Financial Abuse or Control / Divorce Settlement

[Ms_Owe-A-Lot]

Been divorced for almost 6 years, but the financial settlement is still dragging through courts, with the final hearing set for February.
Been subjected to financial abuse and control over years during the marriage, ex used my credit cards to run up debts, wouldn' t let me use bank account or let me have access.
We ended up with enormous amounts of debts, which ended in my Ex bankrupting himself. I had to buy him out and now own 100% of the beneficial interest in the marital home.

I still reside there with our son.

Mortgage, secured loan and property deeds are still in joint names

I cannot get ex off the mortgage as I do not earn enough and do not pass affordability checks on my single income, although I am paying the mortgage on my own

He has not been contributing to the joint debts since moving out 6 years ago.

He is using his name on the joint mortgage to block me from taking out cheaper interest rate deals and forces me to stay on a standard variable rate, as he is maliciously blocking me from making any changes.
Is such behaviour financial abuse / control or just exercising someones right to manage a mortgage even if it is financially damaging to the person paying the mortgage ?

[klingklang]

Been divorced for almost 6 years, but the financial settlement is still dragging through courts, with the final hearing set for February.
Been subjected to financial abuse and control over years during the marriage, ex used my credit cards to run up debts, wouldn' t let me use bank account or let me have access.
We ended up with enormous amounts of debts, which ended in my Ex bankrupting himself. I had to buy him out and now own 100% of the beneficial interest in the marital home.

I still reside there with our son.

Mortgage, secured loan and property deeds are still in joint names

I cannot get ex off the mortgage as I do not earn enough and do not pass affordability checks on my single income, although I am paying the mortgage on my own

He has not been contributing to the joint debts since moving out 6 years ago.

He is using his name on the joint mortgage to block me from taking out cheaper interest rate deals and forces me to stay on a standard variable rate, as he is maliciously blocking me from making any changes.
Is such behaviour financial abuse / control or just exercising someones right to manage a mortgage even if it is financially damaging to the person paying the mortgage ?

Hi, just come across this and I'm trying to hep a family member in a very similar situation, did you get a favorable resolution in the end? I'm hoping so.

[paulajayne]

Hi, just come across this and I'm trying to hep a family member in a very similar situation, did you get a favorable resolution in the end? I'm hoping so.

The first post was from - 9th December 2018

[Ms_Owe-A-Lot]

Unfortunately not. Although there are no real winners or losers as such in these financial settlement cases apparently, I did not have a favourable outcome. I had to represent myself in court at the end whilst my ex managed to pay for a solicitor (his legal fees in the end were £30000 and he was never asked how he managed to fund these, despite claiming near destitution in court. He claimed his girlfriend gifted him 30 K for his legal costs and the judge believed it...)

I managed to prove that he was having at least one bank account he did not declare for the court proceedings, but again, the judge just ignored it.

It's difficult to draw the judges attention if you represent yourself, they tend to listen better to solicitors I am afraid, and I didn't have one.

The judge ruled the house was to be sold and me and my son had to find alternative accommodation, although my credit history was in tatters and I could never get a new mortgage, which I could prove, but again it was ignored, as my ex's solicitor claimed I could possibly get a mortgage with a sub prime lender somewhere which the judge accepted.

My ex did not have to pay anything towards his old debts or the mortgage in the end.

The sale of the property was supposed to release him from all of that and I could have 100% of the equity of the sale, which of course there wasn't much and I was entitled to the 100% equity anyway, as I bought it when my ex went bankrupt to save the property from staying on the bankruptcy administrator's (Official receiver) books for years. I bought my ex's interest in the property from the official receiver and still had the legal documents to prove it, so legally I owned 100% of the financial equity / interest in the property anyway, which the judge couldn't really dispute.

I managed to prove that all the debts were racked up by my ex by providing old credit card statements and loan applications and so on, all in his name and ended up secured on the house. (he hid some of these credit documents around the house on top of cupboards, behind drawers, in bin liners in the loft and so on, I presented in court what I found but it was all to no avail)
It was ignored, as when you are married to someone like that, all his debts become yours, too apparently. So although he took them out and spend the money on things he solely benefitted from (he bought a motorbike on one of his credit cards for example ) the debts were still mine , too because I was married to him.
Marriage trumped it all. What was his was also mine, that included his debts, I am afraid.

So the judge would have happily kicked me and my son out on the street but let me have the equity, but only as I still had some legal documents from the official receiver, otherwise my ex would have gotten 50% of the equity as well.

What happened next was that I managed to drag out the sale of the property a bit. During this time with some help of my then new partner I paid off the arrears and in a last ditch effort managed to re-mortgage the property with a lender who accepted us jointly for a new mortgage, so in the last minute I managed to buy the house back with my new partner (now my husband). But it was a big effort with the help of a mortgage broker and a last minute thing. My new partner's credit rating was so good that it pulled mine back up, as the Halifax Building Society at that time took an average rating by combining both credit ratings, so it lifted us just above what they accepted.
We are as such of course paying off my ex's debts as part of the re-mortgage, but it was that or having to move out and sell the house.

[Ms_Owe-A-Lot]

The first post was from - 9th December 2018

It's Ok - I am still around and got a notification that someone posted on my old thread. I have replied as above

[klingklang]

Thanks for your reply and I’m sorry for dragging it up after hearing all what you have been through. My family members situation is very similar which doesn’t bode well.

[Ms_Owe-A-Lot]

It is now 5 years ago, so it's OK. Happy to help with anything, if you have any questions , just ask. By reading the above you would have noticed that my ex spent 30 K just in solicitors fees to avoid paying 23K of his debts. You go figure. And the system let him get away with it, too

[Ms_Owe-A-Lot]

Just to add, the result probably wouldn't have been any different if I had a solicitor and also spent 30K in legal costs.

I did try and gather as much help and information preparing for the final hearing and a charity that helps with family legal issues said from the beginning I would struggle, as there is very little case law judges can go by for these debt related financial settlement disputes in divorce cases.
Case law is made in the High Court and Supreme Court and it is mainly rich and super rich couples who fight it out there over yachts, racing horses, the Rembrandt in the music room , shares and investments and so on. They generate the case law with these things.

People at the other end of life who fight over debts don't have the money to take their disputes to the High Court or Supreme Court so debt cases in divorce settlements don't get heard in the Higher Courts and don't generate case law.

So judges have very little to go on and will make a judgement based on general family law and matrimonial law. And that usual says what is mine is his and what is his is mine, judges see that this incudes debts. And so did the judge I came before with my case.