Forced house sale

Delree

A friend of mine has a situation on his hands. Ten years ago he won £250k on the lottery. He immediately bought a house but instead of paying for it outright, he used his win to create a trust fund which is administered by his parents, which then loaned him the money to buy the house and placed a charging order on the property in case it was ever sold.

Fast forward to today. His wife of four years is divorcing him, no unreasonable behaviour, she just "no longer finds him attractive" and is talking about forcing a sale. He has told her that 99% of the house sale proceeds will go to the trust fund and she will only get half the equity (about 6K after fees etc).

He has offered her £15k to walk away and not force the sale (he loves his house) but she is adamant.

Is there anything he can do? He can't run to any more than the £15k her has offered her and is worried sick he's going to lose his home.

Any advice would be appreciated.

barba

Obviously your friend should take legal advice.

However, he doesn't own the property so I can't see how she can force the sale. Only the trustees (parents?) will be able to sell the property. The establishment and trust wording are key

paddy's_mum

He needs to seek the opinion of a specialist lawyer.

Having said that, I'm sure I heard once that a divorce court judge can overturn almost anything if doing so helps with fair play in the division of matrimonial assets.

In the wife's shoes, I wouldn't be rolling over and playing dead either. What's to stop the trustees (the parents) giving him the whole of the trust fund once a divorce has been finalised.

Why did he need to have the money put into a 'can't touch it' set-up in the first place?

I suspect that might be a lot more going on here than your friend has given you any honest idea of.

Guest101

It's a short marriage and the house doesn't sound like a joint asset. Goodluck to her.

And I presume she hasn't paid anything towards the house

Errata

House owned by a Trust, short marriage = not a penny piece for wifey.

paddy's_mum

A short marriage but a long engagement that produced three children might make a huge difference ....

Guest101

paddy's_mum wrote: »

A short marriage but a long engagement that produced three children might make a huge difference ....

Have I missed something re engagement and kids?

And a long engagement in it's own is meaningless if she had no part to play in the purchase of the house.

moneyistooshorttomention

I would have thought the first and foremost consideration for him is whether there are any children of the marriage.

If there aren't, then she has a nerve.

If there are...then things might be rather different.

paddy's_mum

Guest101 wrote: »

Have I missed something re engagement and kids?

[STRIKE]Should've gone to specsavers[/STRIKE] No, you didn't miss anything.

Just my way of showing how little pertinent information was in the opening post.

As so often, it's a case of 'the devil's in the detail' because the if's of any scenario can make a monumental difference to the advice offered and to the realities of how such situations are eventually resolved.

Guest101

paddy's_mum wrote: »

[STRIKE]Should've gone to specsavers[/STRIKE] No, you didn't miss anything.

Just my way of showing how little pertinent information was in the opening post.

As so often, it's a case of 'the devil's in the detail' because the if's of any scenario can make a monumental difference to the advice offered and to the realities of how such situations are eventually resolved.

agree absolutely.

To clarify my view is based on two adults with no children involved

Marisco

paddy's_mum wrote: »

He needs to seek the opinion of a specialist lawyer.

Having said that, I'm sure I heard once that a divorce court judge can overturn almost anything if doing so helps with fair play in the division of matrimonial assets.

In the wife's shoes, I wouldn't be rolling over and playing dead either. What's to stop the trustees (the parents) giving him the whole of the trust fund once a divorce has been finalised.

Why did he need to have the money put into a 'can't touch it' set-up in the first place?

I suspect that might be a lot more going on here than your friend has given you any honest idea of.

To avoid the very thing his ex is trying to do now, i.e force the sale of the house, maybe? Or to deter would be money grabbers?