Is He Entitled To Half The House?

[renegadefm]

My partners friend owns a house that was left to her by her grandfather in his will, so when he died the house became hers. 

She was married at the time, but since then the relationship as broken down, but the husband never actually lived in the house she inherited. 

They are now seperate with a devorce on the horizon, but he has won a case in court and claimed half the value of the house once it's sold. 

But it puts her in a sticky situation as she will be left with roughly £70.000, which is no where near enough for a house, and unable to get help, as she would have too many savings.

Is he really entitled to a house that was basically a gift to her, and he never lived in? 

[nicebloke1]

Ok. Who would the house/ money belong to if they were still married and getting on ok?

[Barmaid]

That will not work, Nicebloke. Registering as an occupant with the council will have no impact on the sale of the property pursuant to an Order.

If there is a Court Order, the only way to get round it is to appeal it.  It is pointless pontificating since an order has ostensibly been made and we are being asked to comment on something where we only have sketchy facts.

[barry1010]

They both would.

That's irrelevant, though.  Just as her private pension would be her's throughout the marriage - until they got divorced.

When you get married the law considers all the assets to be jointly owned

 

 

[nicebloke1]

Well thats why i put a question mark. Its just that i know a women who did this because she wasn't on the deeds of the house and husband threatened to sell up, she was told he wouldn't be able to sell if she did this?? And the only way she could get her half of the house was to divorce???

[barry1010]

Being on the council tax bill / electoral register can affect the sale of a house.

[THECORBYLOON]

NICEBLOKE,  in your example the husband threatened to sell the house, he wasn't ordered to sell it by a judge.

[Barmaid]

If she refuses to sell pursuant to a Court Order, the ex-husband will make an application that he has the conduct of sale and that a Judge signs the paperwork instead of her.

[nicebloke1]

Not too sure if your asking me a question, to confirm such or not?

[nicebloke1]

9.34^^^

[jno]

the OP says only that divorce is on the horizon. There can't be any order regarding property till the divorce is granted, surely? Is this all in the future?

[renegadefm]

Redhelen72, 

Sorry how do you mean how would I feel if she got half of his inheritance?

In my opinion it would seem fairer if she was financially safe as she has 3 children to feed and take care of. 

The problem is when you devide something like a house in half, it's not really doing either person any good. 

If they both get £70.000 each it becomes useless amounts for each person. When you have a certain amount of savings she will be denied all child tax benefits etc, so will be poorer, yet she will be the one that will have to find a property to rent that is suitable for her and 3 children.

So £70.000 won't last long for either person, but especially for her, as the husband works, so doesn't need to touch his £70.000 as he's working.

This is where I was surprised the judge did what he did. 

Surely the husband should only be allowed to claim a percentage, like 20% as they were only together for 5 years, and been seperated for over 2 years.

So they seperated around the time her grandad died, so the husband never actually lived in the house as he moved out and started renting a flat. 

But to have half seems ridiculous, it just doesn't help anyone. 

[nicebloke1]

Are you saying he's been awarded this share of the house AFTER the divorce was already done and dusted???

[THECORBYLOON]

"Surely the husband should only be allowed to claim a percentage, like 20% as they were only together for 5 years, and been seperated for over 2 years."

Where did you pluck that percentage from?

[THECORBYLOON]

We know you think it's wrong but the only option open to her, is to appeal and await the outcome.

[nicebloke1]

In a nutshell if they where still married when the house was left to her, I'm afraid it will be split down the middle, no ifs or buts, half each whether it seems fair or not.

[Redhelen72]

So it would be fair for her but not him?

wow!

[Barmaid]

Ancillary relief hearings often take place before a final decree is granted.

I have to say, what has been described does seem a little strange, but we do not know the minutiae.  The general view is that inherited property is not included in the "pot" of matrimonial assets, but if there is an Order the only option is to seek legal advice on an appeal.

[Ellipsis]

There was a contract ... to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer ...

[renegadefm]

Redhelen72, 

I was referring to the fact it would be more fair for her to claim his inheritance because she has the 3 children to look after and home. 

That's all I meant, I don't have a gender preference. 

The thing is her husband never contributed a penny towards any mortgage or anything during their marriage. 

They seperated around the time her grandad died, so then she moved into the house her grandad gave her with the 3 kids, so it was never the marital home. That's what I find out of order how the husband is allowed to make a claim on it. 

I don't know how the husband and judge sleeps at night. The whole system is currupt. 

[Ellipsis]

the only option is to seek legal advice on an appeal ...