my house, my name

Hi,
This is my first post and I''m just wondering if anyone can help or advise me.
Me and my husband are living apart, it was with a view to sort things out and get back together. Unfortunately it''s not working out like that and I have a feeling it is going to end up in divorce.
We have been married less than two years. I have a house that I have owned for 7 years, it is in my name alone and has been rented out for over 5 years, basically before we got together.
I''m trying to find out if he would be entitled to any of this house at all. The house was empty when we first seperated so I moved into it and lived in it for around two months, just for somewhere to go and because I thought living apart would be short term.
We''re getting on better than before but our arguments, which are still frequent, are more and more bitter.
I just want to make sure my house is protected from him as he hasn''t contributed anything as the rent covers all bills. I had a look and all I can see is things on beneficial interest which I don''t think would cover me as I''m the sole owner.
Does anyone know anything that could help me, I''m devastated it''s come to this

With very short marriages where there are no children, you would normal leave the marriage with the assets that you bought in. A period of continous cohabitation before marriage usually is counted towards the length of the marriage, which can make some short marriages much longer.

Co-habitation before marriage isn''t straight forward and a court would consider the nature of the relationship before adding the length of co-habitation to the duration of the marriage. When the finances weren''t amalgamated, the co-habitation was short and there are no children of the relationship co-habitation isn''t likely to be added to the length of the marriage.

As Maisy says the starting point for sharing assets after a short marriage is each party takes away what they brought to the marriage. However, the duration of the marriage is only one factor and there are others is the s25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 checklist that have to be taken into account. That sometimes means a wealthier spouse may need to pay *something* towards the other spouses costs of rehousing. That''s particularly true if one party gave up their job and/or relocated for the benefit of the relationship.

Thank you for your replies, I feel so cold and heartless asking about this but I know he''ll be trying to find out what he can get from me. I''ve answered some of your cmments, I think I''ll look into the marriage act you mentioned to see if any of it means anything to me.

I''m probably classed as wealthier, I own property, he doesn''t.
We lived together for just over two years but that was because accomadation was provided by work, his work, so I moved to meet his needs.
I''m now living back at my parents and he has the house we had rented together as his job finished him.
The finances were a bit amalgamated, we had a joint account where both wages were paid into, then everything went into my account as I stopped using the joint account for bills but that was only because he couldn''t get an account of his own.

Is there anyway I could stop him from trying to get his hands on my house, or would I just have to contest it if it got to that?

What would happen if we just went our seperate ways and we then divorced a few years down the line, would he be more entitled?

mya wrote:

What would happen if we just went our seperate ways and we then divorced a few years down the line, would he be more entitled?

Potentially yes. In a short childless marriage you each take out what you brought in. The longer it gets, the more it goes towards 50/50.

Plus by leaving it, you would be tied to him financially - if he can''t get a bank account then I assume his credit rating is mud. Therefore yours is too. And if you were to come into some money, say an inheritance or lottery win, then he would have a claim on that too. So it is best to end the marriage legally as soon as it is clear that it can''t be saved.

I may be slighty squiffy on this one but I was in a similar position some time ago.
If you take 10 years marriage as 100% amalgamation of assets etc, then 2 years would be 20%. Therefore if the house was brought into question then it should only be to the tune of 20% asset/equity.

Is there any equity in the property?

I am pratically in the same situation as you. The advice i''ve been given is get divorced as soon as possibly. Best to get a Clean Break Consent Order but he will have to a consent order. If he wont it is up to the judge.