Selling my half of house in divorce, does Section 106 agreement stand?

Betsanboo!!

I am currently divorcing my husband and he wants to buy my share of the house. We built our own home in 2005 subject to a section 106 agreement that states if we sell the house it must be 30% under market value, this will greatly be in his favour and will not really benefit me in looking to buy a new home. The S106 agreement was to ensure affordability but if I sell him my half 30% under market value I won't be able to afford anything more than a one bedroom flat. We have two children under 10 years and they will be living between us both. I want to apply for the section to be lifted but my soon to be ex is against this for obvious reasons. Any advice would be greatly appreciated

G_M

The 106, as you say, was to ensure affordabibility. You accepted this at the time and knew that if/when you sold you would not receive matket value. Why do you now think you should receive market value?

For this to be fair though, I'd expect the other half of the property (his share) to remain subject to the 106 so that when he eventually sells, he will get below market value on that portion.

Having said that, I've no idea if a sale or transfer between existing owners would fall within the rules!

Betsanboo!!

As we jointly agreed to the 30%, would it be unreasonable for me to sell at 15% under market value? When we entered into the agreement I foolishly did not think our marriage would end in divorce and I know he will not sell the house,

G_M

You can ask anything you want in terms of your divorce settlement As can he. If you can't agree, the Family Court will make a ruling.

I'd suggest you get legal advice.

moneyistooshorttomention

I would agree with G_M that the position will stand as per original plan re that Section 106 agreement. The terms of that would need complying with first - and then, after that, you and your husband divide the 70% of the house value you have received and pay off mortgage first and then divide the remaining equity between you.

Peoples personal relationships will not be a concern of the Agreement. I don't even think it's worth spending money on asking a solicitor whether the Agreement would still stand or no - as it's so obvious it would and you both can only bargain on selling the house for 70% of standard value regardless of the relationship situation between you.

How could the next owner of the house manage to buy the house under that Agreement otherwise?

Richard_Webster

The existence of the s106 agrement means that any sale ot anyone else would be at 70% of the market value of other similar houses not csubject to such a restriuction. Therefore I really can't see how you base your calculation of the value of your half share on anything else but this 70%.

If you sold to anyone else it would be at 70% so why should you get more form selling half to him?

Marvel1

Flipping this around and be honest if it was you buying the share, you would not want this section lifted.

marksoton

Betsanboo!! wrote: »

As we jointly agreed to the 30%, would it be unreasonable for me to sell at 15% under market value? When we entered into the agreement I foolishly did not think our marriage would end in divorce and I know he will not sell the house,

You know no such thing. His circumstances may change.

If he were to sell he's taken a 15% hit from you and then a 30% hit from his buyer. Hardly seems fair or equitable.

xylophone

What does your solicitor say about the split of marital assets?

Would you be awarded right to reside in the house with the children until the youngest of them reaches the age of 18?

Could you buy your husband out?