Divorce advice

[dba7108]

I'm sure this has been asked a million times but my brother has just split up from his partner if 16 years. He moved into her house that she previously had with her ex. He was paid off by the father in law many moons ago.
My brother has put a lot of money into the house extensions driveways bathrooms etc. Her kids are now getting vocal saying it is nothing to do with him and he should walk away without a penny. They have 2 9/10 yrnold children together. He is seeking legal advice on Friday but was keen to gather anyone's experience. He is not on the deeds to the house. The house has been mortgage free for 20yrs. He has helped with bills etc. unsure if any of this is relevant really but I do know he is entitled to at least something.

[Sebring440]

dba7108 said:

I'm sure this has been asked a million times but my brother has just split up from his partner if 16 years. He moved into her house that she previously had with her ex. He was paid off by the father in law many moons ago.
My brother has put a lot of money into the house extensions driveways bathrooms etc. Her kids are now getting vocal saying it is nothing to do with him and he should walk away without a penny. They have 2 9/10 yrnold children together. He is seeking legal advice on Friday but was keen to gather anyone's experience. He is not on the deeds to the house. The house has been mortgage free for 20yrs. He has helped with bills etc. unsure if any of this is relevant really but I do know he is entitled to at least something.

Who was paid off by the father-in-law?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Sebring440 said:

dba7108 said:

I'm sure this has been asked a million times but my brother has just split up from his partner if 16 years. He moved into her house that she previously had with her ex. He was paid off by the father in law many moons ago.
My brother has put a lot of money into the house extensions driveways bathrooms etc. Her kids are now getting vocal saying it is nothing to do with him and he should walk away without a penny. They have 2 9/10 yrnold children together. He is seeking legal advice on Friday but was keen to gather anyone's experience. He is not on the deeds to the house. The house has been mortgage free for 20yrs. He has helped with bills etc. unsure if any of this is relevant really but I do know he is entitled to at least something.

Who was paid off by the father-in-law?

The woman's ex husband. Hence the woman owned the house outright when OP's brother moved in.

1. My view, so what if he's paid money towards the upkeep of the house. He's been living there rent free for 16 years.
2. OP, you describe your brother as being her partner, not her husband. Therefore, he's legally a complete nobody.
3. Doesn't he want his ex partner and their 2 kids to carry on living in their house without suffering any financial stress, on top of the stress of the kids' dad moving out? He sounds like a real charmer. He should walk away with nothing, which is what he arrived with. He should be doing what's best for his kids and their mother, who one assumes will be the prime carer going forward.

[Nicetobenice]

Are they a married couple getting divorced or are they an unmarried couple splitting up?

[ConnectionError]

Not being married may be his problem

I suspect he has little chance of any financial split

And there are children involved

[dba7108]

Yes sorry forgot to say been married 5 yrs

[Nicetobenice]

dba7108 said:

Yes sorry forgot to say been married 5 yrs

In which case they will have to "do things properly"

Lots of variables depending on what resources each of them has.

[Doesitdrive]

dba7108 said:

Yes sorry forgot to say been married 5 yrs

He probably has legal rights to half but only when the children are 18 I believe.

The biggest issue should be doing right by the kids.

I am getting divorced, no children involved, lived in marital home for 11 years alone, long separation lol, and fighting over money is not going to happen, been much happier without money, she gets half.

Money fought over is not good money, doesn't bring luck, seen it too many times.

[Landlubber]

If they're married then the courts would balance the money and time he's expended.

[Doesitdrive]

Landlubber said:

If they're married then the courts would balance the money and time he's expended.

The lawyers will drag it out as long as possible and charge accordingly.

With children involved that won't happen quickly or easily either.

[Opapayer]

dba7108 said:

I'm sure this has been asked a million times but my brother has just split up from his partner if 16 years. He moved into her house that she previously had with her ex. He was paid off by the father in law many moons ago.
My brother has put a lot of money into the house extensions driveways bathrooms etc. Her kids are now getting vocal saying it is nothing to do with him and he should walk away without a penny. They have 2 9/10 yrnold children together. He is seeking legal advice on Friday but was keen to gather anyone's experience. He is not on the deeds to the house. The house has been mortgage free for 20yrs. He has helped with bills etc. unsure if any of this is relevant really but I do know he is entitled to at least something.

It’s not about him, it’s about the kids and what’s best for them. They can argue about the money in a decade or so when the kids have grown up and are no longer financially dependent on their parents. If he ends up in a bedsit, then tough. The kids are more important than him in this.

[Muzzer79]

Opapayer said:

dba7108 said:

I'm sure this has been asked a million times but my brother has just split up from his partner if 16 years. He moved into her house that she previously had with her ex. He was paid off by the father in law many moons ago.
My brother has put a lot of money into the house extensions driveways bathrooms etc. Her kids are now getting vocal saying it is nothing to do with him and he should walk away without a penny. They have 2 9/10 yrnold children together. He is seeking legal advice on Friday but was keen to gather anyone's experience. He is not on the deeds to the house. The house has been mortgage free for 20yrs. He has helped with bills etc. unsure if any of this is relevant really but I do know he is entitled to at least something.

It s not about him, it s about the kids and what s best for them. They can argue about the money in a decade or so when the kids have grown up and are no longer financially dependent on their parents. If he ends up in a bedsit, then tough. The kids are more important than him in this.

I don't think anyone disputes that the OP's brother should provide for his children

But that is different to completely writing off a marital asset in a divorce, especially one he seems to have contributed so much to.

The fact is they are (and remain for now) married. "What's yours is mine and mine is yours" and all that.

If his wife and family are so adamant that he's entitled to nothing, then a conversation with a legal professional is sensible, with a view to providing for his children first and foremost whilst ensuring his interests are also respected.

[Opapayer]

Muzzer79 said:

I don't think anyone disputes that the OP's brother should provide for his children

But that is different to completely writing off a marital asset in a divorce, especially one he seems to have contributed so much to.

The fact is they are (and remain for now) married. "What's yours is mine and mine is yours" and all that.

If his wife and family are so adamant that he's entitled to nothing, then a conversation with a legal professional is sensible, with a view to providing for his children first and foremost whilst ensuring his interests are also respected.

The solicitor will initially tell him what I and others have said about the children. Then they’ll explain that he’s entitled to an amount and what that may be and that he is extremely unlikely to see any of it until the kids are grown up and no longer financially dependant. At that point the house can be sold and he can get his share. Unless his wife wants to buy him out before then, but there’s unlikely to be any way to force that to happen. He’s got no chance of getting 50% of it. More likely a 30-40% share of the increase in value during the years they’ve been married.

[Nicetobenice]

Opapayer said:

The solicitor will initially tell him what I and others have said about the children. Then they ll explain that he s entitled to an amount and what that may be and that he is extremely unlikely to see any of it until the kids are grown up and no longer financially dependant. At that point the house can be sold and he can get his share. Unless his wife wants to buy him out before then, but there s unlikely to be any way to force that to happen. He s got no chance of getting 50% of it. More likely a 30-40% share of the increase in value during the years they ve been married.

Surely it will depend on their other assets?

As they are married he's probably entitled to something from the house but with a bit of horse trading he may be able to walk away with something in the here and now.

If they are brassic then it's a different matter of course

[Opapayer]

Nicetobenice said:

Surely it will depend on their other assets?

As they are married he's probably entitled to something from the house but with a bit of horse trading he may be able to walk away with something in the here and now.

If they are brassic then it's a different matter of course

The OP was only asking about the house.

[NH-0]

Try to keep the kids on side, that might turn out to be his biggest regret.

[mac96]

He sounds to be in a position that many divorcing women find themselves in whereby the marital assets are in the husbands name and the main income was his but the woman has contributed in other ways . Women in that situation do not walk away with nothing. Neither should he.

He needs legal advice. And he needs to try to keep the kids onside in the longer term. Its a rotten position to be in.

[Ham_and_Jam]

mac96 said:

He sounds to be in a position that many divorcing women find themselves in whereby the marital assets are in the husbands name and the main income was his but the woman has contributed in other ways . Women in that situation do not walk away with nothing. Neither should he.

He needs legal advice. And he needs to try to keep the kids onside in the longer term. Its a rotten position to be in.

My thoughts exactly.

Reading the OP, it sounds like his wife walked from her previous marriage with the house but expects her current husband to walk away with nothing. Doesn’t sound fair.

[Opapayer]

Ham_and_Jam said:

My thoughts exactly.

Reading the OP, it sounds like his wife walked from her previous marriage with the house but expects her current husband to walk away with nothing. Doesn t sound fair.

It sounds nothing like that if you read the OP. Her ex-husband was paid off for the house by the wife’s father, so that was split on an acceptable basis to both sides.

This one, the OP’s brother brought no property into the marriage as far as we know, so will likely get a share of the increase in value for the time that he was there and married.

In terms of comparisons to wives in other divorces without the knowing the full details here, it’s difficult to assess. Did the OP’s brother give up his career to become a house-husband caring for the kids? If not, the suggestion that it’s the same is just bitter misogynistic bks. He might gain financially ultimately, but if he’s the bigger earner, or a decent earner in his own right then he might be opening up a load of options on his income too.

I’ll repeat again, the wishes of the parents here come a distant second to the welfare of the kids and what’s best for them. That’s pretty much what the OP will be told by a solicitor. Financials are a long way down the line, but there won’t be a forced sale of the house.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

mac96 said:

He sounds to be in a position that many divorcing women find themselves in whereby the marital assets are in the husbands name and the main income was his but the woman has contributed in other ways . Women in that situation do not walk away with nothing. Neither should he.

They might do if they were leaving the kids in the primary care of their dad and seeing them every other weekend.