My home is in jeopardy

I have paid a fortune in solicitors fees and it has got me nowhere. Can anyone help?

Effectively, I have a court order, which the FMH is to be sold. However, the price has dropped which as a result (I lose out) my ex does not, due to the way the court order has been worded (another long story - negligence).
My position is this, my ex went to court to have the price dropped, I agreed, knowing the price he requested it would not sell and 5 months down the line it has not sold.
However, as my ex has now seen that there has been no offers he is keen to get me to buy him out, however, it is at a level which I can not afford. So his next tactic today was to, put an offer on the property himself (buy the property). He claims to have no money but he surely has a deposit to put down? He is hellbent on getting what he wants, even if it means the kids and I are on the streets.
My question is, he applied to court to get the price lowered, he has now waited until the price is low enough for him to purchase it from under me. Is this fair? is this not foul play? the order although it said to be sold on the open market - however, given the chain of events,can he do this? I am at my wits end and I just would like to stay in my home. I am up against it due to the way the court order is written, however, can my ex be held accountable for his clear orchestration and manipulation of the situation? I would really appreciate some sound advice here. I am running out of time before my ex throws me on the streets.

Thank you in advance.

Stressed
I have come across this sort of situation on a few occasions recently. By '' this sort of situation '' I mean that a Court has ordered that the family home be sold, with no mention of a buy out, and then one of the former spouses wants to put in an offer on his/her own account. The question is, can this be done ?
I had a case not all that long ago where this was the situation ; one spouse wanted to sell, the other wanted to buy, the matter got before the judge who ordered that the property be sold to the spouse who wanted to buy and gave the other a good ticking off ; and to my knowledge it all went through and at least one of the spouses was happy.
I can''t see any reason why one spouse can''t buy the other out but there has to be some restriction. For a start, the price must be either agreed or else fixed by an independent valuer ( and I really do mean independent ! ) and there must be strict time limits on the exercise of the right.
Again it is not all that uncommon for property to be independently valued for the purpose of dividing up the assets, but when the property comes to be sold it becomes apparent that the property has been over valued and the price needs to be reduced. This happens all the time. It could be that a spouse could not afford to buy at the original figure, and could do if the price were reduced. I don''t think this is necessarily unfair or underhand.
You don''t say what in your opinion is wrong or defective about the order, but I suspect I know. Nevertheless you might share it with me.
You say you want to stay in your home. Could you afford to do this at the reduced price ? Because, if you can''t, then you need to look at renting as an alternative. As a certain someone used to say, there is no alternative.
The most important issue is a home for the children, and therefore, indirectly, for you. I don''t know enough about your situation to give you any advice as to the way forward.
I think I''ll send you a PM.
LMM

LMM,

I can not see that this is not a manipulation of the situation as:

1. When we(I say we, but it was my ex that dictated the price, in which the FMH was to be marketed on the open market) The FMH price had a 2 pronged approach. Offers over £xxx, if not sold by 30th June 2012, then price drops to offers over £xxx. It also confirms that any offers that come in, if I can match it, then I can buy my ex out. However, there is no provision for my ex to buy me out on the order.

2. The sale prices were not attained from an independent surveyor. The figures were my ex''s decision, so that he could attain his lump sum as indicated in the court order. Given the true value of the FMH, I will receive nothing. Hence why I am the one wishing to buy him out at the true value of the property.

3. The property has been on the market for 3 years, at varying prices. NOT ONE OFFER has been put forth during this time. My ex is now desperate to prove me wrong, hence why he has decided to buy it. This makes no sense, he has a home with his partner, I will have nowhere to go.

4. Ex has confirmed that he is attaining a buy to let mortgage, hence profit on my demise of having no home. Surely, there are not 100% buy to let mortgages anymore and he has to put a deposit down to purchase it surely? as a minimum his deposit will have to be 10%, this very deposit equates to more or less what he would be due if the property is sold.
Given this, is it just me that deems this as unfair, malicious and manipulation to force me out of my home?

stressed1 wrote:

is it just me that deems this as unfair, malicious and manipulation to force me out of my home?

It''s just you. The court ordered the house sold so it will be sold and you will be "out of your home" anyway. What does it matter whether it sells to a stranger or to your ex or to the Queen of Denmark? What actual difference does it make to you or your situation after the sale?

How much is the house on sale for and how much is the mortgage?

If it sold to a stranger, how much would you have in your pocket after the sale, and how much would your ex have in his pocket? By that I mean after all fees etc.

If your ex bought you out at the price he is offering, how much would you have in your pocket?

Not the answer, I wished to hear but I do think a critical point is being missed.
It does not matter who buys the property, but the point is, the value of the property is still too high. The values are to suit my ex, so that he gets his lump sum. The agents believe the price is not achievable.

The equity remaining amounts to the lump sum he is due. A little coincidental would you not say?

What you are also forgetting is, this is price manipulation. He has told me he wants it to remain on the market at the current price but if no higher offers are received by the 30th June when the price is due to fall, he will buy it. This very tactic flies in the face of the integrity of the order.

He is therefore privy to the conditions of the order and he has orchestrated the whole thing, if he was interested in purchasing the property from the outset he certainly did not express an interest before we agreed the prices he expressed.
So, by expressing an interest to purchase is like insider dealing, as third party buyers are not privy to the fact that the price will further fall at the end of June, but my ex is. Given this, I believe the integrity of the order has been compromised and more
importantly the property has been on the market for 3 years and not one
offer has been put forth. Given the facts not to mention I am in jeopardy
of losing my home, surely this would not be deemed fair in a court of law.

I would also add, my ex is not offering to buy me out at all, but to buy the property and force me out, as he knows that I will have no equity due to the fact the only equity remaining is sufficient to pay him his lump sum from the FMH.

I have offered to buy him out at the ''true'' value of the FMH, as it is overpriced by £10,000 according to estate agents and similar properties in the area.

Hope this makes sense. Thanks

I don''t understand - surely your problem is the original Consent Order. If I read this string correctly it gives your ex a fixed sum irrespective of selling price? If no one has made an offer then the house is over priced. The market has spoken. This is nothing to do with your ex.