Financial dispute in divorce

GingerMum

A few brief details:
Jointly owned property approx 300k value
Joint mortgage: 111k
Joint secured loan: 59k
After fees etc approx equity 100k +
Husband still living in property, paying for above. Pays no child maintenance, is disputing he has to as is paying loan. Is claiming I agreed to 50/50 childcare (I may have nodded under pressure). He has them 3 nights per fortnight, for dinner alt weeks
Wants property signed to him.
Me, living in rented house with our 2 children. I was contributing to house until we left in January 2017. (split July 2016)
Under pressure, I agreed by text to take a small payout and let him have house. I accept the mortgage and loan are still in my name and he wants half payment to loan. He is telling me his solicitor agrees with him on all this. I cannot pay for the rented house and this too. I have just managed to find a solicitor who has told me to get on claiming maintenance. Ex has gone ballistic!
I don't want to force him out of the house, he is ill and I'd like it left to the children.
I strangely feel calm and able to deal with this finally and am trying to get what is right 'in my head'. Solicitors apparently giving each of us conflicting information is not helping. His doesn't sound quite right though!
Thank you

PeacefulWaters

Why wouldn't / shouldn't you be liable for half the debts built up during marriage?

I'd seek out mediation as an alternative to expensive solicitors. But I think he has a point on debt payments.

That said, what about pensions? It's a bigger picture than anything we can really judge.

GingerMum

I don't dispute the debt is in my name too. That will be reflected in the settlement. If I was living in the house - I'm having to justify to my solicitor why I'm not! - I'd be paying that and mortgage.

pmlindyloo

I agree that mediation is a much cheaper option than solicitors so see if your ex would agree to this.

It is difficult to comment without knowing the financial situation - how much he earns/you earn/savings/pensions etc.

Based on what you have said he does not seem to be having the children on a 50/50 basis at the moment.

If he is paying the whole of the mortgage at the moment and the loan then it is possible that your share of this would amount to the same amount he would pay for child support at the moment.

You can use this calculator to work out an estimate of what he should be paying in child support.

https://www.gov.uk/calculate-your-child-maintenance

Do you intend to sell the house? The joint debt could then be wiped off with any equity and anything left you could share. Then he could pay child support unless it really was a 50/50 share.

Google about family mediation in your area. They can be excellent and anything agreed can be made legal through a solicitor. You would have to go through mediation as part of the divorce proceedings (unless there was domestic abuse) so you might as well try this avenue now rather than racking up solicitor fees.

mgdavid

Can only pass comment once ALL assets and finances are fully disclosed.
What about pensions?
What about cars and other high-value items?
Savings accounts, investments? eg ISAs?
etc

How far have you got in the divorce process?

PS - 3 nights a fortnight is not 50/50 childcare ! Maintenance is calculated on actuals, not promises or informal agreements.

GingerMum

He has refused mediation. He earns at least 3 x what I do. I am having to justify to my solicitor why children and I aren't living in the house! He did agree to sell, then said he wouldn't and the house was to be signed to him with me just leaving with a token sum.

GingerMum

mgdavid wrote: »

Can only pass comment once ALL assets and finances are fully disclosed.
What about pensions?
What about cars and other high-value items?
Savings accounts, investments? eg ISAs?
etc

How far have you got in the divorce process?

PS - 3 nights a fortnight is not 50/50 childcare ! Maintenance is calculated on actuals, not promises or informal agreements.

We both have pension savings. I have no savings and nor does he as far as I know.
We both have cars, his approx 4k, mine about £300.
I left the house with my personal belongings only.

MEM62

Your solicitor will take your view and his will take his. They will not be the same and it is possible that both sides can some distance apart with neither being particularly unreasonable.

You and you ex have two choices. Come to an agreement between you (or you and mediation) or fight it out via litigation and give a large chunk of your assets to lawyers in fees - in which case you both loose. I have seen friends face a £25k legal bill arguing over a £15k - it's nuts!

elsien

What his solicitor tells your ex and what your ex tells you are two completely different things. His solicitor may be telling him he's being silly but at the end of the day the solicitor is paid to carry out the client's instructions. As is yours.

I worked with someone where the ex was saying his solicitor had put the papers in to go to court the following week to get them out of the house and when I contacted the solicitor directly on their behalf (there were capacity issues) the ex was lying to put pressure on.

An agreement under duress and without full disclosure is meaningless. And if it does go to court then they will take a dim view of one party declining to engage in mediation without good reason. Perhaps you should point that (and the costs) out to the ex.

https://www.familymediationcouncil.org.uk/family-mediation/assessment-meeting-miam/

GingerMum

Whilst I agree I am liable for the mortgage and the secured loan, I have been the one forced to leave the house with our 2 children. I therefore cannot pay towards these as I have to pay a large rent and associated living costs. Apart from meals alternate weeks and approx. 120 nights last year sleeping at his, I am paying for the children's costs, uniforms, shoes, clothes (he buys clothes they are only allowed to wear at his house), food, clubs, pocket money, medicine, night pants, trips. He refused to buy a new school jumper as it was £16! My son keeps asking if he has any clothes which aren't second hand!
I therefore feel he should be paying maintenance. I was fully prepared to stay in the house and take on costs!

TBagpuss

OK, from what you say,the net equity after taking into account the mortgage and loan is somewhere between £100 - £130K?
What is he suggesting that you receive?

The starting point would be a 50/50 split so he would need to be able to re-mortgage for £170K to clear the mortgage and loan, and then raise at least £50-65K to buy you out. Can he do that? That equates to you each paying half of the outstanding mortgage and loan.

Because you earn less than him and the children are primarily with you, it would normally be reasonable for you to have a bit more than 50% over all, as you will have greater needs, and have lower income (and therefore lower mortgage capacity etc). There is no specific formula but a split of 60/40 is not uncommon. Your solicitor will be able to give more exact advice as she will have more detail about the finances.

As he is living in the house at present it is not unreasonable for him to be paying he mortgage and other outgoings on the house, and normally this would not reduce his child support liability. After all, if what he wants is to stay in the house, he will need to be able to afford to get your name of the current mortgage and loan, and to borrow additional money as well to pay you your share of the equity, and to pay his child support. If he can't afford to do that, he can't afford to buy you out, and the house will need to be sold.

Forget about the house going to the children. Think of it as cash - whatever he has, whether it is the house, or money from the house sale which he uses to buy elsewhere, it will (if he doesn't spend it elsewhere or leave it to someone else) become part of his estate. The children won't benefit any more if the inheritance they ultimately get is from selling the currently property when their dad dies, or selling a different property on his death, or inheriting some bank accounts. And he could remarry and leave it all to his new wife anyway.

Instead, focus on what you need, and are reasonably entitled to, and let him worry about how to fund your entitlement.

Any discussions you may have had with him are irrelevant - they are not legally binding so don't feel that just because you agreed when he pressured you, to take a small lump sum, that you cannot now insist of your fair share of the assets.

Ask your solicitor about what she thinks you might expect to achieve if you did have to go to cout, and work from there. You are free to accept less if you decide you want to, but start by undertanding what you are entitled to.

Mediation isn't really cheaper than other methods of dispute resolution. The mediator will charge less per person per hour than a solicitor but you are likely to need legal advice from your solicitor as you go through the process and before you confirm any potential agreements. If your husband is likely to try to pressure or bully you then mediation may not be suitable - don't be railroaded into anything you are not comfortable with. You could ask your solicitor about setting up a round-table meting with you, your solicitor, your ex and his solicitor to see if any progress can be made that way, which could be more cost effective than having the same conversations in correspondence.

If you want to return to the house, you'd need to show tat you could afford to pay the mortgage and secured loan, and ideally to remortgage to remove his name from those debts. In that scenario, and assuming that you were not in a position to also raise a lump sum to buy him out, you would have a situation where he would have a charge over the property payable at a set future date. It is worth considering whether you might be more comfortable buying a different (smaller?) property, even if that might mean you needed all or most of the equity in the first instance, He could then have a charge over your new property to secure payment of a lump sum to him at a later date but he would be less likely to think of the property as his.