Quick question on right to mortgage?

beth3735

Just read something online which got me thinking, as much as i don't think or want a relationship split up i was just reading a forum which stated a couple even though jointly named on the mortgage because only the man had paid the mortgage bill she stood no legal chance of having half?! Is this true?

In my situation I work 1 day a week around my kids and husband, and my husband does the full time work, so all his wages goes on mortgage, C tax, gas, etc.

My money goes on running the car, kids, food for us all, clothes and just bits and bobs and life insurance for the 2 of us.

Would this ever go against me if the unfortunate ever happened? Slightly worried that maybe i should protect myself and pay something towards the mortgage?

Person_one

If you've been married more than 2 years,, don't worry about it. Everything you both own is now a joint asset.

74jax

Who is the mortgage in the name of?

Who is on the title deeds?

beth3735

We are both on the deeds and joint mortgage, me and him Thank you though, Glad husband isn't on here as he would think im planning to do a bunk lol Just made me think though when i read it We have been married 10 yrs too, so no need to worry about timescales on that one.

kingfisherblue

beth3735 wrote: »

Just read something online which got me thinking, as much as i don't think or want a relationship split up i was just reading a forum which stated a couple even though jointly named on the mortgage because only the man had paid the mortgage bill she stood no legal chance of having half?! Is this true?

In my situation I work 1 day a week around my kids and husband, and my husband does the full time work, so all his wages goes on mortgage, C tax, gas, etc.

My money goes on running the car, kids, food for us all, clothes and just bits and bobs and life insurance for the 2 of us.

Would this ever go against me if the unfortunate ever happened? Slightly worried that maybe i should protect myself and pay something towards the mortgage?

I was married for sixteen years. During the first couple of years, I worked full time in a lower paid job (shop work). Once our daughter was born, I worked part time. Later, we had two sons, one who is severely disabled. I couldn't continue working as I was caring for our children, attending appointments with our disabled child, caring for his extensive needs, etc.

When my ex left us to start a new family elsewhere, he tried to bully me inot selling our house. He wanted at least half of the sale price (conveniently forgetting that the remainder of the mortgage would have to be paid off first!), and later told me that he wanted the whole amount. He said that as he had always earned more, he had paid the mortgage and therefore was entitled to the full amount.

To cut a long story short, we ended up in Family Court. He wrote 'not applicable' in the spaces asking about disability on the financial forms. My barrister pointed out that we have a child who has considerable care and mobility needs, and my ex said that our son wasn't as disabled as I made him out to be.

I then had to provide proof of our child's disabilities and the fact that he will never be able to live independently. The judge awarded the house to me, with my ex getting half of the profits (after any remaining mortgage has been paid) when a trigger event is reached. The trigger events are stated in the documents from the courts, and it is likely to be many years before the house is sold, as the judge agreed that our son needs to be cared for in the family home in the future.

The judgement is far better for my son's future than I expected, but even before then, my barrister told me that in a marriage, contributions are seen as equal. So caring for the children of the marriage, even if you have no paid work, is seen as equally important as earning the wages that keep a roof over the family's heads. Therefore, division of assets starts at 50/50, altohugh there may be some movement away from that figure.

Your contributions towards your family would be taken into account if you ever separated and divorced. The fact that your husband makes the actual mortgage payments is immaterial, as you contribute both financially (although to a lesser degree), and in caring for your family.

I hope that you remain happily married and nvever have to go through the heartbreak of divorce x

beth3735

Thank you Kingfisherblue, how frustrating that must of been to have to prove your sons disability when your ex knew what that would mean to you dragging your son through it like that.

I am glad the judgement went in your favour and you get to keep the house till your son is grown up.

I also hope i stay married for a long time too, divorce scares me lol Plus i wouldn't get my Las Vegas wedding renewal in 15 yrs time

Thank you though, its cleared up my query, did wonder how it was possible to tell the woman where to go when she has raised their little family Maybe there was more to that story that was let on.

zzzLazyDaisy

Divorce is different from a cohabiting couple splitting up because divorce laws have the power to change the shares in the property, no matter whose name the house is held in, or who has paid what on the mortgage, as all matrimonial assets are considered to be joint assets.

The starting point is that the property would be split 50/50. Then other matters are taken into account, such as who will be the parent with care of any children, which may result in that parent getting a larger share of the house if they are responsible for keeping a roof over the child/ren's head.

kingfisherblue

beth3735 wrote: »

Thank you Kingfisherblue, how frustrating that must of been to have to prove your sons disability when your ex knew what that would mean to you dragging your son through it like that.

I am glad the judgement went in your favour and you get to keep the house till your son is grown up.

I also hope i stay married for a long time too, divorce scares me lol Plus i wouldn't get my Las Vegas wedding renewal in 15 yrs time

Thank you though, its cleared up my query, did wonder how it was possible to tell the woman where to go when she has raised their little family Maybe there was more to that story that was let on.

Luckily my son didn't have to appear in the court. He wouldn't have understood anything anyway, as he has, among other things, a learning disability. I provided written evidence from his paediatrician, Social Services, and the Down's Syndrome Association (who were brilliant - they gave a general overview, followed by specifics regarding my son, who has numerous additional conditions, not all associated with DS).