At Breaking Point - Help to decide on settlement, please!!

sheramber

But if he doesn't get the money for 8 years then surely the value  of any payment will increased by then.

TBagpuss

tightauldgit said:

gizmo111 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

ChrissyTA86 said:
Long story short - on paper he is entitled to very 'little' of the value of the house - I won't go into details. but this is a fact and has been agreed by 3 solicitors.

Clearly totally your choice what you do and dont want to say on a public forum but without the details no one can go on to answer your question of how much is fair. 

Whilst £15k may sound like a lot of money with a property being involved it doesnt sound much at all and there would be some discount for getting it now rather than at some point in the future. 

Fully agree with others, unless you can afford to stick to your principles you can easily end up spending more in total by arguing and racking up solicitor fees than compromising... for some thats ok, they'd rather pay their sol £20k than their ex £5k 

Personally, I think there is a notable value in being able to draw a line under things and so would be looking to see how I could raise the funds to finish the matter for good.

Op says the house was in negative equity 5 years ago, so I guess the current settlement reflects and equity that has been built up during the 5 years he has left.  But unless she comes back to clarify we will never know!

Yeah but the position 5 years ago is not relevant to the position now and if he has his 50% equity then he's entitled to that - all we have to go on so far is a vague claim that he's not entitled to a share of the house for unspecified reasons. 

That's not quite correct. A court is entitled to take into account any relevant circumstances. If the house was in negative equity at the time ofthe split then had it been sold then, neither of them would have got anything, and they would both potentially have been left with debt to pay. 

Presumably the current equity is in part passive growth through house price rises and part due to OP paying the mortgage and reducing the capital debt. He is likelyt o be entitled to share of the first, not necessarily of the second. And if he owed her money they that's also relevant.

OP - if he is going to have to wait, then normally the amount would be a % of the value of the property (not the equity, to voif him benefit from your future payments)  soyou would usually work out the current figure (e.g. £15K, work out what that is as % of the house's current value (e.g. if your house was worth £150,000 it would be 10%, if your house was worth £300,000 it would be 5%.   If you currently have a £100,000 mortgge on a £150,000 house it is 30% of the equity but (suppose housepriaes didn't change) if in 8 years you had reduced the mortgage down to £50,000, he would still get £15,000 (10% of the house price) not £30,000 (30% of the net equity) becuase the charge back is set out as a % of value not equity)

Do you have any family or friends who might be able to help you out? An offer of £5K now as opposed to £15K in 8 yers time might be quite appealing to him, if you were able to raise it. And it is generally fair for someone to get more if they are not getting it striaght away. 

Maybe offer  striaght fixed lump sum of £10,000 in 8 years.

One way of considering what would be fiar would be to look at what the housevlaue is now compared to when you separated - suppose it has gone up in vaue by £30,000 hr might say that he should have half of that, or £15,000. But if you were £10,000 in negtive equity then the actualgain to you and hm was only £20,000 so he might be entitled to £10,000. Then when you have worked out what his share of the net gain is, take off any money he owws and start from there. 

tightauldgit

TBagpuss said:

tightauldgit said:

gizmo111 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

ChrissyTA86 said:
Long story short - on paper he is entitled to very 'little' of the value of the house - I won't go into details. but this is a fact and has been agreed by 3 solicitors.

Clearly totally your choice what you do and dont want to say on a public forum but without the details no one can go on to answer your question of how much is fair. 

Whilst £15k may sound like a lot of money with a property being involved it doesnt sound much at all and there would be some discount for getting it now rather than at some point in the future. 

Fully agree with others, unless you can afford to stick to your principles you can easily end up spending more in total by arguing and racking up solicitor fees than compromising... for some thats ok, they'd rather pay their sol £20k than their ex £5k 

Personally, I think there is a notable value in being able to draw a line under things and so would be looking to see how I could raise the funds to finish the matter for good.

Op says the house was in negative equity 5 years ago, so I guess the current settlement reflects and equity that has been built up during the 5 years he has left.  But unless she comes back to clarify we will never know!

Yeah but the position 5 years ago is not relevant to the position now and if he has his 50% equity then he's entitled to that - all we have to go on so far is a vague claim that he's not entitled to a share of the house for unspecified reasons. 

That's not quite correct. A court is entitled to take into account any relevant circumstnaces. If the house was in negative equity at the time ofthe split then had it been sold then, neiother of them would have got anything, and they would both potentially have been left with debt to pay. 

PResumablythe current equity is in part passicve groth through house price rises and part due to OP paying the mortgage and reducing the capital debt. HE is likelyto be ebntitled to share of the first, not necessarily of the second. And if he owed her money they that's also relvant.

OP - if he is going to have to wait, then normally the amount would be a % of the value of the property (not the equity, to voif him benefit from your future payments)  soyou would usually work out the current figure (e.g. £15K, work out what that is as % of the house's current value (e.g. if your house was worth £150,000 it would be 10%, if your house was worth £300,000 it would be 5%.   If you currently have a £100,000 mortgge on a £150,000 house it is 30% of the equity but (suppose housepriaes didn't change) if in 8 years you had reduced the mortgage down to £50,000, he would still get £15,000 (10% of the house price) not £30,000 (30% of the net equity) becuase the charge back is set out as a % of value not equity)

Do you have any family or friends who might be able to help you out? An offer of £5K now as opposed to £15K in 8 yers time might be quite appealing to him, if you were able to raise it. And it is generally fair for someone to get more if they are not getting it striaght away. 
Maybe offer  striaght fixed lump sum of £10,000 in 8 years.

One way of considering what would be fiar would be to look at what the housevlaue is now compared to when you separated - suppose it has gone up in vaue by £30,000 hr might say that he should have half of that, or £15,000. But if you were £10,000 in negtive equity then the actualgain to you and hm was only £20,000 so he might be entitled to £10,000. Then when you have worked out what his share of the net gain is, take off any money he owws and start from there. 

Don't assume that because you are paying the mortgage that your partner isn't entitled to a share of that equity you are building up. If you have enjoyment of the house and they aren't living there then unless you are paying them rent for their share then you are benefiting from their equity share.

In my experience while a court is 'entitled' to take into account any circumstances they want to unless the circumstances are egregious they probably won't. And so far we haven't heard any detail as to why the OP thinks they aren't entitled to their fair share.

But since the OP doesn't look like they are coming back to answer any further questions or provide any further information it's moot. 

TBagpuss

sheramber said:

But if he doesn't get the money for 8 years then surely the value  of any payment will increased by then.

Yes, usually if there is a delay in payment the money is recored as a % of the house value so it goes up or down with proprty prices. However, there's also the fact that money now is more valuable to most people than money later, so if you are having to wait, it's not unreasonable to expect a bit more - so it might be that 20% share now or a 25% share in 8 years might be seen as reasonable (numbers made up for illustration purposes!)