[Closed] Ex won't move out - WWST?

new poster just joined a couple of days ago

Or long term member who prefers to remain anonymous so opened a second account.

Edit: Hmm, could be my sense of humour is taking a break of course!

The theoretical sunk cost of renting is irrelevant here, if she was paying towards the mortgage rather than a tenant. Ignoring all the legal battle or not talk… why not just get an agreement to pay what her mortgage payments have have helped the OP “earn” thanks to the increase in the value of the house?

Yeah I proposed that and gave workings, looks like £7.24k. That's quite a far way south of the £30k most here would just hand over without question.

I know she’s a horrible cow and we all hate her an that, but doesn’t someone who’s given 2 years of their life to living in a partnership, and expected to live that way forever, deserve to be able to afford somewhere to live now that relationship hasn’t worked out?

I don’t know whether this place is just full of the typical bitter, twisted misogynist misfits that most male-dominated pastimes seem to collect, but there are a lot of heartless **** on here today 🤣

1) She decided to leave that partnership. Which wasn't a marriage or any legally recognised relationship.
2) She already had her own house but used the equity to pay off debts she racked up.
3) Er, tough shit really. She's a big girl, my sister in law just went through the same thing. We helped her out massively and she's paying us back when she can.
4) The OP is not a charity.
5) I'd be saying the same about any money grabber regardless of what they have hanging between their legs (or not).

...typical bitter, twisted misogynist misfits...

I think I might've spotted one!

A question I don't think has been asked yet,

Has she taken legal advice or has she just gone "I'm off, you smell, that'll be £30k thanks"?

My understanding (mostly from reading links on this thread) is that she's automatically entitled to nothing whatsoever, she's likely entitled to "beneficial interest" as fingerbang said but it would be down to her to demonstrate that rather than just pull a figure out of her chuff and then hold out her hand.

Two years is jeff all in the grand scheme of things. Offer her 10k and then change the locks. 😁

then change the locks

Do NOT do this. A whole world of legal pain lies down that road. She will have residence rights.

I don’t know whether this place is just full of the typical bitter, twisted misogynist misfits that most male-dominated pastimes seem to collect

I haven't really been arguing one side or the other. I think it's reasonable that she should get something, I think that half the equity (that some others are suggesting) when she's contributed <5% of the costs is extreme. I'm not sure about her proposed £30k.

I think it's fairly misogynistic to assume that she wouldn't be able to cope without receiving £30k. If it was the other way around, I'd be saying the same things.

The theoretical sunk cost of renting is irrelevant here

I don't think it is irrelevant, she's benefited from the money she's spent. If she can recoup her "investment", shouldn't the OP be allowed to recoup his additional costs, too?

See this is why marriage still has some merit (or of course buying a house in joint name). Takes away a lot of the guesswork when it all goes pear shaped.

Yeah I proposed that and gave workings, looks like £7.24k. That’s quite a far way south of the £30k most here would just hand over without question.

Really? I think most (and especially those with some experience in this area) are saying get some legal advice, rather than taking figures from internet nobodies.

she’s benefited from the money she’s spent

So has he.

Takes away a lot of the guesswork when it all goes pear shaped.

Really?! Talk to more divorcees.

Ultimately, the OP should seek something fair and final. Even if hurt by the breakup, they probably know that as their ex-partner has contributed to the mortgage, and the home has gone up massively in value, they should probably release some of that equity gained and help them get established and moved on. The legal advice should probably be about how to try and make that official and "final", rather than how to avoid paying anything, no?

That said, new poster just joined a couple of days ago, sure this isn’t going to turn out to be about Ukraine or Crimea & the ex is Putin?!

that was my thought when i read it earlier..

I think it’s fairly misogynistic to assume that she wouldn’t be able to cope without receiving £30k.

What is it about people on here that just go straight to nasty?

@Aidy, apologies, I assumed your comment was a dig back at me as I'd accused others of the same thing. But, you may not have even seen my comment so perhaps I got that wrong. Sorry if so.
I don't think she [I]would[/I] be able to cope though, OP says as much, I think that is pretty clear.

Perhaps they didn't comprehend that thread from Mark asking for a modicum of civility?

apologies, I assumed your comment was a dig back at me as I’d accused others of the same thing. But, you may not have even seen my comment so perhaps I got that wrong. Sorry if so.

It wasn't a dig at anyone really. I didn't mean it to be read like that. My apologies also.

Really?! Talk to more divorcees.

I was being somewhat ironic! Although that siad I'm a divorcee myself and when my ex said 'f you you're not having half my pension' the law was a very useful thing to fall back on. Of course there are other horror stories and really it comes down to how reasonable and rationale both parties want to be. It's all one pot before you start bickering and fighting over who gets what.

To the solicitors on here, how is this ambiguous situation avoidable from the offset? As in: Pre-agreed and absolutely written in stone **no** argument/comeback

Is there some kind of contract you can both get drawn up and sign at the moving in (or partner moving in) point? Does having a documented rental agreement help?

Referring to out of marriage partnerships

I'd have thought that as a grownup you put a bit of thought into stuff before you move in together, and would normally expect that you were hoping that this was going to be a permanent arrangement, irrespective of whether it later goes south or not .

In other words, that the girlfriends decision to sell her house and pay off debt was done to the benefit of both, as was the purchase of a new house (I'm guessing from the wording of the op the house was bought for them to move into. So I'd argue that morally, though probably not legally she's entitled to a share of the uplift in value, especially since she sold her house- thinking of the difficulty of getting together a house deposit as a single these days I'd for my own conscience want to see her done right- irrespective of who initiated the breakup.

Really? I think most (and especially those with some experience in this area) are saying get some legal advice, rather than taking figures from internet nobodies.

@ransos absolutely, I'm just questioning why £30k is in any way proportional to the contributions made. I did ask if I was missing something.

I think I might’ve spotted one!

@desperatebicycle care to name and shame rather than passive aggressive digs? Go on, I'm a big boy, I can take constructive criticism.

Bitter

Twisted

Misogynistic

Misfit

FWIW I have no skin in this game, I'm looking at it dispassionately and TBH it sounds like the OP is being mugged. But what do I know, I'm not the sort of person who writes a tenancy agreement when my girlfriend moves in.

@ransos absolutely, I’m just questioning why £30k is in any way proportional to the contributions made. I did ask if I was missing something.

Because she has paid half the mortgage so is entitled to half the increase in value. Simple as that.

Get a solicitor - and quickly; give them all the facts so they can provide appropriate advice.
Would the ex-GF agree with your statement - is it a complete and factually correct statement?
Two solicitors have posted; one specialises in trusts and the other didn't state their specialism - better qualified than me to comment but not the same as having your own solicitor.

@ransos absolutely, I’m just questioning why £30k is in any way proportional to the contributions made. I did ask if I was missing something.

I can see why it might be, but the advice I received BITD is that few would go to court over this sort of sum (not worth it because of legal fees) so ultimately it will come down to a negotiated settlement.

£30K won't get you much of a deposit in some parts of the UK, meanwhile laddo here is sitting on a half million property.

As other have said, she sold her house, paid half the mortgage, put some in to make the place nicer, Presumably at some point a while back you both planned for this to last. It's not much to ask to get herself set up in the grand scheme of things. Give it a couple of years and the value of the house will probably increase enough to have covered it anyway.

Because she has paid half the mortgage so is entitled to half the increase in value. Simple as that.

Errr....

She has been paying half the mortgage repayments since moving in

From the OP

I think the OP is in for a real shock when he gets his legal advice. If this gores leagal he will be paying legal fees and an awful lot more than 30 000 IMO

If it were me, I'd hope I'd consider the way that house prices have gone mad during Covid. She has jumped off the property ladder - I get that her equity went towards paying off debts, but if she kept her house it would have risen in value over the last two years so (in my small, non legal mind) she has taken a hit there.

It will be hard for her to get back on the ladder, I honestly feel that £30k is a small price to pay and she's not being that unreasonable.

Because she has paid half the mortgage so is entitled to half the increase in value. Simple as that.

Once could argue that, since her name is not on the mortgage, she has not paid half at all. Unless there is something in writing stating otherwise, the 'half the mortgate' she paid is little more than contributing to the upkeep of the property. The home improvements, well they are valid.

But this crazy oddness is exactly why OP needs legal advice. Ultimately it will come down to how much he pays her to leave, not how much she is/isn't actually entitled to.

(experience, long conversations with a friend in a more involved version of this who did go legal in the end)

I think the OP is in for a real shock when he gets his legal advice. If this gores leagal he will be paying legal fees and an awful lot more than 30 000 IMO

Of course, so will his ex and it sounds't like she can less afford the fees than he can. I think the few actual lawyers who have responded on her have made it pretty clear that when one party owns the house and the other does not, any claim that might be made by the party who doesn't is tenuous at best. It's not zero (which is a surprise to me), but close to zero.

Is there some kind of contract you can both get drawn up and sign at the moving in (or partner moving in) point? Does having a documented rental agreement help?

Referring to out of marriage partnerships

I'm not a solicitor, but I did this when in a similar situation to the OP. Moving in with girlfriend who used most of her flat sale equity to pay off debts so that it was something like 90% me / 10% her funding the new place. It just governed how anything would be shared if we split and the agreement ended if we got married. Never needed to see how it worked as we married a couple of years later.

Its not close to zero. she has paid half the mortgage - the OP states this and that is easily shown. She has residence rights and she has rights to the equity.

I have been in exactly this situation in england in a house I shred with my unmarried partner.

absolutely, I’m just questioning why £30k is in any way proportional to the contributions made. I did ask if I was missing something.

I think £30,000 is half the increase in value of the part of the property covered by the mortgage

Now please don’t shoot me down if you disagree. But that it where the number comes from

Had she been a lodger then presumably her rent would have been declared as income?

She hasn't paid half of the mortgage. From the sounds of it the OP has put £200k deposit up front on a 4-500k house, over two years she's given him £7k towards the mortgage repayments. 7 is not half of 500 and the mortgage is solely in his name.

It's not "that simple."

Because she has paid half the mortgage so is entitled to half the increase in value. Simple as that.

Well, no. There will have to be an attribution of the increase in value between the equity put in by the OP and the mortgage. If he put in £200k and her £0 and they each funded half a £150k mortgage, he's funded 275/350 and she's funded 75/350 of the property. That would work out at roughly the £30k she's asked for, so it might be that she's been advised to be reasonable and has been.

This

I think £30,000 is half the increase in value of the part of the property covered by the mortgage

and this

Well, no. There will have to be an attribution of the increase in value between the equity put in by the OP and the mortgage. If he put in £200k and her £0 and they each funded half a £150k mortgage, he’s funded 275/350 and she’s funded 75/350 of the property. That would work out at roughly the £30k she’s asked for, so it might be that she’s been advised to be reasonable and has been.

make perfect sense to me.

I’m just questioning why £30k is in any way proportional to the contributions made. I did ask if I was missing something.

Because she has paid half the mortgage so is entitled to half the increase in value. Simple as that.

The reality will be somewhere inbetween SK's "f all" and half of the value increase should the house be sold. There are potentially valid (depending on your point of view) arguments for both extremes...

Hence I see her offer of £30k as being a pretty cheap lesson myself! She might not have fronted any of the capital, but has paid half of the mortgage for the time she has lived there... Had it not increased by £150k in value then we might be talking a completely different scenario where she was walking away with little or nothing, but I think considering if the OP had to sell his house tomorrow he will have gained £150k for doing so, giving 20% of that to the person that paid half the mortgage for the last 2yrs is, in real terms, a good deal...

Genuinely, in the OP's situation (he will know his ex much better than we do) I'd be using my knowledge of her character to gauge what she's likely to accept based on her initial £30k offer, but without offending too much so that she goes all in... Get some advice from a solicitor about drawing up the paperwork for her to sign so that once she accepts the money she has to walk away, and then draw a line under the ordeal...

But this crazy oddness is exactly why OP needs legal advice. Ultimately it will come down to how much he pays her to leave, not how much she is/isn’t actually entitled to.

Which is the real issue here... Hence I'd be seeing what she'd take to f off by next week... Get the paperwork drawn up, signed by both, give her the dosh and off she pops. In the meantime if I were the OP, i'd probably book a room in a B&B for a few nights so as not to heighten his personal suffering!

Its not close to zero. she has paid half the mortgage – the OP states this and that is easily shown. She has residence rights and she has rights to the equity.

You're not a lawer - this one is.

im a trusts solicitor who deals with this kind of thing, I’ve not read all the replies but basically if you’re the sole legal owner then it will be up to her to assert a claim of beneficial ownership, as ‘equity follows the law’, then the starting position is that you are sole owner of the legal and beneficial title. And therefore she’s not entitled to anything.

But I have been in this exact position and took legal advice

Sorry to hear about your breakup OP. These things are always painful.

Definitely would recommend the basic legal advice to be sought, I had a clean break financial agreement with my ex, but that was as part of a divorce. Perhaps the same would apply?

For me, there's the full legal route, where you both hand over a suitcase of cash and get some documents back in return.

Or there's the other route, where you can look at the situation and try to find a way out where you're both happy. I'd guess that's why you're here.

Personally, I'd say what she's asked for is reasonable enough. You've got £120k of equity gains in 2 years, she's got £30k with which to try and start afresh. Of course, given the circumstances, that must smart a lot, because you don't really want her to leave. But if you look back in a few years, I think you'll know that helping her to move on was the right thing to do.

With my logical head on, I think the calculation used to reach the £30k makes sense, as long as you accept that she's been paying the mortgage and not paying you rent.

If it were me, I’d hope I’d consider the way that house prices have gone mad during Covid. She has jumped off the property ladder – I get that her equity went towards paying off debts, but if she kept her house it would have risen in value over the last two years so (in my small, non legal mind) she has taken a hit there.

I think for me, it would depend on the circumstances.

If she'd sold her house to move in with him is different to she had to sell her house to pay her debts, and she saw the opportunity to move in with him.

Also, would he have been able to afford the mortgage without her help?

Also, did she play a part in buying the house? Going to viewings / helping with paperwork / providing moral support.

"If he put in £200k and her £0 and they each funded half a £150k mortgage, he’s funded 275/350 and she’s funded 75/350 of the property" but doesn't that assume the mortgage is paid in full? Isn't the issue that he will have to pay the remaining 145* of the debt when she moves out

*Guessing somewhat as I don't know how much equity will have been gained by 14k of payment

Regardless, the OP has made a big wedge, giving her a chunk to try and get on in life is the decent thing to do.
Also devils advocate, if you give her a decent chunk and she ends up in a bad situation after the split, you won't have trial by social media for you putting her in penury by kicking her out

oldbloke

Well, no. There will have to be an attribution of the increase in value between the equity put in by the OP and the mortgage. If he put in £200k and her £0 and they each funded half a £150k mortgage, he’s funded 275/350 and she’s funded 75/350 of the property. That would work out at roughly the £30k she’s asked for, so it might be that she’s been advised to be reasonable and has been.

Only the £150K mortgage hasn't been paid off as far as I can work out from reading the Ops posts so she hasn't contributed 75/350.

The Op also hasn't said what value he may have contributed to the improvements of the property, increased value of property is likely in part due to improvements.

She sold her house when she moved in

She has been paying half the mortgage repayments since moving in

Doesn't read as though they bought together to me, to me reads as Op purchased the property prior to moving in together?

For those raising whether it was rent or mortgage payments and whether if rent it was declared, GOV website says no need to declare as less than £7.5k per year

https://www.gov.uk/rent-room-in-your-home/the-rent-a-room-scheme :

"The tax exemption is automatic if you earn less than £7,500. This means you do not need to do anything.

If you earn more than this you must complete a tax return."

From the Citizens Advice website linked to on page 1:

'If you’re not married or in a civil partnership, you won’t have home rights' i.e. she may not be able to stay in the house.

...and if the individual is not named on the title deeds:
'If you’re not married or in a civil partnership, or you haven’t sorted out what happens to your home, you might still be able to prove your right to the home if you can prove you have a 'beneficial interest'. This usually means you've contributed to the home financially.

In court, you’ll need to show a judge how you’ve contributed towards paying for the home - this can be difficult.'

Hi all, OP here. Didn't expect this to take off in quite the way it has!

For the avoidance of doubt this is deliberately a brand new anonymous forum ID as I'm sharing quite a lot of financial stuff. It's not all a metaphor for Putin and I'm not a Russian troll (although if the money's good then I may have to be soon..)

Far too many replies to respond to everybody, the consensus seems to be to pay her nothing and throw her out (which I'm not going to do) or to pay her half of the value of the house (which I'm not going to do) or something in between (which is where I'm trying to get to).

In terms of specific questions, there is still about £140k on the mortgage, it is by no means paid off. There was no declaration of trust although I can now see that it'd be massively useful.

I need to get the house valued as this is all moot if the alleged £150k pot of gold is actually 5k and some magic beans. In that case I'd be refunding her mortgage payments, possibly some of the home improvement money and calling it a day. Following on from that I'll be getting advice from a solicitor, if that's 'give her 30k and run for it' then so be it.

Thanks for all the help and sympathy, will keep you all posted.

How very reasonable.

"Who’s getting the dog? 🙂"

These aren't dog people. One can tell...

Presumably if the house has actually dropped in value massively to say 100k then you can lock the ex in the house and demand she pays you her share of the negative equity

She's getting the cats and she's welcome to the blighters!

If you're going the full solicitor route, as apposed to an agreement between you that just needs legal drafting, I don't think I'd do it that way round. Again, IANAL, but wouldn't refunding the mortgage payments be tacitly accepting that she'd paid towards the mortgage, rather than paid rent?

How much damage have the cats done to sofas, carpets etc 😉

Is everyone blind to fingerbangs post then? He has pretty much covered all the legal, everything else is just conjecture.

Don’t forget Jakesters comments as well as Fingerbangs 🙂

Laws a funny thing, better call Saul.

 If he put in £200k and her £0 and they each funded half a £150k mortgage, he’s funded 275/350 and she’s funded 75/350 of the property. That would work out at roughly the £30k she’s asked for, so it might be that she’s been advised to be reasonable and has been.

She hasn't funded half of a £150k mortgage, she's contributed to a quarter of the payments so far - OP bought the house 4 years ago, OP's ex moved in 2 years ago.

Ah - I missed that bit. Obviously she is only entitled to her rightful share of the increase in value for those two years

that case I’d be refunding her mortgage payments, possibly some of the home improvement money and calling it a day. Following on from that I’ll be getting advice from a solicitor

Eek, you haven't read the replies have you?
Do NOT pay her some money back for mortgage/home improvements and then see a solicitor. That would be an immensely stupid generous and naive thing to do.

"Here you go, acknowledgement that it was a mortgage contribution, not rent, and thus I agree that you are invested in the house"

I don’t think I’d do it that way round. Again, IANAL, but wouldn’t refunding the mortgage payments be tacitly accepting that she’d paid towards the mortgage, rather than paid rent?

This

PS. Just for completeness, I do think you should be paying her money back, it's just that by following that method it may well end up escalating to a figure higher than you expected.
(Though, as per other replies, if you bought the house 2 years before she moved in then it does seem to make your position stronger.)

 OP bought the house 4 years ago, OP’s ex moved in 2 years ago.

That wasn't it the OP. Makes things slightly different I guess

I was in a similar situation but not the same. In the op's position I'd say to her 'I want to be reasonable and want to make sure we can part at least on good terms. It does neither of us any favours to get legal as it'll take a long time and cost us both money.' then give her a counter offer. Expect to settle somewhere in the middle.<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> Then ask a solicitor to draw up an agreement on full and final settlement. Don't get any legal documentation sent to the address other than the final one. Really.</span>

Fwiw mine did get legal, it cost me several k in fees, and took six months if not longer. Can't tell you how much fun that 6 months was...

Good luck.

That wasn’t it the OP. Makes things slightly different I guess

Actually I've no idea how I arrived at that conclusion. Ignore me, other than to recognise the delightful illustration of why anonymous internet forums are not a substitute for actual qualified advice.

🙈

Try to remember, you obviously care/cared about this person, you were planning a life together...

Being as there are so many experts on here, does she have to pay capital gains tax on the £30k if she doesn't buy within a year.  Would the OP be liable for the capital gains tax on the portion he has already paid out on?

I can suddenly see how solicitors earn their fees

I can suddenly see how a lot of people end up divorced /single as well

Actually I’ve no idea how I arrived at that conclusion.

Ah, fairy nuff, I thought you might have known the OP and had extra info.

Try to remember, you obviously care/cared about this person, you were planning a life together…

...and they decided to go their own way of their own choice.

By no means take that as "kick her out with nothing" but you CANNOT be emotionally invested or you will lose regardless of the outcome, either financially or emotionally. Easier said than done but this is why we have professionals to work this all out.