How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Harris Your Own Question
Harris, Family Law Expert
Category: Family Law
Satisfied Customers: 2851
Experience:  Family Law - Specialist in Divorce, Financial Relief and Children Matters
Type Your Family Law Question Here...
Harris is online now

I divorced two years ago (decree absolute) and my ex-wife re-married

This answer was rated:

I divorced two years ago (decree absolute) and my ex-wife re-married in April 2014. She lives in the former marital home with new husband and our two children from our former marriage.
However, there was no consent order or financial agreement when we divorced. The former marital home and mortgage is in my name only and so I continue to pay the repayment mortgage in addition to child support payments. Although I am happy to split the equity 50/50 in principle I don't agree that I should continue solely to finance the mortgage. In practical terms I have no choice short of defaulting or evicting them - neither course of action appeals to me.
I think that her continuing interest in the flat ended when she re-married. I.e. that 50% (assuming for now that we split 50/50) of the equity should be due to her at that time. But that the re-payments I have made since her re-marriage, along with any increase in property value, should not be split but should be mine alone. Is that a sound legal position?
Hi, thanks for your question. I am a qualified family law solicitor.
Her right to claim financial relief as a result of the marriage from you ended when she remarried.
However as she remains living there with the children she is free to make an application under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 if you decided to sell or evict them. This would be in relation to financial provision for the benefit of the children, and would likely include repayments of the mortgage if she demonstrates that she cannot afford this herself.
If she did pursue such an application regarding the matrimonial home she would claim that this is required to meet the children's needs. Such an order allowing her to continue residing would usually last until the children reach 16 or complete education, after which the property is to be sold and the equity be split accordingly. In your case as it was, and still is in your sole name, and you have continued to meet the repayments solely you are likely to obtain the majority, if not 100% share upon sale.
Please do let me know if you have further questions about this.
Harris and other Family Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
Many thanks.
Good luck and please do come back if you have questions in the future. You can ask me directly here: