Ex-husband has re-married, has he fallen into the re-marriage trap re our house?

duchy

Whilst I don't believe he is entitled to more than half and that paying only half a mortgage AND having the benefit of a property costing much wasn't a bad deal for the OP.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

FBaby

The affair is not really relevant. The issue is whether he chose to pay half the mortgage and for OP to remain in the house or whether this decision was imposed on him. Again though we don't know whether capital gain is an issue.

Ziggazee

The point is the parties 'divorced' and clearly did not deal with the entirety of the financial situation. The house remains in joint names.....the ex has contributed to the mortgage.....and has the right to request to be bought out. He does not have to accept the 'reasonable' offer that the OP has put forward if this does not represent a sufficient interest in the property. Bottom line is yes, he can take the OP to Court if he wishes. He may win.....he may not. It might not actually cost him money......the Court are also within their rights to make an order for costs against the OP if they believe she is being unreasonable. The 're-marriage' trap does not apply here. The house is in joint names and he is entitled to realise his share.


Nothing more to argue about really. The OP needs to seek independent legal advice asap as dragging things out could blow up in her face in the long run.


The fact he has managed to buy another house has no bearing on the matter, and there is absolutely zero evidence that he has committed any mortgage fraud. I've seen lots of cases over the years where parties separate and one of them goes on to purchase another property despite remaining on the mortgage of the matrimonial home.

duchy

It can run on for years.
My partner owns his own home but has a court ordered share of 30% of his and his ex's house going back over twenty years. He has never wanted/needed to insist on settlement as she went on to have another child with someone else and forcing her to sell would have left her disadvantaged.

I can see after all this time that the time will come this needs to be sorted out -Could we use the money yes but after all this time he'll probably accept a lower than 30% of value just to tidy things up . It's not worth the hassle not to as far as he is concerned even though he's far from "rich". I'd never considered the issue of CGT -something to look into.