Cohabitation and right to sell the house after split

chealy74

Hi
I have a question, I have recently split from my ex and are both still currently living in the house with our 2 year old daughter.

My ex is the one who has finished the relationship and wants me to move out eventually, all my savings are tied up in the house so I would like to sell, split the equity and move on with joint custody of my daughter.

My question is, when married the wife will nearly always be given the right to remain if young children are present, is this the same when cohabiting if it goes to court. I would be more than happy to have my daughter full time but I know it is highly unlikely.

I am not being unfair i just think if she hangs onto the house for the next 18 years I am totally screwed with ever owning a property again.

Thanks for any feedback, also I am going to seek some legal advice but though I would ask here as I am totally stressing out..

C3PO

I’m in a very similar situation.
My first bit of advice is to go nowhere until the house is sold - your ex cannot force you to leave.
The only real way of resolving this is to agree to sell the house and split the proceeds but getting to that point can be very difficult if one party does not agree.

chealy74

Thanks for replying, i'm aware my ex cannot force me to leave but I am not sure how long I want to remain in the house, plus I think there is a 3rd party involved.

I have a buddy who is a barrister and he thinks I may have a problem trying to sell the house due to my young daughter, I could very well find myself out and not being able to sell the house for a number of years.

A2LUE42

Only if that is your choice. Unfortunately most guys think that is an enviable outcome and agree to it. Judges prefer the couple to come to an agreement and if they see it as fair, they rubber stamp it. You need to stand your ground and decide what you want.

Xterminator

Hi Op

if you come to an agreement the judge will likely rubber stamp it. IE a compromise that both sides can live with.

Otherwise you are going to try to convince a judge that your wife and daughter should have to leave the family home to suit you. Even if you get 50-50 custody, your wife needs a home suitable for the child and presumably your wife and child have ties is the area, maybe have child's name down for a local school etc. If your wife gets to live in the home for the next 16 years, you still retain your 50% share in the property, its just that your asset cannot be liquidated.

I understand that you would have a better chance of owning another property if the asset is liquidated, but you are not the only party involved. You probably need to step back and see the big picture, and pay special attention to your child's needs, they should be paramount.

It is a sad fact the divorce leaves all parties worse off (except the lawyers).

C3PO

Xterminator wrote: »

Hi Op

if you come to an agreement the judge will likely rubber stamp it. IE a compromise that both sides can live with.

Otherwise you are going to try to convince a judge that your wife and daughter should have to leave the family home to suit you. Even if you get 50-50 custody, your wife needs a home suitable for the child and presumably your wife and child have ties is the area, maybe have child's name down for a local school etc. If your wife gets to live in the home for the next 16 years, you still retain your 50% share in the property, its just that your asset cannot be liquidated.

I understand that you would have a better chance of owning another property if the asset is liquidated, but you are not the only party involved. You probably need to step back and see the big picture, and pay special attention to your child's needs, they should be paramount.

It is a sad fact the divorce leaves all parties worse off (except the lawyers).

The OP has made it clear in his post that himself and his partner are not married - this is relevant!

TheBoyConor

Doesn't really matter if he is married. The Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010 means that where the child is involved rights and obligations, and restrictions equivalent to those under marriage kick in. They are not married but for this purpose they might as well be.

A safer option for a guy is to buy his own house and rent it out while living with the wife/partner in another rented house. It is a sad an cyincal state of affairs but alas it is the only way to avoid being shafted if you want to get married or have a serious partner.

TheBoyConor

If your daughter is 2, then I assume that you own and are living in the house for more than 2 years? Is this correct? If so then you are stuck I'm afraid.

However, if you only have the house less than 2 years then the rights/obligations in the aforementioned Act do not apply to you and you might be able to force a sale? Would she or her family or her new jockey buy out your share?

chealy74

Hi
Thanks for replying, haven't been on much lately but currently, there is no immediate rush to move out we are still in the same situation but working on it.

In regards to the house, I will eventually seek legal advice if needed just to see where I stand but I am aware it will probably not be in my favor. I have no desire to see my daughter unsettled as she is the most important thing but there needs to be a realistic approach to how long my ex could stay in the house to allow all parties to move on with their lives.

It appears no matter what country you live in the guy always gets shafted