Hello, this is my second attempt after losing my post. I guess it logged out without me knowing such was my concentration over the matter at hand. Maybe it was for the best, maybe I don’t need to be as specific as I was. I just wanted to say to you, Dognut, (great name by the way) that it’s great to be optimistic and you certainly can be, but beware if you will…
“All’s fair in Love and War”
.
I write out of personal experience where my ex and I during Separation purchased a house (40% of the value of the
FMH which he stayed in) out of joint funds during our separation. Both houses—my little converted bungalow and our 4 floor, 5 bedroom house were mortgage free. I was advised by my solicitor that me staying in a rental was eating up resources. My ex-husband didn’t want a mortgage and therefore I had to find a house that was less than our joint bank account. I was told that he would allow me to have the difference between the house price and what was left in the joint bank account so I could furnish the house. Unfortunately, his mind changed somewhere along the way as did the maintenance I was receiving up to that point.
Unfortunately, in my situation I wouldn’t know that he had another almost 60,000 pounds in his personal bank accounts for another 9 months after
financial disclosure on the day of the First Hearing! My husband seized the opportunity to claim Ancillary Relief while I was ‘between’ solicitors and waited for the LSC to amend the Certificate of Public Funding. Then my legal aided solicitor prevaricated in neither meeting the deadlines or doing the preparation necessary by Court appointed deadlines. It was my ex-husband, earning an excellent income versus me unemployed and looking after the children who initiated the Ancillary Relief Hearing. [Read another cautious tale ahead: preparation is key.]
The morale I think is this: ‘Trust is great, checking is better”. The financial disclosure process of the
form E from both parties is needed so that resources can be ideally split equitably in matrimonial cases. For example, when I completed the Form E, it was a foregone conclusion that I already had a place to live, and thus my needs had already been pre-determined BEFORE true financial disclosure from my miserly ex-husband.
Buying a house for me even if that house I now had was a very much smaller house –albeit in my sole name -- was considered 'suitable' regardless if it was worth approximately 40% of our FMH . I didn’t know that by buying a house during separation, that it would prejudice the future decision of the Court, or that a spin would be put on by husband’s surprise Barrister that it was ‘suitable’ for a mother and two kids, where it clearly was not. But I had a solicitor who couldn’t or wouldn’t defend me against the mistruths of the other side, and because she neglected so in not doing essential preparation on the day of the First Hearing; I was defenseless.
Because of my ignorance of not knowing that I did not have to make a decision on the day of the Ancillary Relief Hearing, and having an incompetent solicitor; I was under extreme duress to sign over or transfer the large and spacious FMH to my ex-husband. Buying a house, whether it was in my sole name or not did not matter, as we had bought it out of joint funds and being a legally aided client meant that this was considered ‘preserved’ for me, and I would have to pay the commission 25% out of my ‘
Clean Break’ lump sum settlement from my ex-husband. The settlement left me a stay-at-home-mom without any spousal maintenance, retirement provisions, or sufficient child support.
If I had to do it all over again, turning the clock back 7 years now, I would have stayed in the 4 bedroom rental I had in the first six months of the separation. It was paid out of joint bank account. I would have waited until after financial disclosure (Form E) was filed and discussed, before I would even begin to consider how we would separate into two houses.
Hindsight is 20/20…
Certainly, I would not even begin considering signing over my substantial interest in our mortgage-free house until after MY Residency Order for the Children was considered fully. I lost out not only financially, but in losing the house that the kids would still call home. Although I live in the same village, the children who are young adults now take their friends over to the FMH, spend all their free time there with all the computers and luxuries that I can’t provide.
If after the true colours of a former partner come out in all their glory, I perhaps would have had the strength to demand that it was he that move out of the FMH and that I stay in the beautiful large house where the children most wanted to be. My point is, attitudes change as they must as a couple are splitting…Seven years later if I am honest I truly wish that I would have had the strength not to concede to my ill-advised solicitor to hurriedly buy a house, or to be forced to sign over my interest in the FMH without proper recompense. Neither, would I allow my ex-husband through his emotional blackmail to force me into accepting far less than what the children and I needed.
I sincerely wish you luck and clarity that perhaps you and your wife can come to an amicable settlement for the benefit of the children.