# No Equity in House, split with ex!!!



## krissi (12 May 2010)

Hi everyone, first time posting so i'm not too sure if i am in the right place, but I need advice.

My ex and I bought a house and lived there together for four and a half years.  We had one child together and I have another child from a previous relationship.  A year ago we split up-I am currently living in the house and paying the full mortgage and have done so for the past 12 months.
The balance of the mortgage is E140k now, it was E145k when he moved out.

We attended mediation and the agreement was that I buy him out for E20k.  My problem is this-house prices are dropping and I believe will continue to do so.

A house up the road is currently for sale at E180k (they started asking E210k) and it shows no signs of selling-as is the case around the country.  I dont think we could sell the house and if we do sell, we have a clawback penalty of E22k approx to pay(as it was an affordable house), so if we were offered E165k, at best we would break even after costs are taken into account.

We took on this debt together and now I am expected to take over it all and pay him for something which is fast becoming a liability instead of an asset.
I would be prepared to take over his portion of the debt but not to give him a lump sum payment also.  Is this fair??

I am seriously considering selling and cutting our losses-if we do owe money then its split 50:50.  What about the fact I paid his half of the mortgage?

Advice please people-do I try and sell or do I stay and get the house transferred into my name-with or without a lump sum??

He has a solicitor who seems hell bent on getting him money and he told me that his solicitor fees will be coming out of the lump sum I give him, so I dont think she is going to give up trying to get me to pay that easily.  She is threatening Partition Proceedings-I thought this was only when parties would not agree to sell??  Can she do this if children are involved??


Thank you


----------



## niceoneted (12 May 2010)

Why did you agree in mediation to the 20k pay out if it is not what you want?

Can you afford to pay the mortgage on your own and are you interested in having this home for you and your children?

You cannot be thinking of what the house will be worth down the line. what if house prices were rising would you pay the 20k asap in the hope your ex wouldn't be dragging things out to get a better deal. 

You have to bear in mind that your ex probably put a lot of money into the house already and it is not yet in negative equity. 
DO you really want to sell pay the clawback and end up not having your own place for you and the kids. 
I would settle and be done and glad of the chance to move on with the house in my name and relatively small mortgage compared to others. 
Good luck


----------



## krissi (12 May 2010)

Since the mediation, the houses similiar to this have dropped, which is why I am now considering selling, this was one of the options open to us.
MY ex is not keen on selling-he thinks I should give him the money rather than the pay the clawback.  This would push the mortgage from E140k to E160k.

Of course I'm thinking about the future and is what I'm paying a viable purchase-who wouldn't?   I have a responsibility to myself and the children to look after all of us financially.
I would like to stay in the house but I can buy another house if its not in our financial interest to stay here.  At the moment I can afford the mortgage on my own so that is not a problem.

My ex did put money in as did I and its not yet in negative equity-but it will be which is why I'm considering all options now.


----------



## doubledeb (12 May 2010)

krissi sorry to hear about the situation. I think you would have to re-mortgage to get his name taken off the house, would you qualify for a mortgage of that much on your own?. also depending on earnings you might now be entitled to FIS or one parent family payment. Also make sure you are getting maintenance from him.  My brother did something similar back in the day where houses were making a profit.  He re-mortgaged paid off the old mort then split the profits with his ex.  I assume this is stil how it works but if you are in negative equity and sell or re-mortgage he shold be responsible for half the loss?.... open to correction on this
Maybe time to get yourself a solicitor?


----------



## krissi (12 May 2010)

Hi doubledeb, 
Yep-defo need a solicitor, I just wanted peoples advice because sometimes when you are in a situation it can be hard to see clearly.
I doubt I could get a re-mortgage at the moment, I could indemify him against the mortgage and get him to sign something removing all rights and claims to the house maybe??  In the next year or two the bank might be more favourable to taking his name off the mortgage.  That is more hassle though. 
I believe we are both responsible for any loss if we sell, which is fair enough as this is something that we both took on.  If we can sell, I believe we will be lucky to break even.

Maintenance, access etc are all sorted.


----------



## doubledeb (12 May 2010)

I'm not sure its as easy as that. Norfbank is great with advice about mortgages etc.  Maybe check with his earlier posts there might be something in them that might help you.
I wouldn't blame you not wanting to sell with the kids etc.  but if you can afford the repayments I would try and stay there if you can't get another mortgage.  His solicitor is having a laugh telling you to give him 20k to get out.  I would get myself a good solicitor (maybe the one that you had when buying the house first day) and get him to sort it out.  take the hassle away from you. He would be doing well walking away with no debt.


----------



## maybemaybe (14 May 2010)

*Not that bad a deal......*

Hi Krissi

Had a gawk through your personal situation, and the only way to try to clarify, or for you to hopefully understand, is by literally putting the shoe on the other foot. 

You say, you and your ex partner lived in the house for circa 4.5 years? If it were a case of you leaving the family home, with your two children, and renting other accomodation, it wouldn't really seem fair, that he walks away with a house, and you walk away with nothing. He did invest in the family home, in some way shape or form, so he should be compensated for same. 20K, although will seem like a big lump sum (and it is!), it works out at 85e per week you are refunding him, for his time spend there, and any works, bills, etc he partnershipped there. Should you proceed with a maintenance application, you may be awarded up to that amount per week for your child. He will pay this until the child attains the age of 18, which is possibly more than 4.5 years. He has no home, no girlfriend, his child will not live with him, it seems like an extremely fair deal to broker. Although your home is decreasing in value, this is through no fault of his, and initially when the family home was bought, he, along with yourself, bought at market price. For 4.5 years, he paid the mortgage, bills, looked after the children, maintained the home, many other little issues that are also taken into account, and to walk away with nothing, bar his lump sum, minus his legal fees, is a pretty raw deal-for him. 
Also, to try and buy again yourself (sell, and split the difference) will be almost impossible, as now you are single, with two children. In comparison to before, cohabiting, with one child. The banks will look upon you as a liability, so better to stay put until you are more secure. You have a home, that you can afford, 20K to get rid of someone that you really do not wish to have many dealings with, and to get a home in a climate where people are loosing home's, and cannot get mortgages is a pretty good deal. 
His Solicitor (as any decent Solicitors would do) will get a cash deal for him, its only fair, if I were you, I'd get the 20K and be done with. You have a home for your children, which is the main point.
Best of luck with it all!!


----------



## krissi (15 May 2010)

Thanks everyone for the replies...Okay so this is what I'm coming up with so far!

To put it bluntly I have to pay him for living with me???

I may be walking away with a house-but I am also taking on a huge debt.  Now I have the full mortgage to pay on my own, another loan of E20k to compensate him for living with me, financial costs of bringing up the children on my own (maintenance barely covers their school lunches).  

Oh and during all of this my house value is tumbling!

In this case, yes I may have a home but it seems like I may pay dearly for it.

In his case-he doesn't have a house, but he is debt free, up E20k and pays a bit of maintenance.

Nobody wins in a seperation but I'm trying to judge financially what will cost me the less in the long run.  
It's not his fault the value is decreasing but nor is it mine, so can someone tell me why should I pay for something that is not worth it in the current climate.

If the shoe was on the other foot-to be honest, I think I would be happy to get out with no debt which I why I am seriously considering putting it on the market.

On another note also, when two people decide to have a child-they have a responsibility to care for that child for the rest of its life.  Why in Ireland, when a couple split up is it the mothers responsibility to provide a home for the child.  Yes, most fathers pay maintenance but it comes nowhere near covering the cost of bringing up a child.
Don't get me wrong-of course I am going to provide a home for my children-but why is it always up to the mother??


----------



## roro123 (16 May 2010)

krissi said:


> On another note also, when two people decide to have a child-they have a responsibility to care for that child for the rest of its life.  Why in Ireland, when a couple split up is it the mothers responsibility to provide a home for the child.  Yes, most fathers pay maintenance but it comes nowhere near covering the cost of bringing up a child.
> Don't get me wrong-of course I am going to provide a home for my children-but why is it always up to the mother??



l'm very sorry about your situation but if you really feel that strongly about it perhaps you could consider giving your kids to your ex and let him rare them, then you can pay maintenance perhaps?



krissi said:


> I may be walking away with a house-but I am also taking on a huge debt.   In this case, yes I may have a home but it seems like I may pay dearly  for it.



He has no home, no kids, but you have a roof over your head and a home for the kids. Sounds like a fairer deal for you, although you may have to adjust the standard of living that existed before. Hopefully things will work out for you with the proper approach from both sides.


----------



## dubrov (16 May 2010)

roro123 said:


> He has no home, no kids, but you have a roof over your head and a home for the kids. Sounds like a fairer deal for you, although you may have to adjust the standard of living that existed before. Hopefully things will work out for you with the proper approach from both sides.


 

What are you talking about? She doesn't just get the home in the split. She has to pay a mortgage which may be more than the value of the house. He can always get a new mortgage elsewhere if he wants a house.

Bottom line, Krissi is get a solicitor. That is the only way to ensre a fair deal


----------



## krissi (17 May 2010)

roro123 said:


> l'm very sorry about your situation but if you really feel that strongly about it perhaps you could consider giving your kids to your ex and let him rare them, then you can pay maintenance perhaps?
> 
> He has no home, no kids, but you have a roof over your head and a home for the kids. Sounds like a fairer deal for you, although you may have to adjust the standard of living that existed before. Hopefully things will work out for you with the proper approach from both sides.



I had to smile at reading that quote-I seem to have been entirely misunderstood.  First of all they are not my kids, they are our kids (my first child looks at him like a father).  I was simply querying why does everyone assume that it is the mothers responsibility to provide the home??  Surely this should be up to both parents??

I don't see how this is fairer financially!!  I have the children and a home but my question is do I stay in this home or will I be better off selling this home now and buying another house in two or three years time??

I think I will seek legal advice early next week but I am still edging towards selling-I think it will be less messy that way.  Is there anyone else who was in a similiar situation, what was the outcome??


----------



## niceoneted (17 May 2010)

Krissi, one of my sisters is in a similar situation to you. She is just about to make a deal with ex hubby. She will make what ever deal the solicitors deem fair as she knows she will not get a mortgage herself if she were to sell and have to buy again and she feels it is important to have a family home for the children for years to come. 
I sense some bitterness in your posts which is understandable but I think you need to put your differences with your ex aside and think of what you want for yourself and the children going forward.
Good luck it's a tough time.


----------



## krissi (17 May 2010)

Hi niceoneted, 

This is exactly my point.

It sounds like your sister is paying her ex because she wants the kids to have a family home.

Why is she paying??

Does he also want the kids to stay in the home??

Is he taking less because of this??

I am looking at this from a pure financial viability point of view.

I want a house so, do I keep this house and pay my ex or do I wait a couple of years until they have decreased in asking price and save myself thousands in capital and interest??

Regarding another mortgage I believe I will qualify for one on my own without too much bother.

Any hard feelings towards my ex are stemming from the fact that he seems to think I owe him money, which might be fair if the house was actually worth something.  I am at odds with this so I think selling might be the best option.

When NAMA was first introduced there was murder about the government paying more than the land and properties were actually worth on the open market.  I along with thousands of others disagreed strongly about this-why would I make the same mistake??


----------



## niceoneted (17 May 2010)

What I suggest to you is to make an application for a mortgage to see what you would get. There is no point thinking that you won't have a problem getting x amount. This is what my sister did and it is how she discovered that she would not get the mortgage she thought she would which was a huge deciding factor. She wants a home for herself and the kids - she does not want to have to uproot them and rent and if not happy where renting or problems with landlords have to uproot again. 

In answer to your questions she wants a home for herself as much as the children. She is thinking of when she is older. I think it is the right way in thinking in wanting a family home for your kids. 
She doesn't really care what he thinks as her priority is and always will be the kids, they are probably older than yours so speak for themselves too and they want to be in the house they have lived in to date. 
There is no agreed price yet between them but she says she will be happy with what the solicitors fairly agree. She has an excellent solicitor from a trust point of view which I believe is very important.


----------



## krissi (17 May 2010)

Thats a good point about the mortgage and also the solicitor.

My kids have said that they dont mind where we live-I have one teenager and 1 in primary school, so this has enabled me to look at it from an entirely black and white point of view.

Renting does bring issues, sure I suppose what doesn't-every choice brings its own set of problems really.

Thanks again for your advice, I will let you know what the bank says and also what legal advice I receive.


----------



## maybemaybe (17 May 2010)

Remember too Krissi, if you take over the house now, no stamp duty etc, but if he goes to buy, he will. As would you, in a few years. So, possibly by saving money now and selling, you may end up paying that in a few years with stamp duty, as you will not be considered a first time buyer anymore  I know it seems your lumbered with a debt with the mortgage, but in the current climate (and I'm in negative equity big time), I happily pay extortionate interest rates, as I know the criteria for a mortgage is so much tighter, I'm just happy to have a roof over my childrens heads, big aul debt or not. (ever notice we're estatically happy when we get approved for mortgages, and soon after we think wtf?!)


----------



## krissi (17 May 2010)

How right you are maybemaybe, its only afterwards we think what have we done??  

Even if I bought another house in two or three years for E110K or E120K it will probably cost me E140K between costs, stamp duty, furnishings etc.

So maybe I should stay put?

Ever just want someone else to make a decision for you lol???


----------



## dereko1969 (17 May 2010)

regarding stamp duty if you were married the person that left the family home can be regarded as a first time buyer the next time they buy a house if they were a first time buyer of the house they left. 
however this does not apply where both parties leave the house.


----------



## Mick31 (19 May 2010)

Your ex should be happy to walk away free of debt and he can certainly qualify as first time buyer again. It 's ridiculous to even think he could get 20k.


----------



## redbhoy (25 May 2010)

Mick31 said:


> Your ex should be happy to walk away free of debt and he can certainly qualify as first time buyer again. It 's ridiculous to even think he could get 20k.


 
How much money has the ex put into the house? Maybe he is well within his rights to be looking for 20k regardless of equity in the house.


----------



## Card (25 May 2010)

why  not a situation whereby you both contribute to the mortgage equally until the youngest child is 18 or finished education then the house is sold and any proceeds split?


----------

