A new practice aims to make divorce less acrimonious when it comes to splitting the family home. William Little reports
• Case study: Time to say goodbye to a much-loved home The protracted McCartney divorce goes to show that, no matter how rich you are, the dividing of assets is a traumatic business. It is usually the stress of the festive season and the odd Christmas party infidelity that triggers many couples to decide, come late winter, to go their separate ways, according to research by Insidedivorce.com. Yet saying “It’s over” is the easy part – because deciding what happens to the family home can be more emotionally draining than the break-up itself. “Divorcing couples fighting for their property can be like the War of the Roses,” says Selina Brown, of Brown’s estate agency in Kent, who has seen first-hand how couples use property to register resentments and emotional pain. And with divorce or separation accounting for 9 per cent of all property sales, there are many for-sale houses emitting a lot of bad karma.
“If one part of the couple decides that they want to sell the house against the other’s wishes, it can become difficult to sell. If one party has moved out and the party remaining does not want to sell, then cleaning can slip, the house can be left untidy, keys can go missing and appointments to view the property can be cancelled at the last minute,” she says.
One divorcee told a potential buyer that her house had been burgled five times in the past six months and that was why it was proving so hard to sell. “One partner sometimes will do anything to keep hold of their property,” says Brown. Not all divorces, however, end in acrimony and even for those that do, tearing up the carpet and throwing paint over his favorite picture isn’t always the best solution, especially when children are involved. Despite the fact that she has decided to divorce her husband, Anna-Marie Purcell, 40, from Surrey, has avoided the acrimony of going to court by negotiating through solicitors by a new practice called collaborative law. “Both couples sign an agreement with their solicitors that they will stay at the negotiating table and not go to court. If they do, the lawyers are sacked,” says Roger Bamber at Mills & Reeve LLP, who is one of 1,000 lawyers now trained in this new approach.
“The process focuses on what the family needs and on the solutions. It has no hidden agendas or mistrust and works on the assumption that both parents want the best for their children. Whereas court is expensive, polarizing and a breeding ground for discontent and mistrust,” he says.
“Divorce does enough damage so avoiding the court has enormous benefits, especially when children are involved. If there is arguing and tension already, then they have seen enough and don’t need to see the situation escalating,” he says. Property issues for divorcing couples with children can appear straightforward because the wife, usually the main carer of the children, takes possession of the family home until they are 18, with the full backing of the law. Anna-Marie, however, didn’t want to keep the three-bedroom, semi-detached house she bought with her husband in 2004. Yet to keep the house as the family home she would have to put her name alongside his on the contract to make it legal. “I’ve spoken to a lot of people going through divorce and they have told me that when the woman seeks the divorce, the man can create financial problems. I didn’t want to have to worry about that. I wanted my independence,” she says.Yet the driving force behind that decision was that she wanted to have a clear break. “The psychological break of moving house allows both parties to move on. Even if I had wanted to stay, I wouldn’t have been able to afford the mortgage on my own. I didn’t want to rely on him,” she says. So now the ongoing financial negotiations will take into account that Anna-Marie’s share of the equity of the house will have to purchase a property that will be suitable to bring up the children.”That is the sticking point and what we are negotiating on. It isn’t just about getting 50/50. I will need to take a substantial chunk of the equity to afford something in which to bring up the children,” she says. Yet she admits she won’t be able to afford a property as big or as nice as the one she has now. “I will miss the size of the house and the village life, but I have no other choice. The property prices around here are too expensive and I don’t want to move away because family and friends live close by,” she says. Yet even if couples want to get divorced, they may not be able to. Recent research from Scottish Widows found that more than two-thirds (69 per cent) of all those who have a joint mortgage would be unable to raise the money to buy the other person out should the living arrangement turn sour. Many others decide to divide the marital home in two because partners don’t want a drop in their standard of living. “They don’t want to take half the equity and buy something half as good,” says Denise Knowles from Relate. “They’d rather stay put and divide up the house.”
In some cases, according to Knowles, the marital home is divided in two, with children having bedrooms in both halves. In one case, a couple painted white lines along the middle of the hallway. “There was even a white line painted down the middle of the gardening shed so the couple did not have to share the shears and spades when they took it in turns to do the garden,” says Knowles. “There are an awful lot of boundaries that need to be sorted out. Things that are taken for granted in a relationship all have to be renegotiated. There are also the problems that can arise when one or other has a new boyfriend or girlfriend.”
Yet one couple made it work. When Margaret McKeith, 45, married her second husband, she didn’t want her two daughters to be living away from their father, so she asked him to move back in. “We ended our marriage amicably and we stayed friends, so moving back in together wasn’t a big issue. My new husband also thought it was a good idea,” says McKeith. Now they all live in a big house in Surrey with McKeith’s ex-husband having a granny flat to himself, and the girls can go visiting whenever they wish. “It has worked out fine. The girls are not resentful that I have remarried because they are still living with their father. I’m sure this can’t happen with all relationships, but we all get on. We are all one big happy family,” she says.
Yet for some couples even the law isn’t enough to safeguard their investment. If one partner gets the upper hand in the property wars through intimidation, the other can lose out, fearing the consequences of seeking help from the law. This is what happened to Claire Grey from North Wales. “I bought my dream home on the coast in Wales, a 300-year-old long house. I bought it with my boyfriend. We worked hard to pay off the mortgage and put a lot of work into doing up the property, which was rundown. It looked over the sea. “It was what I had always wanted. We had one and half acres and I adopted lambs. It was really the good life. I could hear the seals and the sea from the garden,” she says. Then the relationship turned bitter and abusive. “It was a really violent relationship. I wanted to leave for quite a while but I didn’t want to leave my home because for me it was my sanctuary. It was where I was happy and comfortable,” she admits. “When I managed to pluck up the courage to end it, he threatened to kill me, told me he would destroy the house. Instead, he did the worse thing possible, he bullied me out of my home,” she says.
He used her love of the house to get at her. “I was worn out by the threats and I agreed to let him buy me out. I was so tired and I so wanted it all to end that I lost about £60,000 on the sale.”
It was heartbreaking for Claire to lose the cottage, but since then she has worked hard and saved enough for another property. “I am now living in a cottage in the countryside, close to work and my friends. It’s my new sanctuary, and this time I won’t be putting anyone else on the contract.”
Try to put the children first
• It is important to agree what provisions will be made for your children with your ex alone, with the help of a solicitor, or with the help of a mediator before you begin the divorce process.
• The family home is usually the main asset, and the first consideration will be to ensure your children have a suitable home.
• If you have children, when and how you tell them about the decision to divorce is crucial. Parents should tell children together. Answer their questions as honestly as possible and reassure them that you are committed to them even though you will be living in different houses.
• Reassure children that you still love them, that the separation is not their fault and that you will be making new living arrangements so that their parents can still see them on a regular basis.
• Divorce and separation involves intense feelings of loss. Losing your home, economic stability and regular contact with children as well as your dream of living happily ever after. Talking to a trusted friend, family member or a counselor can help with the powerful emotions you’re experiencing to give you the strength to tackle the practical issues such as negotiating the sale of the family home; moving house and separating your belongings.
• Tips from Denise Knowles of Relate: www.relate.org.uk Help your Children Cope with your Divorce, by Paula Hall is available online and in all good bookshops.