The most important issue is whether you have dependent children.
On the assumption that you have not, the options are :
1. The House could be awarded to one party outright.
2. The same as option 1, but the spouse who gets the house having to pay a lump sum to the other ( ie a buy out )
3. The house could be sold outright and the proceeds divided. If one spouse is a high earner and the other not, the lower earner might have a larger share of the equity.
4. The sale of the house could be delayed until the happening of some specified event ( usually children growing up ).
Which of those options is adopted depends on the parties' finances and their respective ability to borrow. Divorce in most cases means a reduction in living standards for both and the primary aim is, or should be, to make sure that both parties have somewhere to live.
Sometimes the marital home can form part of a ' horse deal ' for example, the wife may get the house and the husband keeps his pension. There are many ways of dealing with the situation and I can't comment further than this, save to say that if there are children, are in a different ball game.
If you hover over your own wiki userID and click, you will enter your profile, at the bottom you can select forum postings for the previous posts you have either created or posted on
Basically what Mike said above is about it, but it does depend on whether there are dependent children and you did mention maintenance
If you are still unsure post up all relevent information, bearing in mind the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 chapter 18 section 25 thus:-
25.-—(l) It shall be the duty of the court in deciding whether to exercise its powers under section 23(l)(a)(b) or (Cl or 24 above in relation to a party to the marriage and, if so, in what manner, to have regard to all the circumstances of the case including the following matters, that is to say—
(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;
(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 made by each of the parties to the
welfare of the family, including any contribution made
by looking after the home or caring for the family;
(g) in the case of proceedings for divorce or nullity of marriage,the value to either of the parties to the marriage of any benefit (for example, a pension) which, by reason of the dissolution or annulment of the marriage, that party will lose the chance of acquiring;
and so to exercise those powers as to place the parties, so far as it is practicable and, having regard to their conduct, just to do so, in the financial position in which they would have been if the marriage had not broken down and each had properly discharged his or her financial obligations and responsibilities towards the other.
Thanks guy's. I did find out how to get to my other posts just after I wrote the first one. Just learning !
Well been to mediation, to fill you in slightly I do have 2 dependant children 3 and 7 which are living with my ex2b.
After coming out of mediation I am reasonably happy. 2 points though the first one is still about the house. Looking at her finances she has got options such as going into shared housing although things would be tight for her but it would mean I could get the equity % I have agreed on. But it would push her and I can see that having an effect on spousal maintenance. The mediator already has told me that I have enough free cash available to support her further than I intend so I am unsure what to do. If I push for a house sale then I might end up paying in other ways !
The other one is spousal maintenance although I have reduced the amount I am giving her from now it is not significant against running my own house. When I pushed this point with the mediator she went through my financial details and told me how much I could afford which was infact an even greater amount.
I suppose this point is where the solicitors win by people being greedy
Overall though I feel it was fair just don't know how I am going to save up for a deposit when my equity is tied up in a house and I am paying rent and running a house of my own?
Ok looked at some figures last night from the disclosure and have worked on a few things.
I have quote coming from an independant financial advisor say they will lend my ex2b upto £130000, (she didn't get an approriate quote she told them the details she thought would best fit her cause).
My question now is would it be allowed that she bought me out of the house by as much as she could afford now. Which would then give me enough deposit without saving to buy somewhere. Then agree on paying the rest of the % agreed at one of the trigger points.