Is this unreasonable? long

Which one of them keyed the car? I think they should get less.

I concur that it should be an even split, and it's good that they are both in agreement and happy with this; I would have expected Anthony to want more, although guilt may be a big factor in his decision.

I think it should be split as a %age based on how much they put in. I do think it's different if the relationship has been over a longer period of time and there are children involved.

Well, H put all of the deposit on our house as he had a property before me and I didn't as I moved out of home and straight in with him. If we ever split up we would split the house 50/50 as I have put in money in lots of other areas - for example paying for lots of holidays that we both went on or paying for household improvements.

It depends on each person's way of doing things though - as I said, all of our money goes into one account so we always consider all money as being joint, even though he earns a much higher amount and therefore contributes a higher percentage to the pool.

Regardless of the moral issues involved and I don't think anyone would disagree from the info given here that Anthony was anything other than a d1ck, I think it is fair enough that he gets more money from the house. He did pay a larger share into it and it was virtually never a matrimonial home. I think it would have been different if they'd had kids say, and the reason her financial contribution wasn't as large because was she had given up her earning potential to be at home looking after them, but I think it would be very unjust if, regardless of the reason for the marriage break up, that someone who was married and in a matrimonial home for a very short time could benefit substantially financially.

Sounds like he's happy enough to go with the 50/50 though.

Half the house yes, maintenance no - assuming there are no children.

I didn't spot the bit about maintenance initially - why can't she go out and earn her own money?

Save in exceptional circumstances, usually where a woman has given up work to bring up a family and keep house I don't really approve of women getting maintenance. I thought it was hardly ever granted these days?

No kids involved luckily.

I must say I agree about the no maintenance. I know she's used to a better lifestyle than she can afford now but she needs to readjust that now he's gone.

My wife put down the deposit on our house as she sold her flat and had the cash. When we split we agreed that I would let her have the house without selling it. She "paid me off". Not that the finacial reward came to anywhere near the time and effort and love and tears that went into that house.

To be fair though, it was unpracticle for us to sell as we would have both lost money. I had no desire to live in that house and was quite happy for her to keep it with her kids. I'll take my name off the mortgage in Dec 09 when the mortgage company agree to it. Until then I have to trust her to keep up the mortgage payments on it. We also have a "semi" legal document detailing the house and the responsibility for the mortgage etc and for me agreeing not to make any future claim on it. Not that it is actually worth the paper it's written on in the eyes of the law.

She'll make a fortune on it when she sells in 2010, but i guess thats life. For the moment I'm just getting my life and finances back on track...

I don't think she should get 50% of the house or maintenance. It's not as if there are children involved or they've been married for a number of years so I don't really see why she's entitled to half the house if he put a large deposit down. Obviously up to him though and if he's happy to give it her...

The reasons for their split are entirely irrelevant. As is the fact that they were married, under the circumstances. It was a short relationship, and there are no children involved.

They should sell the house and split the proceeds according to what % they contributed to the deposit. She shouldn't receive maintenance as there is no reason why she can't work and earn her own money.

When I got divorced our solicitors said similar. We were of a similar age, it wasn't a long marriage (3 years) and we had similar earning capacity - even though there was a child involved. We split everything 50/50.

I agree with you, emma. I think she should get half, regardless of who put more money in. They were/are married after all, it's not a business/investment/arrangement between friends. Whilst married couples don't necessarily own all their property in common, the family home (even if no children are involved) should be shared, and that means a 50/50 split.

I don't think she should get any maintenance, though.

50/50 split on house - fair enough if he's happy with that, but maintenance!!! NO WAAAAAY. She needs to get out in the real world and earn a living. Does she have no self-respect? asking for maintenance............tsk

That doesn't work for everyone, though. Yours was a far more equitable split than, for example, one person getting the house, contents, car, savings and child maintenance, as happened with ex-mrs WTP.

My mother got nothing but the house and contents, and it was worth an absolute pittance by the time she came to sell it, whereas his business was worth rather a lot. Meh. She considers it a small price for having got rid of him.

To be honest EN you have not stipulated how they own the house etc?

If they own as joint tenants then yes, 50/50 split. They may, when buying the house have taken into consideration Anthony's higher input and own the house and tenants in common in unequal shares if that is the case then this should not be changed IMO. After all he has been still paying the mortgage for a year for her.

WSS - aside from the house issue, why on earth would she get maintenance?

Should the increase in the value of the house be split according to the percentages put in? Or should they get their deposits back and half the equity left? What would happen if the house was worth less than they'd paid for it?

I can understand her asking for the house to be split 50:50 but I'm surprised at her asking for maintenance. I wouldn't have thought there was a chance of her getting that. Unless she's just asking for it to distract from the house bit.

I don't see why he should have to split 50/50 if he contributed more. And absolutely no way should she get maintenance. I think she's been lucky he's paid the mortgage for the last 12 months!

It wasn't actually all that equitable for me, because I had a child ? Despite ex Mr Clairy's violent behaviour, and affairs, I paid all the costs of the divorce (I saw it as my way of getting rid of him for good) so my half was worth roughly half of his half. No provision was made for our son, we had to go through the CSA and they took 2 years to find him as he subsequently did a bunk, so I missed two years of child maintenance. However, that was the circumstance of my marriage and the fact that we had a child. In the case of e-numbers case study, I think the original logic applies.

I think she's got a bit of a cheek on all counts tbh. It sounds to me as though she's milking him for all she can get. If I were leaving such a relationship with no children having had the mortgage paid for a year, I'd want nothing more than what I'd put in and would have been desperately saving for said 12 months in order to be independent and self reliant. I don't understnad this sense of entitlement some people have just because they have a marriage certificate, especially when the marriage certificate is only a year old!

x

I have been in a similar position where an ex paid the deposit for the house. I paid half the mortgage payments and bills even though he was earning twice as much as me. He had managed to save 16k in the 18 months that we lived together. But my morals wouldn't allow me to take anything away when I left him for being too tight with his money! I put it down to experience.

I do think it's unfair that she wants half of everything, But I think that he will pay some guilt money.

The house - their business. I could go into the legal ins and outs (Hecate I think aleady mentioned joint tenants and tenants in common) - but at the end of the day, whatever they are happy with. But maintenance?!!!!!!!!!!!!! With no children, a massive payout (compared to input) on a house, and a marriage that lasted one day... Based ONLY on what you've said here, she sounds like a money grabbing bee-atch. She needs to get on with her life instead of trying to punish him. Tsk.

She's taking the p*ss re maintenance. Yes he was an arse for wanting to pull out of the wedding so late (but he did say so before the day, give him an ounce of credit here) but he's been very patient with her for all this time and from the information here, she's taking advantage of him big time. He's tippy-toed around her because he broke her heart, but its time for her to move on but she doesn't seem to want to and is clinging onto him and his wallet. A percentage split is probably fair enough, but if I were him i'd do 50/50 just to get out.

I think she's taking the piss on a number of fronts really...

He's been paying the mortgage on it, and put up more of the money initally so I wouldn't necessarily expect to spilt it 50/50 when he had already expressed doubts about the marriage beforehand and left after 1 day. It may be disgustingly harsh (and my judgement could well be clouded by having a crap day at work today!) but I think that if you have to beg someone to go through with your wedding then something is wrong - and to expect a lot out of a divorce after a start like that is just roode!

And as for maintenance - wtf?

I was wondering this. For me this is the crux - if they didn't set anything out when buying the house that one should get a larger share than the other, then it should be a 50/50 split. Otherwise then logic would tell you to go with whatever was agreed.

However, if they are both happy with a 50/50 split then I cannot imagine why anyone would possibly have an issue with that? Actually, it's no one's business but their's anyway and your friend sounds beaky

L
xx