Handing over 40% share in equity in lieu of child care payments

MartinW6

Well chaps, I called the Child Maintenance Options hotline and, apparently, I could put either a new Consent order or Court order in place which would potentially protect me (they wouldn't be able to claim child maintenance once I give up my 40% share).

I guess the best thing to do is consult a family law solicitor to see exactly what the protection would be. Alternatively, would it be better to simply have a private, unwritten agreement between ourselves? By being unofficial, it might have the affect of giving both parties a reason to stick to the deal (if one party reneges, the other can too). It would probably work more in my favour, and I'm guessing they'd be uncomfortable with it not being official, but they also know that I'm a trustworthy person and stick to my word.

If I go the unofficial route, I realise there's a chance that they could ask for all child maintenance payments that I've 'missed' since we made the private agreement. BUT, they intend to get married, so I could in turn force a sale on the house if they did that.

Jagraf

Really difficult one. Myself and my husband bought my ex out and remortgaged but then there was a housing crash so my ex actually made a packet and i lost my equity - not his fault but you never know which way these things will go.

If I were her I would be looking at selling and getting somewhere else - you could then both have your equity and she could rent, but they may move further away.

Personally any of our decisions we kept separate from child maintenance and ours was also a private agreement.

Horrible times for all concerned.

Floxxie

MartinW6 wrote: »

Well chaps, I called the Child Maintenance Options hotline and, apparently, I could put either a new Consent order or Court order in place which would potentially protect me (they wouldn't be able to claim child maintenance once I give up my 40% share).

A Consent Order for child maintenance is only valid for 12 months so your ex can approach the CMS after this time.

MoneyMission2015

Just another question to throw into the mix for you and might be completely irrelevant, but as this is no longer your personal residence, would you be liable for any capital gains tax on the value of the 40% that you currently own? I believe in similar circumstances where somebody sells their house for below market value (to a family member for instance) they are still liable for the CGT based on the full market value of the property, so even though in your case no money is exchanging hands, just make sure you wouldn't be stung with this tax.

Person_one

It doesn't seem like a fantastic idea to me.

What if you agree to this then you do something to make her angry and she decides to chase you for CS anyway?

What if you agree to this and your wife then falls on hard times and feels she has no choice but to claim CS to keep a roof over the family's head?

What if you agree to this and then your financial circumstances change so that your kids end up worse off from the deal because you lose much less than you would have if you'd paid CS?

What if you fall on on hard times and need to claim benefits but are deemed to have given away £70,000 and deprived yourself of that asset?

pigpen

Yes you can do that but it needs to be endorsed by the courts and the mortgage company..

You say £x in equity works out as x number of years of maintenance so you don't pay for that length of time.

Because you have a legal document if she decides to try to get maintenance from you then you can produce the document and they will not persue the claim until the term you are not paying has expired.

MartinW6

Person_one wrote: »

It doesn't seem like a fantastic idea to me.

What if you agree to this then you do something to make her angry and she decides to chase you for CS anyway?

What if you agree to this and your wife then falls on hard times and feels she has no choice but to claim CS to keep a roof over the family's head?

What if you agree to this and then your financial circumstances change so that your kids end up worse off from the deal because you lose much less than you would have if you'd paid CS?

What if you fall on on hard times and need to claim benefits but are deemed to have given away £70,000 and deprived yourself of that asset?

The first two questions you mention are possibilities.


What I would say is that my ex-wife and her partner are as keen as mustard to remove me from the house ownership... which, putting myself in their shoes, I can totally understand. I don't interfere with the running of the house, but it must make her partner uncomfortable to have my shadow hanging over their home.


I can probably negate the first possibility (making her angry, etc...) by waiting until they marry to agree to any deal. That way I have leverage as I can force a sale on the house. "Start paying maintenance again!", "Okay, sell the house".


The second possibility would be harder to deal with... I wouldn't want to see the kids lose their home. I'd probably have to step in and pay child maintenance until they were back on their feet... but then that devalues the whole point of the deal. I guess I have to decide whether it's worth taking that risk (the main one being her partner's job security/career path).


Whatever I do, I won't rush into anything.

Ozzuk

Something else to add to the mix, these payments are for child support. Ie, the money goes to benefit the child.

(I'm not a parent so maybe getting this wrong!!!)

Having more equity in the house isn't likely to increase the cash flow of your ex so you may want to consider if the children will still get everything they need with the reduced income. You may find you have to put your hand in your pocket more for instance for clothes, trips etc...

TBagpuss

MartinW6 wrote: »

Well chaps, I called the Child Maintenance Options hotline and, apparently, I could put either a new Consent order or Court order in place which would potentially protect me (they wouldn't be able to claim child maintenance once I give up my 40% share).

Do NOT, under any circumstances, acept legal advice from CMOS. They are not legally trained and often don't understand the rules of the scheme the administer, never mind the more complex legal issues.

A financial order on divorce is a one-off. You can't "get a new consent order".
In some very limited circumstances you an limit certain parts of a consent order (for instance, the level of mainenace paid

I guess the best thing to do is consult a family law solicitor to see exactly what the protection would be.

Alternatively, would it be better to simply have a private, unwritten agreement between ourselves? By being unofficial, it might have the affect of giving both parties a reason to stick to the deal (if one party reneges, the other can too). It would probably work more in my favour, and I'm guessing they'd be uncomfortable with it not being official, but they also know that I'm a trustworthy person and stick to my word.

If I go the unofficial route, I realise there's a chance that they could ask for all child maintenance payments that I've 'missed' since we made the private agreement. BUT, they intend to get married, so I could in turn force a sale on the house if they did that.

Talk to a solicitor. But be aware that when the CSA (as it then was) was introduced, one of the specific purposes was to prevent people from contracting out of their CSA liabilities (becuase the government didn't want people to be able to contract out and then for the parent with care to need state support.

There are things which can be done when an order is first agreed to reduce the risk of an application being made for child support but they are not cast iron.

You might be able to work out a private agreement - possibly one where you agreed that the amount they are due to pay you will be reduced by £1 for £1 by any child support due but not paid. You'd have to decide how to work out the numbers - perhaps agree to re-calcute the % you are due once a year
(e.g. if 40% in todays prices is worth £100,000, then 12 x £400 = £4,800 or about 1.9% of value so after year one, your charge back ove the hosue would be reduced to 38.1%, - over time the % interest you were entitled to would reduce.

but it would be fairly complicated to work out.

Person_one

MartinW6 wrote: »

The first two questions you mention are possibilities.

Out of interest, what makes you think the second two aren't possible?