Husband bankrupt and Trustee wants to sell our house??!!!??

silvercar

renegadefm wrote: »

But hang on, its not like the both of them are partners in crime here and we're trying to be clever. Its the husbands debt, not the wifes, but she will be equally affected by this, which to me there must be something to prevent this. Hence my post about the marriage breakdown scenario.

In a marriage breakdown scenario, there would be negotiations on a financial settlement. This may include the wife having a greater share of the equity in order to provide a home for the children. That would mean a smaller share of the equity for the OR to claim in bankruptcy of the husband.

silvercar

TheGardener wrote: »

The frustrating thing for the wife will be that I suspect they have continued to pay the mortgage over the past 2 years when in fact if they knew there was no chance they would be able to buy back the husbands interest - they didn't need to bother paying the mortgage and could have used the mortgage payments to find a new home - even if it was temporary rented.
This is where getting the right advice from the outset can save untold heartache. Even though the hubby was made BR by a creditor - he could/should have taken professional, free advice so they could make the right decisions and plan for the future. The wife could have got a job and not been so distressed now the time has come to sell the house.

Agreed. Particularly painful if it was a repayment mortgage as every £1 spent on repaying the capital increases the ORs share of the equity by 50p. Literally money down the drain.

silvercar

threeofus wrote: »

renting is a waste of money, for me it would be more than I actually earned and everything I have worked for for 25 years will be gone because I was financially abused, he has now walked away with his 'clean slate' yet I have nothing, can't even house my children as the property market is slow I will have to reduce the sale price leaving a pittance

I think your definition of financial abuse is rather wide.

My grandfather would never have told my grandmother anything about their financial affairs, but she wouldn't have considered it abuse. Financial abuse implies him taking out money in your name or stealing your money. Mismanagement of his own money doesn't mean abuse.

MovingForwards

I would recommemend OP checks the Land Registry title to make sure she is named on the Deeds, especially as she has admitted the relationship is old fashioned; her being a housewife and the husband the provider.

AnotherJoe

renegadefm wrote: »

But hang on, its not like the both of them are partners in crime here and we're trying to be clever. Its the husbands debt, not the wifes, but she will be equally affected by this, which to me there must be something to prevent this. Hence my post about the marriage breakdown scenario.

Describe that "something" taking into account the people at the other end of the BR who are out more than £100k and so will still lose out and maybe will lose their home(s) and certainly would if you generalised the situation.

renegadefm

silvercar wrote: »

In a marriage breakdown scenario, there would be negotiations on a financial settlement. This may include the wife having a greater share of the equity in order to provide a home for the children. That would mean a smaller share of the equity for the OR to claim in bankruptcy of the husband.

Sounds extreme I know, but I know a situation similar to this that happened to a work college years ago, and they prevented losing so much of the money by actually divorcing and escaped losing so much of the money to the OR that way. And then 10 years later they re-married. Sounds bizzare but true.

renegadefm

BeccaGee wrote: »

Thank you all for your messages. I am reading

Sounds extreme I know, but I know a situation similar to this that happened to a work college years ago, and they prevented losing so much of the money by actually divorcing and escaped losing so much of the money to the OR that way. And then 10 years later they re-married. Sounds bizarre but true.

lisyloo

renegadefm wrote: »

Sounds extreme I know, but I know a situation similar to this that happened to a work college years ago, and they prevented losing so much of the money by actually divorcing and escaped losing so much of the money to the OR that way. And then 10 years later they re-married. Sounds bizzare but true.

I did actually look into divorce for tax purposes recently (more out of curiousity than being serious).
One needs grounds for divorce.
I came to the conclusion that if those grounds did not exist then I would have been looking at perjury and or tax evasion.
I did not want to live my life in hiding e.g. you couldn't put a happy holiday picture of the two of you on facebook.


Not saying there isn't grounds in this case, but I am saying you can't just divorce for any reason, you have to have "grounds" that meet the legal definition.
I would personally considering lying (whether by omission or not) about something very major to be ureasonable behaviour but I am not a lawyer.

renegadefm

lisyloo wrote: »

I did actually look into divorce for tax purposes recently (more out of curiousity than being serious).
One needs grounds for divorce.
I came to the conclusion that if those grounds did not exist then I would have been looking at perjury and or tax evasion.
I did not want to live my life in hiding e.g. you couldn't put a happy holiday picture of the two of you on facebook.


Not saying there isn't grounds in this case, but I am saying you can't just divorce for any reason, you have to have "grounds" that meet the legal definition.
I would personally considering lying (whether by omission or not) about something very major to be ureasonable behaviour but I am not a lawyer.

I don't remember on what grounds they divorced at the time, its a long time ago. But I do remember it was to avoid losing an awful lot of money to the OR, which they achieved by divorcing.

In fact the truth why they divorced didn't actually come out until about 10 years after they went bankrupt or rather the husband did. I think they wanted people to think they simply drifted apart.

lisyloo

But I do remember it was to avoid losing an awful lot of money to the OR, which they achieved by divorcing.

I'm pretty sure that isn't grounds for divorce which include adultery, abandonment, unreasonable behaviour etc. I'm sure you can get all of thme by googling, but I'm certain avoiding debts is not one of them.


This means they lied on their declarations and have never been found out.


In this digital age it's much harder to keep the truth under wraps than 10 years ago i.e. anyone putting a photo of them together on facebook or instagram could blow their cover.