munsterred
Registered User
- Messages
- 8
So I think the starting point should be to get him to take 50% of the fall in value.
I am a great believer in being straight up. Forget tactics. This is no time to be playing games..
This only applies where both people are straight up.
Munsterred's ex is not being straight up with his proposal.
Exactly - which is why it is simplistic of anybody to assume, as some earlier posts seem to, that some sort of 50:50 split of anything is automatically or necessarily relevant in this specific case.There is no reason for the OP to be objective about this (and a post which starts "my partner has decided he wants to break up...." is, to me, a bit of a red flag) but I would not encourage OP to be so quick to assume that partner is being wrong\deceitful\unfair.
The original house was owned by OP, but she and partner lived there for three years;
Depending on how their joint finances were arranged, it is entirely possible that the partner might regard himself as having some claim to some of the profit on the sale of the original house. This might well be supported by the facts (and ultimately by the courts).
I am not positively disagreeing with what has already been said - just saying that without all the facts, I would be a touch slow to take sides.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?