Hi Costanza.
How long have you been married?How long did you live together before that?
Are there any children involved?
If so what are there ages and who will they be resident with for what time.
As my solicitor told me it is not recognised in law who brought what to the table financially unless it's a real short marriage.
Debts will be tricky shame they are not joint names.
i am sure your hubbie would love to leave these in your name and your responsibility.How much are the debts and how much will you be up financially if you get him to take on half.
Just don't agree the division of house equity without the division of these debts being taken into account also would be my advice.
All the best
Pete

Are you asking if its true that his post separation pension won't be taken into account? Or, is it fair that it won't when all the value of the house is?

Who says these things are the case other than your stbx? As your marriage isn't a long one (20 years) you will almost certainly be able to argue that the value of the house when you both got married should be 'ringfenced' to acknowledge your greater contribution. The house still belongs to him, so post separation can't be ringfenced, as its still his (who pays for what is irrelevant here in legal terms, as I understand it.)

You could both almost certainly argue that pensions should also be ringfenced either side of marriage, as a pension is treated differently than property, although there is no guarantee of this. The law must ensure you are both housed after the divorce, which is why the property is dealt with in this way and your partner will get a portion of its value to rehouse himself; but you only have a right to the 'benefit' of the pension you're losing by no longer living with the pension holder when s/he retires NOT the pension itself and that is MUCH more difficult to quantify under these circumstances.

You can sell the house and realise an exact amount NOW for it - so you know how much is available when - this can't be done with a pension, so how could the blunt knife of the law slice this with the same ease?

Is this what you're asking? Does this help in any way? How long have you been separated? If you've been separated a while then the value of the house has presumably reduced, so surely he won't be advantaged by this too much?

I really dont understand " the house still belongs to him- its still his "

Sorry, sloppy use of language on my part. It 'belongs' to him in the sense that when you married and you both moved into it as a married couple your house ceased to be just a house but legally became a 'marital home' and the law gives both spouses rights over that home, even if it legally still belongs to only one of them. So in your case he can't sell the house, only you can, but he can put a 'home rights notice' on the property to stop you selling it until the court works out how much of its value he is en­title­d to.

When you married you gave him legal rights over your house, even if the name on the deeds didn't change, and if you're still married he still has those rights until they're dissolved by divorce - so in effect, the house still 'belongs' to him in that he still has rights over it, even if he isn't the legal owner. So until you divorce and settle the finances he still retains these rights, so gets the value until his rights cease to exist.

Sorry, that sounded even more convoluted....

Hi constanza

I understand what you are asking , and I see that you feel wronged that your family home is put into the pot whilst no account appears to be taken of debt he has helped run up or of his earnings now .
I too have found it difficult to understand how things are calculated in a shortish marriage when there are no children of the marriage .
I think this is because no one really knows how a particular judge will see things and I so I think its up to you ( and your solicitor ) to put forward your case, he will put forward his , and see if you can agree something between you!

I wish you good luck sorting it
shiny

Ephelia,
thankyou for your informative answer,please could you explain what you mean when you say you only have a right to the benefit of the pension and not the pension itself and where does CETV fit into that?

thanks

shiny