# Family home after separation



## dockingtrade (21 Jan 2012)

If someone owened as house and after 5 years met someone and got married, if they lived in it and share mortgage payments while they were together whos entilted to the what share of the house. 
Does the fact one person bought it before they were together mean anything or is it 1/2 of everything?


----------



## robbie00 (21 Jan 2012)

I think its a 50:50 split


----------



## Eithneangela (21 Jan 2012)

+1.


----------



## Thirsty (21 Jan 2012)

It's not necessarily as straightforward as that.

You don't mention if there are children, pension funds, savings, other assets or liabilities.

All these things add to the mix.


----------



## ClubMan (21 Jan 2012)

robbie00 said:


> I think its a 50:50 split





Eithneangela said:


> +1.


Not necessarily by any means.


----------



## putsch (22 Jan 2012)

It certainly is in no way as simple as 50:50.  All kinds of factors go into it. But in the first case if the parties can make a fair sensible agreement themselves there is no need for lawyers. Get legal advice to start with (FLAC if you can't afford a solicitor) and ideally if you can go for mediation do!


----------



## Bronte (23 Jan 2012)

It is not 50:50.  Most likely it will be split along the way each partner contributed.  That can be different where there are children.  

Is the property in negative equity?  You might have to do a deal.


----------



## dockingtrade (23 Jan 2012)

The house is not in negative equity, very little left on the mortgage. She bought the house herself as a single mother 1993 then got married 5 years later and had a child with her husband. So its a bit messy. Thanks for the repsonses I recommended that she see a solictor just to go through entitlements. Good to know it may not be as simple as a 50:50 split. What she wants to do is keep the family home with the kids without having to have to pay out 50% of the value of the home, if he was to leave. She wants to pay 100% of the rest of the mortgage herself and also put the house in the kids name.


----------



## Bronte (24 Jan 2012)

Your friend definitely needs to see a solicitor, but she also needs to be realistic.  The husband has rights too, and has contributed, plus he will need housing, so it could be messy, people need to think of what the other needs and not just what one wants for the kids etc.  A fair solution as far as it is possible for all should be the aim.  

Why does she want to put the house in the childrens name?


----------



## dockingtrade (24 Jan 2012)

she is realistic, just worried that it has to be 50:50..it would break her. She'd worried that lets say there's 20k left on the mort and the house is worth 120k, she will have to pay 50k to him for her to stay in house and him to leave. It was 7 years (not 5)before he moved in and they got married that year. So its 7 years paying the mortgage on her own plus the deposit and 11 years 50:50 on repayments with. It would still be substantial if it was even worked out that way. I dont understand the house in the kids name either. Its just what she has in her head, pay him off then put the house in the kids name.  She doesnt want child support but i said she'll have to see how much she needs to pay off before making that decision. There's no issue with access.

Bottom line she need to see a good solicitor. Thanks


----------



## 44brendan (24 Jan 2012)

If there is a mortgage on this house it cannot be transferred without the permission of the Bank. This is complex and she needs to get advice from a good solicitor before making any decisions.


----------



## ClubMan (24 Jan 2012)

I don't think that the property or mortgage can be put in the name of any minors. Whatever about a will or trust (probably cost prohibitive) covering this situation.

She may not want child support but the children are entitled to the support of (and contact with) both parents.


----------



## Thirsty (24 Jan 2012)

> Bottom line she need to see a good solicitor


Not necessarily, mediation can help iron out many of these questions.


----------



## ClubMan (24 Jan 2012)

Even with mediation it makes sense to get independent legal advice - at least to run the rule over any mediated agreement before it becomes formalised as a separation agreement/deed of separation.


----------



## dockingtrade (24 Jan 2012)

thanks all... she wants to see a solicitor now, just for information purposes at the moment not to start any kind of preceedings.


----------



## Bronte (25 Jan 2012)

dockingtrade said:


> thanks all... she wants to see a solicitor now, just for information purposes at the moment not to start any kind of preceedings.


 
That is excellent and is the correct way to go about things.


----------

