You could be missing the point here-look at the factors the Court is OBLIGED to consider not just CSA in isolation...ie the "big picture".
In fact, the relevant principles are set out in Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 :
25 Matters to which court is to have regard in deciding how to exercise its powers under ss. 23, 24 and 24A
(1)It shall be the duty of the court in deciding whether to exercise its powers under section 23, 24 , 24A or 24B] above and, if so, in what manner, to have regard to all the circumstances of the case, first consideration being given to the welfare while a minor of any child of the family who has not attained the age of eighteen.
(2)As regards the exercise of the powers of the court under section 23(1)(a), (b) or (c), 24 24A or 24B]above in relation to a party to the marriage, the court shall in particular have regard to the following matters—
(a)the income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future, including in the case of earning capacity any increase in that capacity which it would in the opinion of the court be reasonable to expect a party to the marriage to take steps to acquire;
(b)the financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
(c)the standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage;
(d)the age of each party to the marriage and the duration of the marriage;
(e)any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage;
(f)the contributions which each of the parties has made or is likely in the foreseeable future to make to the welfare of the family, including any contribution by looking after the home or caring for the family;
(g)the conduct of each of the parties, if that conduct is such that it would in the opinion of the court be inequitable to disregard it;
(h)in the case of proceedings for divorce or nullity of marriage, the value to each of the parties to the marriage of any benefit . . which, by reason of the dissolution or annulment of the marriage, that party will lose the chance of acquiring.
(3)As regards the exercise of the powers of the court under section 23(1)(d), (e) or (f), (2) or (4), 24 or 24A above in relation to a child of the family, the court shall in particular have regard to the following matters—
(a)the financial needs of the child;
(b)the income, earning capacity (if any), property and other financial resources of the child;
(c)any physical or mental disability of the child;
(d)the manner in which he was being and in which the parties to the marriage expected him to be educated or trained;
(e)the considerations mentioned in relation to the parties to the marriage in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (e) of subsection (2) above.
(4)As regards the exercise of the powers of the court under section 23(1)(d), (e) or (f), (2) or (4), 24 or 24A above against a party to a marriage in favour of a child of the family who is not the child of that party, the court shall also have regard—
(a)to whether that party assumed any responsibility for the child’s maintenance, and, if so, to the extent to which, and the basis upon which, that party assumed such responsibility and to the length of time for which that party discharged such responsibility;
(b)to whether in assuming and discharging such responsibility that party did so knowing that the child was not his or her own;
(c)to the liability of any other person to maintain the child.]
So the crucial part for you above is:
including in the case of earning capacity any increase in that capacity which it would in the opinion of the court be reasonable to expect a party to the marriage to take steps to acquire"
The Court can use H resources if he refuses to get a job...ie give you his share or a good portion of it...
Actually if H "failed" to get job and support C who has had to give up College I think that could be argued as "conduct"...Many DJ's wouldn't be very sympathetic with his cause.
Courts have time and time again said if one party has to get all the equity in a csae like this to meet a housing need they will do so...
So go for it without further delay and certainly before you loose all with repo.
If you seek ancillary relief order and ask the Court to list first appointmant early and to order Forms E be prpeared within say 3 weeks should the repo proceedings be issued the DJ in those may make a suspended order on terms you pay just the monthly payment and delay interest payments till after the AR proceedings!
That will buy you time.
His
form E will be very short and simple.
Go to solr next week taking:
P60
3 months wages slips
Copy bank statements for 1 year
Evidence of debts and thraetened repo
Evid of house value eg nearby property sales particulars
Your latest Pensions statement.
Details of any policies you have in sole or joint names (if endowment ring for surrender value/if term or anyway policy ask Life Co for a letter setting out terms of policy)
Make a list of your monthly outgoings/need financially now
Similar list for the anticipated costs of future house/flat to be bought
Get a print out from mortgage broker to say how much you can raise on mortgage as you will in Form E be saying on sale the Mortgage + Equity is your "need" to buy a new house.
Don't waste too much time and money discussing matters with Solr get him/her there and then to prepare Form E. Solr can then write to H/H solr to say you are ready to comply with the Financial ancillary relief protocol.
Solr will ask H /H solr to write to confirm in 7 days he will comply or solr will reserve position to file Form A. [so no delay]
If surprisingly they say OK and H files Form E quickly then Form A to be filed and Crt asked to list First Appointment in say 4 weeks. which CAN be used as an FDR and hopefully DJ will say you need most of the equity etc:)
