Divorce, what is my husband entitled to?

duchy

Get legal advice-Personally I agree he won't be entitled to 50% but you need to talk to a solicitor now to make sure you protect your assets. You can't file for divorce until you are married for a year but you can investigate annulment and also legal seperation now
If you feel he is abusive (physically or mentally) then you could also contact Women's Aid for support and advice.
Good luck

grey_lady

If he's being paranoid, violent and scaring you then go now, today
dont hang around to discuss and let him talk you out of it.

ganadon

Thank you all for your responses, I can't express how much it encourages me that you are all willing to give me advice. I forgot to mention that I have purchased a second flat, in my own name, this has happened while I am married but once again he has put nothing into it. I will look for legal advice but I'd be grateful for anyone with experience to help me. I can't believe how he has reacted with threats of taking my things away from me, I never envisaged that it would be like this.

kickstart_3

Where does divorce in 12 months come in ? I am waiting for one and have been told 2 yrs by my solicitor .

aimex

The 12 month thing is that you have to have been married 1 year before you are able to petition for divorce. The two years you are talking about probably means that you are petitioning on the ground of two years separation with consent. make sense?

the position where the marriage is short and there are no children is that each party should take from the marriage what they brought to it, ie you keep whats yours and he his.

xx

hypno06

My dad and step mum separated after 4 months of marriage. The house was in his name prior to and during the marriage.

I am fairly sure that he had to get a valuation of the house as at a date when they began the relationship, and a valuation as at the time of separation and it was only the increase in value that formed any part of the divorce settlement.

Dad had a half hour free session with a solicitor who helped out no end. Sadly he died before the divorce came through, so I can't tell you what the eventual outcome would have been!

I hope you manage to get things sorted soon - I also think it helped keep costs low that they went to mediation...not sure though, sorry!

Errata

ganadon wrote: »

I have thought about an annulment but I can't think on what grounds I can get one and what if he refuses to agree to one?

Google annulment, lost of info on specialist divorce sites. The grounds for annulment are pretty tight - eg non-consumation, bigamy, close relative.
If you're are being subjected to domestic violence which can be psychological not just physical then surely with the property and shares you own you should be able to leave and your wisest course of action is to seek legal advice on assets split and grounds for divorce.

ganadon

Errata wrote: »

Google annulment, lost of info on specialist divorce sites. The grounds for annulment are pretty tight - eg non-consumation, bigamy, close relative.
If you're are being subjected to domestic violence which can be psychological not just physical then surely with the property and shares you own you should be able to leave and your wisest course of action is to seek legal advice on assets split and grounds for divorce.

Yes, I've been looking at these and it seems that there isn't a category for me to get one and it seems all i can do is perhaps move out, wait until we reach 12 months and then file for a divorce.

bristol_pilot

The divorce laws in the UK are grossly unfair IMO which is why we are fast becoming the divorce capital of the world. It is a gold-diggers charter. (Only California is arguably worse and at least pre-nups are binding there).

In particular: 1. assets owned by each party prior to the marriage are NOT generally ringfenced, 2. no account is taken of conduct when sorting out the financial settlement and 3. in an increasing number of cases a proportion of future earnings is awarded. It is usually men who end up being fleeced by these rules. At least this post shows that it works the other way too.

The starting point for negotiation is a 50-50 split of all assets owned by the couple. As this was a short marriage, the chances are that your other half's share of the joint assets will be scaled back - probably to 40% or 30%. So that is the proportion of the total assets of the marriage that you stand to lose. Whether he has been nasty, paranoid, threatening to you and so forth may or may not be a matter for the poilice but it will not diminish what he will get out of you financially I'm afraid. As it is a short marriage, you have a good chance of avoiding an attachment to your future earnings.

Another aspect that is unfair with our current laws is that your other half may be eligible for Legal Aid whereas you may not be. If that is the case then it is very bad news, because he can start all sorts of spurious court actions against you (with a blank cheque from the taxpayer to cover his fees) and you will have to pay all of your legal costs even if you win your cases.

See a solicitor immediately. I consulted my solicitor before possibly getting married and, after listening to what he advised me, I decided to stay single (like him).

ganadon

bristol_pilot wrote: »

The divorce laws in the UK are grossly unfair IMO which is why we are fast becoming the divorce capital of the world. It is a gold-diggers charter. (Only California is arguably worse and at least pre-nups are binding there).

In particular: 1. assets owned by each party prior to the marriage are NOT generally ringfenced, 2. no account is taken of conduct when sorting out the financial settlement and 3. in an increasing number of cases a proportion of future earnings is awarded. It is usually men who end up being fleeced by these rules. At least this post shows that it works the other way too.

The starting point for negotiation is a 50-50 split of all assets owned by the couple. As this was a short marriage, the chances are that your other half's share of the joint assets will be scaled back - probably to 40% or 30%. So that is the proportion of the total assets of the marriage that you stand to lose. Whether he has been nasty, paranoid, threatening to you and so forth may or may not be a matter for the poilice but it will not diminish what he will get out of you financially I'm afraid. As it is a short marriage, you have a good chance of avoiding an attachment to your future earnings.

Another aspect that is unfair with our current laws is that your other half may be eligible for Legal Aid whereas you may not be. If that is the case then it is very bad news, because he can start all sorts of spurious court actions against you (with a blank cheque from the taxpayer to cover his fees) and you will have to pay all of your legal costs even if you win your cases.

See a solicitor immediately. I consulted my solicitor before possibly getting married and, after listening to what he advised me, I decided to stay single (like him).

I really hope that this isn't true, he does not deserve even 30%.