreement.

Despite the expensive advice from the conveyancing solicitor this is the consensus from just about everyone else directly involved in mortgage lending. Thanks. It all helps to clear things up.

And in this whole process it was actually the matrimonial solicitor who suggested that this might be the problem, so fair play to her.

Dave_Ham

AnnKittenplan wrote: »

Despite the expensive advice from the conveyancing solicitor this is the consensus from just about everyone else directly involved in mortgage lending. Thanks. It all helps to clear things up.

And in this whole process it was actually the matrimonial solicitor who suggested that this might be the problem, so fair play to her.

Good luck - I hope you clear up this administrative matter quickly and effeciently and can move on with the more important stuff you must be going through...

All the best..

star4876

There seems to be some really great advice on here and its definitely an eye opener!

AnnKittenplan - sorry to throw a slightly unrelated question in your direction but I get the impression that you are selling the current property on good terms, and stand to make a reasonable profit from it?

Your ex partner wants to buy a new house and from what you have said already about him getting the mortgage before your discussion and agreed 12.5k contribution, he doesn't technically need any of your money to achieve that? Sorry if I've missed something there.

I understand that you want to make some investment for the benefit of your children, but why does it have to be in his property?

Obviously this is a decision you have come to for your own reasons, but you could set up a trust fund for your kids or make other investments with the money, without all of the complication of getting involved in another house with your ex partner? Esp considering you are just going through the motions of getting rid of one joint asset, why embark on another?

Sorry I know its unrelated, thats just what pops out at me from reading what I've seen.

AnnKittenplan

star4876 wrote: »

Your ex partner wants to buy a new house and from what you have said already about him getting the mortgage before your discussion and agreed 12.5k contribution, he doesn't technically need any of your money to achieve that? Sorry if I've missed something there.

I understand that you want to make some investment for the benefit of your children, but why does it have to be in his property?

Obviously this is a decision you have come to for your own reasons, but you could set up a trust fund for your kids or make other investments with the money

I am beginning to come to the same conclusion.

I began this presuming keeping the equity in the property and securing it with a Second Charge was what was the most common outcome of a separation. As far as I can tell it is, but that is not our situation.

I figured if it can be invested in one property and secured with a Charge, then it can be invested in another property and secured with a Charge. Seems practical and simple. What has been untangled by hh, DH and others is that this is not the case.

The £12½k investment was, ironically suggested by me with the aim that it would make it easier to get a mortgage (bigger deposit) and the repayments would be smaller, and a good place for the money is the property in which the children will be living.

Given the problems and potential pitfalls I may be better off abandoning the idea and investing elsewhere, say, in a trust fund.

Thrugelmir

Is your solicitor suggesting a 62.5% / 37.5% split of equity?

With you receiving the additional 12.5% at a later date.

Unusual for there to be a straight 50/50 split at the time of divorce/separation where there are children involved.

star4876

To be honest with you I would take whatever money is coming to you from the sale of this joint property and aim to keep things simple.

This advice probably isn't appropriate for the mortgage section of the forum but breakups and having to deal with property is difficult enough as it is, not even considering that children are involved.

If your ex partner can afford to re-house himself and provide for the children then let him do it, and whatever money you are able to keep is yours, to manage however you want to. (Or put aside for your children)

Investing in his property might seem like a good idea to some extent , but you never know what the future holds, people's priorities can change. Good luck with everything x