On behalf of my friend ...

Well if she asks for all of the equity regardless of need he isn''t going to be happy about it. That said 60% may be selling herself a little short, and really for the security of the children she may be better looking to buy.
He is going to be in a better position to get a mortgage.
In terms of strict need that would be for a 3 bedroom house at a push with two of the girls sharing, not ideal I know.

LB

There are other options such as a mesher order which would keep her and the children in the house. He would get his share when the youngest is 18. This would keep the children''s stability and the equity would not be wasted on rent.
Have a look at the post called ''who gets the house'' stickied at the top of the property and mortgages section. That should help explain options. It may also be a good idea to suggest she joins Wiki.

Hadenoughnow

Thanks. She has joined, but has been in shock since the chat they had on Monday, so she asked me to post this one question. Poor love is barely sleeping, or eating, has 3 kids to organise and a job to go to. I''m quite worried about her tbh, but am keeping a very close eye. Even though the agreement to split is mutual, its still knocked her for six.

Thing is, she really doesn''t want to stay in the house. They bought it not liking it to do it up. It''s in good order, but the layout is a bit weird. They have already done up 2 previous properties to very high standard as both are in the trade. She hates this house, except for the girls bedrooms which are beautiful. She told me she just wants to get out of the house, and is worried about how long it might be on the market, so staying there isn''t an option for her.

They weren''t married. Does that make a difference when it comes to.division of the home/assets?

MissTish1 wrote:

They weren''t married. Does that make a difference when it comes to.division of the home/assets?

Yes, that changes EVERYTHING.

She should take the 60% and £600pm and say thank you very much. Legally she would be entitled to 50% of the house (assuming it''s in joint names), 25% of his income in CSA and that is all. If he is offering more than this then she should thank her lucky stars.

If she was married then she''d be in a much better position. I think the solicitor gave her advice assuming she was married...

Has she told the solicitor that they are not married? The solicitor seems to be advising and acting as though they are.

Even if they are not married, it may be possible to have an order under the Children Act that allows her to retain use of the equity until the youngest child is 18.I believe it could be used to purchase another property. After that it would be split 50:50 or along whatever lines were legally agreed when the property was purchased.

If her name is not on the deeds, this does make things tricky for her.

She needs to take legal advice from a solicitor who has the full facts of the situation.

As she is not married, this is not a family law case so she needs to make sure she is talking to someone who is competent in property law. She can make a beneficial interest argument - if you use the search bar at the top, you will find Dukey''s excellent post on this. However, this can be a difficult avenue as in these cases (unlike AR) the losing party pays the other''s costs .

Alternatively she could, as Cookie suggests, take the 60% and make the best use of it she can.

You say she has a job ... she should investigate what she can claim in tax credits as a single parent and put in a claim asap as they can only be backdated by 93 days.


Hadenoughnow

Thanks both. She''s said she''s going to come into the site later and look at this thread, and she will then be able to advise on some of the finer points as she of course knows all the details. They actually lost their working tax credit due to the recent changes, but she is applying again as now obviously her household income is a lot lower than it was before.

Keep an eye out for her folks ... Shaz1975.

Thanks