Sharing The House Price When Selling

[merton69]

My wife is due to leave the family home soon and has tentatively agreed that her name stays on the mortgage and I pay it until it finishes or I sell and move.
The mortgage has around 6 years to go before it is completed. The mortgage is an endowment based scheme and it appears the endowment may not cover it all at the end by around £10,000.

My question is please, if she leaves now, over the next few years I am hoping to update it and therefore get a better selling price. Let's say for arguments sake the property is worth £100,000 now. With an update here and there the price goes up in value. Is she able to get half the new price difference?
In other words, should I get some house values now, so if there is a price increase, she only gets what she deserves when she leaves the property now please?

[Dogsbody2]

The short answer is that you need to worry about the ownership of the property, not who pays the mortgage. For example, do you know whether the house is registered at the Land Registry as joint tenants, or tenants in common.

Read this, perhaps, then see if you have further questions.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/relationships/relationship-problems/relationship-breakdown-and-housing/if-you-live-with-your-partner-relationship-breakdown-and-housing/if-you-live-with-your-partner-and-you-own-your-home-relationship-breakdown-and-housing/relationship-breakdown-and-housing-rights-if-you-own-your-home-jointly-with-your-partner/

[VHG]

Note the house will go up in value anyway, no matter if you do any work on it or not.

So if you come to value it in say 6 years time and it HAS gone up in value how much of that is natural increase and how much is for the work you have done, it will be hard to separate the two.

I would imagine if her name is on the mortgage and the land registry papers then she will get half the value of the house when time comes to sell no matter what you do.

The fact that you have paid the mortgage for the last 6 years will not count when it comes to splitting the house proceeds, she will still get half (in many marriages one person pays the mortgage but that does not mean they deserve more out of the house when it is sold).

You need to consider this very carefully, as you could pay the mortgage for 6 years, AND spend money doing up the house, and she will get half the house value anyway when it is sold.

[Dogsbody2]

"I would imagine if her name is on the mortgage and the land registry papers then she will get half the value of the house when time comes to sell no matter what you do"

Not the case if the land title is held as tenants in common. Which is why I started by trying to help the OP by understanding some of the fundamentals, rather than making assumptions.

[atalanta]

The division of the value of the house will depend on whether one of the couple will have to make a home for dependent children

[TonyV]

If relationship is irrevocably broken down don't let solicitors get involved if at all possible. Is it possible for you to agree sum with your wife on current value of property and raise another mortgage to give her a lump sum now?

[TonyV]

Then have property transfered into your sole name

[VHG]

>>Not the case if the land title is held as tenants in common.

Seems to me if it is tennants in common and it is 50% each then she will get 50% when the house is sold so where the issue?.

Also how many married couples actually have their house in "tennants in common", very few.

[VHG]

>>Then have property transfered into your sole name

Why on earth would his wife agree to that (he could not do it without her agreement).

She is very unlikely to give up her half share of the house, life does not work like that.

[Dogsbody2]

"Seems to me if it is tenants in common and it is 50% each then she will get 50% when the house is sold so where the issue?".

But it doesn't have to be held as 50% - the tenants can determine whatever split is more appropriate.

[TonyV]

Can only speak from experience my ex accepted a 60 / 40 split in my favour we both had solicitors acting and they agreed on arrangement with Judge

[Dogsbody2]

There we go then. QED

[hc4361]

In the meantime you will be getting the benefit of living in the house without paying part rent to your wife in consideration of her joint ownership.

[Peter Pedant]

I dont think this is a question of law
I think it is a question of what you agreed at the time she left
both of you will sign the agreement

and you just as well find out what the law prescribes in these cases ( you cant be the first ) which you will note does NOT require agreement from your wife and adhere to that

I can easily foresee and perhaps you can
that at the time of sale one or other party will get out a calculator and think to themselves - "oo I could have got a better deal if I had gone to court " ....
and so they do

and this could bewhere you start
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_v_Dowden

[Togo]

When she leaves get a paying lodger. Use the money to pay your mortgage.

[merton69]

Thank you for all your comments.

Wow! What a minefield!!!

Basically she is moving out and I am staying here with our two young children.
Her name will stay on the mortgage and endowment scheme.

The kitchen needs updating as it is still the original units. We were told when we thought about moving a few years ago that a new kitchen would majorly up the selling price. I was also looking to possibly add a conservatory as well. This will up the price from what it is today, so if I am the one putting in the £££££'s, why should she reap the benefits when she isn't here or contributing?

[bednobs]

presumably she has to pay rent where she is going?
As someone up there said, if her name is on hte mortgage, she still retains all the risk, should you not pay it, plus se is not getting any benefit from the house, although retaining responsibility for it.

[merton69]

Yes she will have to pay rent. Just a bit gutted that I will continue to look, repair, maintain and improve the property without her input then collect the gains at the end.
Just wondered where I stood with it all.

[Peter Pedant]

well yes or .... no
You did say she had agreed ....

but now you wonder what the law says ( it is a law thread ) which is kinda not by agreement. Courts commonly impose a settlement where one side deffo does NOT agree.

andit is always one side whips out a calculator and thinks blimey I have been ripped off ...

so I think it is sensible to get a lawyer or arbitration involved early