Re:Co-habitation proved after less than 6 mths

My ex and gf have actually BOUGHT a house together, 4 months after signing our consent order, after claiming that they are not living together!

My ex and I signed our clean break consent order in January this year, which was ­base­d on the info we put on our Form E's which stated that neither of us would be living with someone else in the next six months. This allowed my ex to claim that he needed more from the sale of our marital home as he needed to buy a house for him and our son to live in. I knew this was a lie at the time but could not prove it. So we ended up having a 53/47% split, with me getting the 53%.

However, I have just found out that my ex has actually bought a property with his girlfriend in May, less than 6 months since our agreement.

The marital home is currently on the market to be sold so the split has not yet happened.

So my question to you all is, can I now take him back to court for lying about his co-habitation plans?

I presume that the question on form E about co-habitation is asked because the other parties assets and income is taken into account when deciding the needs of the party co-habiting? So I presume if he had been honest about this, I possibly would have been awarded more as he needed less?

His girlfriend had a mortgage free house of her own which she sold at the same time as the house they have bought together. She also has a £50k p.a. job.

He was also unemployed at the time we signed the agreement so we agreed he could keep his redundancy as income until he got another job. And he miraculously got offered a job 2 days after our agreement was signed! So he got to keep the redundancy and had an £85k p.a. job.

I know I sound bitter, and I probably am, but I don't see why he should be allowed to get away with the lies if there is anything I can do!

This is one that you need expert legal advice with, in fact i`d go so far as to suggest a barrister, its certainly worth investigating further.

The cohabitation issue may not run because its hard to prove intention so unless you can show on paper they intended to cohabit its far from easy.

His income may be another matter, for example if he has a profession and historic income about the same as the new job it could be he agreed to be made redundant knowing he could pick up a job with ease after the agreement was sealed, that said this should have been considered as part of the agreement.

We have a very helpful solicitor on Wiki named TBagpuss so perhaps she will spot this and give her considered opinion.