Protecting an Asset from the other party

sterlingsafeguarder

A relative of mine has recently divorced from his wife but a financial settlement has not yet been agreed. (she left the family home, took the children, and lives in rented accommodation). Childcare is arranged on a 60:40 basis in favour of the mother.


He wants to sell his house during this Financial Order process but fears:
(a) That having thousands of pounds in his bank before the FO has completed could weaken his side of the outcome, and represent a risk
(b) That his ex wife may go after this asset if the house sale was challenged during the legal process


The house sale is urgent as he:
(a) Has interested parties and fears the Brexit vote could reduce the sellers bargaining power thus railroading his plans to co-buy an expensive house large enough to accommodate 4 children from their former marriages
(b) Wants to move in with his new partner(also divorced), who currently rents but whose tenancy ends in Aug. He obviously wishes to avoid having to continue paying a mortgage and sharing rent costs in a new rental.


Could he protect the equity asset by asking his conveyancer to send the money, on completion, to a relative as a gift (this other relative is also looking to buy a property at present)? For safekeeping.


Would this measure, if feasible, prevent the other party from accessing this asset, in other words, protect it until the FCO process was completed?


There is already a Consent Order on the table but not agreed to, as yet, by the other party. She has a very generous deal on this voluntary basis, but there is no guarantee she will sign.


I would appreciate comments from anyone who has been in a similar predicament, and what transpired. Thank you.

elsien

So he's wanting to stop a marital asset being considered as a marital asset during the financial settlement process?

Tigsteroonie

When you say there is a Consent Order on the table, is that simply a one-sided offer that he has made?

Consent Orders aren't normally drafted until full disclosure is made by both sides and mediation has occurred - the Consent Order should reflect what is acceptable to both sides, not an offer from one side. Otherwise you are just wasting money getting the solicitor to draft and re-draft.

If the house is jointly owned, she'll need to sign an agreement to sell (he cannot sell unilaterally); which she won't do if she thinks that she's not getting her fair share.

meer53

No chance.

WillowCat

Assuming the house is in single name, and there is no desire by either party to keep hold of it, the obvious answer is to sell and the conveyancing solicitor (or divorce solicitor if they have one) keeps hold of the funds until distribution between the parties. In that way they are also clear about how much equity there is to be divided.

It would be very unwise to purchase a new house, especially with a new partner, as that house will become a marital asset and it could be more complicated to raise the finance to pay the other party off. It could even be the case that a court would force a sale of the new property (having joined new partner in the proceedings). Very messy.

Note that if she has already had a home rights notice placed on the property then they would need her consent to sell.

pigpen

Why can the new partner not move into the house with him in August?
Why would he want to deny his wife the money from the proceeds of her home as she is legally entitled?
He wants the legal people to commit fraud??

What a sweetie he sounds.. quite the catch!

I don't think he will have much luck!

sterlingsafeguarder

Thank you for the comments received.
Elsien - My apologies as I should have made it clear that my relative is only referring to his share of the equity.
Willowcat- this point will cover your "home rights notice" She is already in receipt of a (generous) share of the equity.
Tigsteroonie- The Consent order has been on the table for a long time. It is a clean break offer of 50% of his company pension and a continued top up on maintenance payments. She has already received a 78% share of the available capital at the date of separation last year!( my relative has re-mortgaged the property in his name only)
Pigpen- His current home is too small to accommodate the 2 adults, 2 permanent residing children and 2 children on a 40% basis. On the denial point, the comments above should resolve that.


My relative is rightly concerned that his proportion of the equity on the sale of the house does not become an issue in court proceedings
Thank you

Person_one

sterlingsafeguarder wrote: »

Thank you for the comments received.
Elsien - My apologies as I should have made it clear that my relative is only referring to his share of the equity.

How does he know how much that is with no financial settlement?

sterlingsafeguarder

In reply to Person_one
He has a fair idea of this as he has already had an offer on his house and worked out a figure, taking into account sale expenses etc.

Person_one

sterlingsafeguarder wrote: »

In reply to Person_one
He has a fair idea of this as he has already had an offer on his house and worked out a figure, taking into account sale expenses etc.

No, sorry, I mean how does he know what percentage is 'his share' when that hasn't yet been agreed in a financial settlement?

sterlingsafeguarder

Person_one


That was calculated by his solicitor and based on what has already been paid to his ex wife in regard to the house split and monies paid to her for setting up her rented home and children's expenses (these latter two were £4,500)