Me and my wife have split after 10 years of marriage. We were buying our house which is now valued at 80,000 with a mortgage of 28,500 to pay. I still live in the house with our 10 year old son. She has now moved in to a bedsit with a new partner. I work full time and she works part time, her new partner does not work.She comes to the house to see our son but does not have him at all overnight. I have a works pension that was frozen last october when i was made redundant. She claims she is entitled to 50% of the house and my pension and does not have to pay any child maintence as she does not earn a lot and must keep her and her new bloke. She all so claims she can remove anything in the house that she feels she paid for even though she only worked part time for about 3 to 4 years of the marriage where as i have worked full time for the whole marriage. The mortgage is in my name only but her solicitor has put a home rights notice on it at the land registry.
My understanding is that if you are the parent with care then she should be paying you child maintenance under the CSA rules. You can work out how much if you know what she earns, using the CSA website, which has a very simple calculator. The earnings (or lack of them) of her partner do not figure in this at all so she should not be arguing that needing to keep him comes first.
She will be entitled to a share of the total assets that you have between you (these would include the family home and your pension). However, you might get the larger share as you are looking after your child and his interests come first. I would get some legal advice, though, even if it is only a one-off fixed fee consultation.
Regardless whose name they're in all the assets, including any pensions, are added together and any debts subtracted to determine the size of the matrimonial 'pot.' The starting point for division is 50:50 but need and housing the children are the priority. It doesn't sound worth selling your home because with house prices as they are you wouldn't be able to downsize so then it's a question of working out how much you could increase the mortgage to pay a share to your wife. Once you know how much money you can raise you can work out what proportion of the assets you require to home your son.That could be 60,70, 80% or more.
Sometimes when there are not a lot of assets it's necessary for the parent not housing the children to keep their share as an interest in the property until the youngest child is 18 unless certain conditions (usually the resident parent cohabiting, remarrying or dying) are met triggering a sale.
She is entitled to 50% of the things in the house too so it's a good idea to make an inventory and try to agree who gets what.
As sexy says most non resident parents have some CM liability, even those on social security contribute something.
mediation is a good way of settling matters because experience shows people are generally more satisfied with agreed settlements and being non adversary mediation is quicker and less expensive. Also people tend to adhere better to arrangements. If you can agree a settlement with a mediator's help you might just take it along to a sol to give it the once over and turn it into a legal document which is then submitted to court for approval.
With my present income i would find it hard to remortgage to buy her out. This was mentioned the other week and she instited she wanted her money i said it would put me and her son on the streets, she said she didn't care aslong as she gets her money. and i find it hardest about my pension as most of this was paid in before i married her
I feel exactly the same about my pension. Not only was most of it accumulated before we married (or even lived together), my husband has worked full-time throughout but has not bothered to put much into his, despite constant nagging to do so. I find this the most galling aspect of the whole situation.
I'm not sure that your wife is entitled to half of the things in the house. I think they count as 'non-realisable assets' and so don't figure in the same way. My solicitor says that if there are two of something (two televisions, two sofas) then my husband should be able to take one, but if there is only one thing (the cooker, for example) then it stays in the house for the benefit of the children.
Try to get some sort of agreement with your wife, but remember that your son's needs must come first, and certainly will if it goes to court. As Fiona says, she may have to retain an interest in the property so that she doesn't get her share until a future specified date. I have an acquaintance for whom this was when the younger child left university.