Renting property to husband when separated?

pmlindyloo

benniebert wrote: »

Is that right? To which subsection of 3.235 would the LA be relying on?


I see it that the flat would be covered, but not the husband's previous property ie the family home. Neither the wife nor the husband had lived in the flat.

I must admit I considered this legislation and since the buy to let would not ever have been occupied by OP or ex thought that this arrangement would fall under the usual 'is this a contrived tenancy?'

Perhaps HBO could confirm.

soupdragon10

Just to clarify a few point.

1. We are having a trial separation, not divorcing at least in the short term, therefore we do NOT want to involve a solicitor at this juncture. The split is amicable (as far as these things can be).

2. There will be no mortgage on the property and my husband would have a proper tenancy agreement, so I do not believe we fall foul of the regulations posted.

3. My husband has mental health problems, and I am trying to assure him of a safe and secure environment to keep him safe while we are separated. Just because we are separating does not mean that I do not care about him and what happens to him.

4. There is little suitable rental accommodation available (small country town) and he needs to be central due to medical appointments etc. which is why I have looked at buying somewhere for him.

5. I cannot see that we are breaking any rules by doing this - he will be a formal tenant, and his rental payments will be taxed as my income. He will have a bona fide tenancy agreement and rent will be within the local norms.

xylophone

A "trial separation" is not a divorce.

The parties are still legally married.

The parties own a property jointly (?) and one is sole owner of a property.

One party moves into the property solely owned by the other and claims benefits to pay rent to the other.

Contrived tenancy?

And given the concern expressed by the OP for her husband and his mental health problems, would she evict him if he ceased paying the rent?

The OP will have to put the case to the LA for a decision.

pmlindyloo

xylophone wrote: »

A "trial separation" is not a divorce.

The parties are still legally married.

The parties own a property jointly (?) and one is sole owner of a property.

One party moves into the property solely owned by the other and claims benefits to pay rent to the other.

Contrived tenancy?

And given the concern expressed by the OP for her husband and his mental health problems, would she evict him if he ceased paying the rent?

The OP will have to put the case to the LA for a decision.

My other concern regarding this is whether the OP's husband has any capital tied up in the current property.

If he is then it is very unlikely that he would be eligible for HB.

Caz3121

Husband would have a financial interest in the property as part of the divorce surely

If there will be no mortgage and the property is being bought with money that is yours as a couple then not sure why you would need rent since this is to give you as a family time apart
Even if he rented elsewhere he would need to use his other benefits for bills, food etc
I assume if you decide to divorce, he would get at least a share of this property (or maybe all depending on the rest of the financial pot) or if you decide not to separate you can rent the property to another tenant

pmlindyloo

Caz3121 wrote: »

Husband would have a financial interest in the property as part of the divorce surely

Probably, but they aren't getting a divorce

Therefore, it is prudent to establish whether the current property is in joint names.

soupdragon10

To clarify the current property is NOT in joint names, and neither will the flat be. The money for this is an inheritance paid to me. My husband has no capital or savings at all, all the money coming into the house apart from his disability benefits is earned by me, and has been for many years. I can prove this if necessary.

We do not have joint accounts, and all bills are paid out of my account.

Mojisola

soupdragon10 wrote: »

To clarify the current property is NOT in joint names, and neither will the flat be. The money for this is an inheritance paid to me. My husband has no capital or savings at all, all the money coming into the house apart from his disability benefits is earned by me, and has been for many years. I can prove this if necessary.

As you are married, it doesn't matter that the family home is only in your name - it is an asset of the marriage along with any savings and the new flat, if you buy it.

He will be entitled to a share of the assets.

FBaby

Contrived tenancy?

You would hope so!

Seems OP is suddenly struggling with the concept of 'what's yours is mine and what's mine is yours' as a result of marriage!

soupdragon10

So basically, although we will be living apart, and he is an independent person in his own right I am expected to support him?

Plus he has already said he wants no part of our current home (which I owned before we were married). We have gone down this route because he doesn't feel safe renting from someone he doesn't know, even with a tenancy agreement, as they would be able to go in and do periodic checks etc. (something he simply couldn't cope with). Without understanding his mental health problems you would not be able to picture the scene that would be enacted.