Hi Folks
I have a question about what l can reasonably take out of the FMH before our divorce proceedings begin?
My wife and l have been married for 16 years (2005) and our relationship ended in 2018. I know it won’t make any material difference but since we married l have basically paid all the mortgage on our property, all subsistence, all holidays etc.
When our marriage stopped subsisting l paid for my wife to live at our property until she left in 2019 to return to her country of origin for a 1 year sabbatical, returning to live back at the FMH in 2020 when covid struck, until she left for the Netherlands in summer 21.
During her absence in 2019 l had to pay her debts from our joint bank account to the tune of circa £500 p/m as well as shipping on her clothes and effects.
Our property is worth approx £230k with £60k left on the mortgage. I now live there and am sole person on mortgage.
I want to be reasonable with my ex when making a financial settlement however feel that to just remortgage and give her half would be unfair. The property badly needs some refurbishment, in large part due to my inability to afford whilst subsidising her. Plus l want a new car and haven’t bought one for the same reasons up to this point. I owe my mum £8k for my current vehicle which l want to pay back from this too and can show evidence she paid.
Ex now lives with a new partner in Netherlands who anecdotally has money, plus she owns a property in her country of origin which although l have no way to force her to include l think would be fair leverage.
I am thinking about taking some equity out of the property and spending the money on renovating the property and part exchanging my car. My question is whether this could be legitimately argued as reasonable to enable me to live in and fair so as to have a means of transportation or whether l would be seen as reducing her side of the settlement?
Another, more severe option, would be to remortgage and move about two thirds of the equity somewhere off shore so she could not get it nor could UK courts but l fully expect then to have the courts take a dim view. (I don’t really care whether they take a dim view or not frankly as on a point of principle, if you pay everything and do so much for someone, l can live with being accused of being the bad guy).
But as l said, ld rather be fair and give her closer to half minus the above necessary expenditure that is long overdue as a result of her unreasonable behaviour.
Grateful for your advice please?