Wife has left. What should I be paying for?

Valli

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

Is this Scotland or England?

In England the house and matrimonial assets are assessed at the time of the divorce, so getting valuations now won't help.

In Scotland the value of the house and assets is assessed at the date of the breakdown of the marriage (as I understand it)

I had to get the valuations some considerable time beforehand (England).

I would assume that IF she has left and is no longer contributing to cost/upkeep of house then time of separation is relevant.

But I could be wrong.

(Note to self - marry and divorce more frequently, to keep up to date with sytsem;))

zzzLazyDaisy

Valli wrote: »

I would assume that IF she has left and is no longer contributing to cost/upkeep of house then time of separation is relevant.

Not if the house is in joint names, held as 'joint tenants', (generally the case for most married couples). The legal starting position is always that the net proceeds are divided equally, no matter who contributes what and no matter how long one party has been living away from the property.

The courts can alter that share in the divorce settlement, but rarely do unless there are children involved, in which case the parent with care of the child/ren (usually but not always the mother) often gets a bigger share of the proceeds than the non-resident parent.

madbadrob

Valli wrote: »

mediation is useful, though not binding. Courts take adim view of those who will NOT accept/undergo mediation process

apols fortypos

Not exactly true. My ex and I were offered mediation and both refused it based on the fact we couldnt have a civil word for each other through our solicitors so there was no chance of that happening in any mediation. Granted we also lived 200 miles apart which made mediation impossible.

Splitting the house is also not as straightforward as been stated here. If the house was bought prior to a marriage it can be argued that whilst it was the marital home it was the husbands prior to marriage and the court would have to decide the percentage of what the wife would be entitled to based on a lot of factors. My ex only got 21% of mine which allowed me to buy her out

Rob

markharding557

Hi charlievalentine
This website and forum is for people separating and divorcing.
http://www.wikivorce.com/divorce/

Thegirl

madbadrob wrote: »

Splitting the house is also not as straightforward as been stated here. If the house was bought prior to a marriage it can be argued that whilst it was the marital home it was the husbands prior to marriage and the court would have to decide the percentage of what the wife would be entitled to based on a lot of factors. My ex only got 21% of mine which allowed me to buy her out

It would be unlikely to matter in this circumstance as it is a long marriage (if their child is 11 and they've been living together since the child was born, regardless of when they married it would class as a long marriage as cohabitation prior to marriage is included in calculating the marriage length).

denton6

Thegirl wrote: »

It would be unlikely to matter in this circumstance as it is a long marriage (if their child is 11 and they've been living together since the child was born, regardless of when they married it would class as a long marriage as cohabitation prior to marriage is included in calculating the marriage length).

I don't believe living together counts towards the marriage length. I was living with my now ex for 22 years and had 2 children together. Went on to have 2 more children. When we split, it only classed as 16 years married.

DexterMorgan

I have no problem with the split of the property as there are options. The mortgage continues to have to be paid. It sounds too obvious that if the asset is divided, so the liability is similarly divided but is this the case?

keystone

DexterMorgan wrote: »

I have no problem with the split of the property as there are options. The mortgage continues to have to be paid. It sounds too obvious that if the asset is divided, so the liability is similarly divided but is this the case?

Unfortunately not - am going through this myself atm. If the mortgage is in joint names then there is a 99.999999999% chance that the mortgage provider will not allow you to just take one name off the mortgage. You will be required to redeem the existing mortgage and close it off. Whoever remains in the house will then have to take out a new mortgage if they want to stay there. Be prepared for computer to say no!! In the meantime you are both jointly and severably liable for the monthly payments.

Sorry.

Cheers

DexterMorgan

keystone wrote: »

Unfortunately not - am going through this myself atm. If the mortgage is in joint names then there is a 99.999999999% chance that the mortgage provider will not allow you to just take one name off the mortgage. You will be required to redeem the existing mortgage and close it off. Whoever remains in the house will then have to take out a new mortgage if they want to stay there. Be prepared for computer to say no!! In the meantime you are both jointly and severably liable for the monthly payments.

Sorry.

Cheers

Thanks for that. I thought (feared?) that would be the case. Given that the soon-to-be-ex will be staying in the house with the kids and so selling it is not an option, my interest in the property will have to take some time to be realised. Just another obstacle on the way to re-establishing a foothold on the property ladder!