- Posts: 77
A well respected, award winning social enterprise
Volunteer run - Government and charity funded
We help 50,000 people a year through divorce
Because she earns less, could demonstrate a need for more than 50%, could persuade the court that 50:50 isn't fair. All sorts of reasons
Chevette wrote: The remaining equity after DOT is £280k....But surely that should be split 50/50?.....I owned the house before I met my wife....Why should she get more than me??
She moved into my house then we got married..
Are you saying she could be entitled to get a bigger split of the remaining equity after DOT?.....Even if I become unemployed??
Did they give you a guarantee that it was legally binding on the court and would be upheld?
The DOT was agreed for a very good reason, to protect money I had put into the house before my wife had moved in....If its going to be disregarded by a court then maybe I should sue the solicitors that drew it up.