Tweet
Hi everyone, I'm currently going through mediation and could really use a reality check on where I stand. My ex is pushing for a 70/30 split of the house equity, but I'm holding out for 50/50. I feel like I'm being squeezed and want to know if a court would actually see her side as "fair."
For context, we have a solid shared care routine. I have the kids for 156 nights a year (Band C), so about 43% of the time. Both kids are now in school full-time from 8:45 to 3:15.
What's bothering me is the income gap. Between her part-time wages, Universal Credit, child benefit, and the maintenance I pay her, her monthly take-home is actually £1,000 higher than mine. I work full-time, but she only does 15 hours a week (Thurs/Fri). I've pointed out in mediation that since the kids are in school, she could easily work 9:30 to 2:30 Mon - Fri to increase her income (I think this is called earning capacity under s.25?), but she's not budging.
She also has a higher mortgage agreement in principle than I do, yet she wants 70% of the equity just to avoid renting and stay in our current high-value area.
The problem is, my mother is selling her house where I've been staying, so I have a massive housing need on the horizon. If I am forced to take only 30% (Appreciate this isnt forced via mediation), I'm basically priced out of buying or even a decent rental for the kids. I've found plenty of properties within 20 minutes of the school in nearby areas where we could both afford to buy and would meet their needs (3 bedrooms) if we just split the money 50/50.
I've got a few questions:
Any advice or experiences with similar "needs" cases would be a huge help, and I would be happy to elaborate on any other info needed.
For context, we have a solid shared care routine. I have the kids for 156 nights a year (Band C), so about 43% of the time. Both kids are now in school full-time from 8:45 to 3:15.
What's bothering me is the income gap. Between her part-time wages, Universal Credit, child benefit, and the maintenance I pay her, her monthly take-home is actually £1,000 higher than mine. I work full-time, but she only does 15 hours a week (Thurs/Fri). I've pointed out in mediation that since the kids are in school, she could easily work 9:30 to 2:30 Mon - Fri to increase her income (I think this is called earning capacity under s.25?), but she's not budging.
She also has a higher mortgage agreement in principle than I do, yet she wants 70% of the equity just to avoid renting and stay in our current high-value area.
The problem is, my mother is selling her house where I've been staying, so I have a massive housing need on the horizon. If I am forced to take only 30% (Appreciate this isnt forced via mediation), I'm basically priced out of buying or even a decent rental for the kids. I've found plenty of properties within 20 minutes of the school in nearby areas where we could both afford to buy and would meet their needs (3 bedrooms) if we just split the money 50/50.
I've got a few questions:
- Does the court care about a 20-minute commute? To me, it seems like a small price to pay so we both have a roof over our heads.
- Is there any world where she'd get 70% when she already has the higher income and better borrowing power?
- Am I right to stick to my guns on 50/50? Under the new FJC guidance, I thought the priority was making sure the kids had two proper homes.
Any advice or experiences with similar "needs" cases would be a huge help, and I would be happy to elaborate on any other info needed.