Divorced but partner with child wont sell house

itsatoughone123

Hi everyone, i need some help. My ex wife and i have been apart for 18 months. I have moved out but continued to pay the mortgage as well as child maintenance for my 4 yearold daughter. I am with someone else and live with her but renting. We would like to get a mortgage but because i am on the mortgage of the house i cannot apply for another mortgage so it would all be on my partners single income. My ex wife doesn't want to sell and cannot buy me out as she only works part time and cannot afford to move, but the property has around £200K in equity. I even offered her a majority share but she just got very upset and refused and its causing difficulties between us. 
I have spoken to lots of people including a solicitor and they all agree that we should divide assets but i don't know what to do. I hate upsetting her as she is a lovely person but this will certainly divide us badly. What do I do?

LoopyLoops

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

Also where will your daughter and ex wife live if your ex cannot get a mortgage?  Private renting is expensive and won’t give your daughter much security in that she can end up having to move many times.  Council won’t house them as they will be seen as voluntarily homeless if your ex wife agrees to sell

poseidon1

I am guessing that your divorce ( along with a significant number of similar divorces) did not incorporate a financial settlement agreement ( ie the principle of a 'clean break' ). See link to an article on this -

https://www.scottbailey.co.uk/divorce-and-separation/is-there-a-time-limit-for-reaching-a-financial-settlement-after-divorce-in-the-uk#:~:text=A financial settlement determines how spouses will,debts and child support or spousal maintenance.&text=If your partner ends up struggling financially,,can make (pensions, lumps sums, property transfers).

If you did not address these issues in the divorce it is essential you do not let too much more time elapse before doing so.

You  not only remain tied financially to your ex via the house, but your future private/ occupational pensions remain accessible to your ex, in the absence of a court ratified agreement. Did you not use a solicitor to handle your side of the divorce? If so why were these issues not part of the pre divorce negotiations?

Regardless of the upset it will cause, i see no other option than you persue a formal financial settment agreement ASAP.

Section62

LoopyLoops said:

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

...

There's typically three separate (but linked) processes when a couple divorce.  There is the divorce itself (legally ending the marriage), the financial remedy, and the child arrangements.

There's no requirement to do all three, although a judge might refuse a decree absolute application (even if the parties agree) if the judge feels there are financial/child arrangements which need to be addressed first.

If there are children involved the financial remedy has to take the child arrangements into account - for example making sure there is a home for them to live in with one parent, and suitable housing when staying with the other parent.  The children come first, so if the court decides it is in the best interests of the child that they remain in the family home with a parent they live with then the other parent is likely to have to accept they won't get their share of the family home until all the children are no longer children.

But in some circumstances it is possible to get a decree absolute without having a financial remedy/child arrangements order, so you could be 'divorced' without the finances being settled.

Hoenir

When you divorced was a financial consent order drafted? 

What advice did the solicitor give you?  They've access to the full picture. When children are involved. The situation is not as black and white as it may appear. The court will assume guaradianship of the child and consider their welfare in determining whether any arrangement proposed is acceptable. 

elsien

LoopyLoops said:

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

Also where will your daughter and ex wife live if your ex cannot get a mortgage?  Private renting is expensive and won’t give your daughter much security in that she can end up having to move many times.  Council won’t house them as they will be seen as voluntarily homeless if your ex wife agrees to sell

Not really the case any more, as a rule, but still a common misconception. Divorce financial settlements have to take into account the needs of all parties, not simply their preferences. If the non/resident person needs the house sold in order to adequately house themselves, that is what has to happen, even if it means the children having to move to a different smaller property. .

Having to to sell a house does not equate to making yourself voluntarily homeless, and it is not helpful to suggest that. 

Hoenir

elsien said:

LoopyLoops said:

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

Also where will your daughter and ex wife live if your ex cannot get a mortgage?  Private renting is expensive and won’t give your daughter much security in that she can end up having to move many times.  Council won’t house them as they will be seen as voluntarily homeless if your ex wife agrees to sell

Not really the case any more, as a rule, but still a common misconception. Divorce financial settlements have to take into account the needs of all parties, not simply their preferences. If the non/resident person needs the house sold in order to adequately house themselves, that is what has to happen, even if it means the children having to move to a different smaller property. .

The issue is normally the ability to obtain an adequate mortgage. Smaller properties are relatively still expensive. 

LoopyLoops

elsien said:

LoopyLoops said:

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

Also where will your daughter and ex wife live if your ex cannot get a mortgage?  Private renting is expensive and won’t give your daughter much security in that she can end up having to move many times.  Council won’t house them as they will be seen as voluntarily homeless if your ex wife agrees to sell

Not really the case any more, as a rule, but still a common misconception. Divorce financial settlements have to take into account the needs of all parties, not simply their preferences. If the non/resident person needs the house sold in order to adequately house themselves, that is what has to happen, even if it means the children having to move to a different smaller property. .

Having to to sell a house does not equate to making yourself voluntarily homeless, and it is not helpful to suggest that. 

 I thought if the mum (ex) agreed to sell without a court ordering it then that is voluntary.  Same as leaving a rented house on a section 21 before the court order.  Just thought it was the same, wasn’t trying to be unhelpful at all. I know someone that it happened to, so was drawing on that knowledge.  Left themselves in a right pickle. 

sheramber

Hoenir said:

elsien said:

LoopyLoops said:

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

Also where will your daughter and ex wife live if your ex cannot get a mortgage?  Private renting is expensive and won’t give your daughter much security in that she can end up having to move many times.  Council won’t house them as they will be seen as voluntarily homeless if your ex wife agrees to sell

Not really the case any more, as a rule, but still a common misconception. Divorce financial settlements have to take into account the needs of all parties, not simply their preferences. If the non/resident person needs the house sold in order to adequately house themselves, that is what has to happen, even if it means the children having to move to a different smaller property. .

The issue is normally the ability to obtain an adequate mortgage. Smaller properties are relatively still expensive. 

Then they rent. 

All should be considered when getting divorced. 

Hoenir

sheramber said:

Hoenir said:

elsien said:

LoopyLoops said:

What was agreed in the divorce settlement?  I thought they usually covered of assets?  I know judges have usually stated age of the youngest child reaches x age the house can be sold.  Anytime prior it has to be both parties agreeing.  But I’m not an expert! 

Also where will your daughter and ex wife live if your ex cannot get a mortgage?  Private renting is expensive and won’t give your daughter much security in that she can end up having to move many times.  Council won’t house them as they will be seen as voluntarily homeless if your ex wife agrees to sell

Not really the case any more, as a rule, but still a common misconception. Divorce financial settlements have to take into account the needs of all parties, not simply their preferences. If the non/resident person needs the house sold in order to adequately house themselves, that is what has to happen, even if it means the children having to move to a different smaller property. .

The issue is normally the ability to obtain an adequate mortgage. Smaller properties are relatively still expensive. 

Then they rent. 

All should be considered when getting divorced. 

Far too often it turns into trench warfare.  As demands made favour one party or the other. Hence the need for courts to represent the children's interests and welfare above that of the parties involved. . 

Renting isn't always the cheapest solution either. 

Tracet74

I'm hazarding a guess you've separated but not divorced as yet?  In that case, your legal advisor is best placed to give you advice as they are aware of the complete picture.  It reads like you are trying to be the "good guy" but you also need to protect yourself. I speak from experience as it took me 15 years to broach the D word and that only happened when the mortgage came to term.