Divorce is often a challenging and emotionally charged experience and one of the most difficult decisions involves what to do with the family home. Many couples opt to co-own the property after separation for financial or practical reasons, but this choice comes with significant risks. Understanding these risks is essential for making informed decisions. This article explores the potential pitfalls of maintaining joint ownership after divorce, covering scenarios where one spouse remains in the home, both leave and rent it out, or one party defaults on payments.
When one spouse remains in the family home
When one spouse stays in the home while the other moves out, various complications can arise:
Responsibility for mortgage and maintenance costs
The mortgage lender holds both parties responsible if the loan is in joint names, regardless of any private agreement. Even if the resident spouse agrees to cover mortgage repayments, the non-resident spouse remains legally responsible. If payments are missed, both credit scores can suffer. Similarly, maintenance costs can become contentious, especially if the non-resident spouse believes expenses are unreasonable.
Risk of default and repossession
If the resident spouse faces financial difficulties, defaults can occur. The property is at risk of repossession, which will adversely affect both parties. This risk is heightened if the resident spouse is self-employed, has fluctuating income, or faces unexpected financial challenges.
Restrictions on property use
The non-resident spouse retains a legal interest in the property, but their ability to influence how the house is used is limited. They cannot unreasonably prevent the resident spouse from making minor changes, but may be able to block significant alterations. Disputes often arise over property upkeep and renovation decisions.
Access to the property
While one spouse lives in the property, the other may question their rights of access. Unless a court order or agreement states otherwise, both spouses generally have the legal right to enter. However, conflicts can arise if access is perceived as intrusive. In extreme cases, the resident spouse may seek an Occupation Order to prevent the other from entering, although they would need to prove that their safety or that of the children is in jeopardy. The court views such an order as draconian, therefore excluding one party over the other is always seen as a last resort.
Impact on future financial planning
Remaining tied to a jointly owned home can hinder financial independence. The non-resident spouse may struggle to secure a new mortgage while still tied to the existing one. Additionally, disputes over the property’s eventual sale can delay financial closure.
When both spouses leave and rent out the property
Renting out the family home may seem like a practical solution to cover the mortgage and generate income. However, this arrangement presents its own challenges:
Management responsibilities
Landlord responsibilities are typically shared between both owners unless a clear agreement states otherwise. This includes maintenance, tenant management, and ensuring legal compliance. Disagreements can easily arise, especially if one spouse is more involved in property management. Even where a managing agent is employed, both parties would need to agree on instructions regarding the management of the property.
Financial disputes
Income from rent is usually applied to the mortgage and property expenses, with any surplus split between both parties. Disputes may occur over how profits or losses are shared, particularly if one party believes the other is not contributing equally.
Liability for defaults
If tenants fail to pay rent or damage the property, both owners bear the financial burden. Disagreements over how to address these situations can strain relations further. Additionally, if the property becomes vacant, both owners remain responsible for the mortgage.
Tax implications
Rental income is subject to taxation, and both parties may need to declare their share. If one spouse is in a higher tax bracket, disputes over tax liabilities may arise. Proper legal and financial advice is vital if you are to avoid unexpected tax burdens.
Selling the property
Joint owners must agree to sell the property. One spouse may wish to sell while the other prefers to continue renting, creating a deadlock. In such cases, a court application for a Property Adjustment Order or Order for Sale may be necessary.
What are the financial risks and legal challenges?
Regardless of the chosen arrangement, certain financial and legal risks are present:
- Risk of bankruptcy or financial difficulty: If one spouse experiences financial hardship, creditors may seek to enforce debts against their share of the property. This is particularly concerning if one spouse is self-employed, as their financial situation can be unpredictable. In severe cases, the property may be forcibly sold to settle debts.
- Credit score impact: Both spouses remain liable for joint mortgage payments. If one party defaults, both credit scores suffer. This can limit future borrowing options and financial planning. Even in amicable arrangements, relying on the other party’s financial responsibility is a considerable risk.
- Forced sale of the property: If disagreements arise, one spouse may apply to the court for an order dealing with the property. The court will weigh factors such as the welfare of any children, financial circumstances, and the conduct of each party when making a decision.
- Risk of deterioration: If the resident spouse neglects property maintenance, the home’s value can deteriorate. The non-resident spouse may suffer a financial loss upon sale. Disputes often arise over what constitutes “reasonable” maintenance and repair.
What practical solutions can minimise the risks?
To reduce the risks of co-owning a home post-divorce, you should consider these practical steps:
- Formal agreements: Draft a Declaration of Trust outlining each party’s responsibilities, including payment obligations, access rights, and plans for the property’s future sale.
- Independent legal advice: Both parties should seek legal advice to ensure their interests are protected.
- Mediation: Mediation can resolve disputes without costly court battles. It provides a structured environment to negotiate mutually acceptable agreements.
- Sale and division: In some cases, selling the property and dividing the proceeds may be the cleanest solution, enabling both parties to achieve financial independence.
- Court orders: If necessary, apply for a court order to settle disputes over ownership, sale, or access.
Ultimately, while co-ownership may work in certain circumstances, it often prolongs the financial entanglement of divorce. In many cases, selling the property and moving on independently is the most effective way to achieve a clean break.
Related Articles
Load More