Reply to: Friend and partner splitting - who gets the house?

[BrilloPad]

Having thought about this (!) I wonder what his new gf makes of this? Surely she wants the child to come first?

But maybe she doesn't. Women are supposed to be the natural child carers but many instances where they do not.

Remember the Plymouth child picture scandal? That bloke approached women on facebook and chatted to 20. He turned the conversation to the subject he wanted. 16 of them went away - without telling the police! 4 went ahead and took pictures!

Then there was Paula Yates. The mother of baby Peter. Need I go on?

I believe that both parents should have equal responsibility - until events prove them otherwise.

[EternalOptimist]

Yeah, I think she works too but she is the main care giver and he is the main earner.

drip, drip, drip , drip

[MyUserName]

Understood.

A court will look to keep the status quo. And look after the child. Perhaps the only thing that would help your friend if is she is the bread-winner. I assume they both work and she does most of the childcare?

Yeah, I think she works too but she is the main care giver and he is the main earner.

[BrilloPad]

He has not moved out, they are still sharing the house.

Understood.

A court will look to keep the status quo. And look after the child. Perhaps the only thing that would help your friend if is she is the bread-winner. I assume they both work and she does most of the childcare?

[MyUserName]

He moved out so is stuffed. He should have stayed in the house.

He has not moved out, they are still sharing the house.

[BrilloPad]

He could change the locks when she is out on the razz.

He will then face an ex-parte custodial sentence. Quite rightly.

[BrilloPad]

Only his mum? So his father cannot take custody and have the bit live with him?

He moved out so is stuffed. He should have stayed in the house.

[GlenW]

But can he force a sale of the property? I don't know much about these situations, but if the mortgage is in his name alone, what's to stop him putting the property on the market? Granted not much chance of it selling if she refuses to let people view it, but if legally it isn't "her" house can she stop it getting sold?

Agree the child's needs come first, but if he's got £X equity tied up in the house is there really no way he can get at that money if she refuses to move out? That does seem a bit harsh on him...

He could change the locks when she is out on the razz.

[SueEllen]

Indeed. and even if they agree to share custody 50/50 she will always be principal carer...

Bottom line...If you have children expect to pay for the ex and the children until they are at least 18.

If she wants to stay in that house - she will get it until you agree a sale and split of proceeds. Doesnt matter if she didnt pay the mortgage, she can just claim she bought all the groceries etc. The law is an ass and there is no sign of it being updated to reflect modern society.

If it was updated to reflect modern society she would have more rights.

At the moment there are legal battles going on arguing how much the cohabitee without assets in their name should have after they split up.

Best situation talk to a lawyer and come a with a plan that leaves the house in the kid's name only.

[Willapp]

If she wants to stay in that house - she will get it until you agree a sale and split of proceeds. Doesnt matter if she didnt pay the mortgage, she can just claim she bought all the groceries etc. The law is an ass and there is no sign of it being updated to reflect modern society.

But can he force a sale of the property? I don't know much about these situations, but if the mortgage is in his name alone, what's to stop him putting the property on the market? Granted not much chance of it selling if she refuses to let people view it, but if legally it isn't "her" house can she stop it getting sold?

Agree the child's needs come first, but if he's got £X equity tied up in the house is there really no way he can get at that money if she refuses to move out? That does seem a bit harsh on him...

[Underscore Pt2]

FTFY

Indeed. and even if they agree to share custody 50/50 she will always be principal carer...

Bottom line...If you have children expect to pay for the ex and the children until they are at least 18.

If she wants to stay in that house - she will get it until you agree a sale and split of proceeds. Doesnt matter if she didnt pay the mortgage, she can just claim she bought all the groceries etc. The law is an ass and there is no sign of it being updated to reflect modern society.

[vetran]

The Kid gets first dibs on the house She gets first dibs on the kid.

FTFY

[Underscore Pt2]

They are not married, they moved in together. He pays the mortgage and she pays him some money per month. They have a son.

They have broken up years ago but she still lives there and now he wants her to move as he has a new gf but she is refusing and says she has rights to the house.

Assuming all of these facts are correct I would have thought she would not. Anyone on here know anything about this scenario?

Does the fact she has paid him money towards costs give her a legal position or would that just class her as a tennent?

She gets first dibs on the house.

[vetran]

So you ask for advice but don't post all the facts - weird

Suityitus strikes again! No one is safe

[EternalOptimist]

I have been studying law for three years now, and cases like this in particular.

How much of the money that she has been paying towards the house has come from her boyfriend ?
what proportion of the mortgage has she been paying ?
How has she been paying ? is there an audit trail ?


sry, must dash. Judge Judy is coming on the telly in a minute