asset split in divorce

TMNT · 26th Jun, 2014

Strictly hypothetical,
I'm not married nor will be, been there done that

If I bring in a property worth 500k and then during the marriage it increases to 1m,

And during this time we refinance at 100% (for arguments sake)

When the assets are split, I assume the equity is zero there fore nothing to split, is this correct?

Does it matter whether these funds were spent on paying back cc or a holiday together or living expenses or if one party has legally siphoned away the cash?

If this is the case I'm not surprised many people refinance during a divorce.and spend the $, especially if the property is only in onr persons name

D.T. · 26th Jun, 2014

How would you refi to 100 lvr?
Why would family court care what finance is associated with the asset rather than the equity portion which can then be split?

alexlee · 26th Jun, 2014

TMNT said:
Does it matter whether these funds were spent on paying back cc or a holiday together or living expenses or if one party has legally siphoned away the cash?

In a divorce, there really isn't a 'legal' way to siphon away the cash.

TMNT · 26th Jun, 2014

D.T. said:
How would you refi to 100 lvr?
Why would family court care what finance is associated with the asset rather than the equity portion which can then be split?

Yeah obviously 100% was for arguments sake

I've just been told my friends are getting divorced, and her and her lawyer are insisting that the 150k equity in the house must be given to her even though they refinanced about a year ago and took out 100 for renovations,

Further more she wants the split calculated before they pay off their emergency credit card which she maxed out.

It didn't sound right to me

thatbum · 26th Jun, 2014

TMNT said:
I've just been told my friends are getting divorced, and her and her lawyer are insisting that the 150k equity in the house must be given to her even though they refinanced about a year ago and took out 100 for renovations,

Further more she wants the split calculated before they pay off their emergency credit card which she maxed out.

It didn't sound right to me

It could be right. Could be 100% wrong. No way to tell from where you are standing because you don't have all the information.

Assets are generally divided up globally rather than asset by asset, so what's fair in one situation might be completely unfair in another.

No point speculating without 100% of the relevant information. There's too much of that that goes around already - probably why most people think the family court is unfair.

nhg · 26th Jun, 2014

I know quite a few of divorced couples, and they get on like BFF's. Place the kids wellbeing ahead of their own, and genuinely appreciate they are two great individuals who simply grew apart.

I cannot even fathom the sort of hate that must have sparked up in the relationships (or lack of) you speak of.

Terry_w · 26th Jun, 2014

TMNT said:
When the assets are split, I assume the equity is zero there fore nothing to split, is this correct?

Does it matter whether these funds were spent on paying back cc or a holiday together or living expenses or if one party has legally siphoned away the cash?

In a recent case the husband was a gambler and he blow a lot of money, the wife tried to have this money added back for property settlement purposes - but the court didn't allow this saying non existing assest cannot be divided. Todd and Todd

But if the money is used to buy something then this is property of the marriage and could be divided. If there are other assets then they can be divided as well. In Todd they adjusted the wife's share up because of the husband's post separation use of monies.

TMNT · 26th Jun, 2014

Terry_w said:
In a recent case the husband was a gambler and he blow a lot of money, the wife tried to have this money added back for property settlement purposes - but the court didn't allow this saying non existing assest cannot be divided. Todd and Todd

But if the money is used to buy something then this is property of the marriage and could be divided. If there are other assets then they can be divided as well. In Todd they adjusted the wife's share up because of the husband's post separation use of monies.

yes, I would assume that gambling debts would be treated a bit differently to just your standard poor judgement in overspending on lifestyle expenses,

but in my non legal eyes, gambling debt during the marraige would be no different to say the woman buying $50,000 worth of designer clothes, bags and jewelerlly

Terry_w · 26th Jun, 2014

TMNT said:
yes, I would assume that gambling debts would be treated a bit differently to just your standard poor judgement in overspending on lifestyle expenses,

but in my non legal eyes, gambling debt during the marraige would be no different to say the woman buying $50,000 worth of designer clothes, bags and jewelerlly

Jewellery and designer stuff has value, even when 2nd hand. Money blown gambling is gone.

thatbum · 26th Jun, 2014

TMNT said:
but in my non legal eyes, gambling debt during the marraige would be no different to say the woman buying $50,000 worth of designer clothes, bags and jewelerlly

The husband also gets the benefit of having a wife decked out in expensive gear and presumably looking nice.

Not the same as gambling. Even gambling during the relationship doesn't always get factored in as something added back in a final split.

TMNT · 26th Jun, 2014

thatbum said:
The husband also gets the benefit of having a wife decked out in expensive gear and presumably looking nice.

Not the same as gambling. Even gambling during the relationship doesn't always get factored in as something added back in a final split.

true true!!!

thats a very good point!

but it could be argued that the husbands gambling, if she was with him at the venue could be seen as entertainement for her, plus any winnings, if they spent it on extravagent stuff could be argued for as well

datto · 26th Jun, 2014

So, if the marriage is on the rocks and the IPs are in one name, it would be best to sell the assets and spend the money (wink, wink).

It could prove a tad difficult to sell the property you live in though eg

"Honey, why are we having an open house"

lizzie · 29th Jun, 2014

Had a female relative by marriage recently divorce after 30 years ... the family house was in the husbands name - he refinanced it to the max without telling her - blew all the money and then left her for someone else.

After over 30yrs and thinking they had a fully paid off home, she ended up with next to nothing as there was next to nothing left.

TMNT · 30th Jun, 2014

lovestruck said:
What usually causes two people who are so "in love" at one point in their relationship to then go to the other extreme where they hate each other so much? I've never understood how this can happen. Isn't marriage a thing where you choose to still love (verb/doing word) someone even after you "fall out of love"?

An interesting point on eof my relatives made which I scoffed at first but now I agree with is

Arranged marriages last because you have to try and make it work, while love marriages will stay the same or fall apart

TMNT · 23rd Jul, 2014

http://www.justfamilylaw.com.au/fre...oQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGEkmlGH1l_QT9JMMI6vfoEDrMXvQ

To the lawyers out there

Just doing a bit of research, I know it's not an official law website
But it says that due to recent law changes, prenups are accepted

Is this the case p, has anything changed at all?

There is another section further down that says , circumstance changes means the bfa can be deemed invalid like always

So is any of this stuff new and/or significant?

TMNT · 23rd Jul, 2014

I have a little philosophy

Money, politics and religion are the root of all evil

thatbum · 23rd Jul, 2014

TMNT said:
http://www.justfamilylaw.com.au/fre...oQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGEkmlGH1l_QT9JMMI6vfoEDrMXvQ

To the lawyers out there

Just doing a bit of research, I know it's not an official law website
But it says that due to recent law changes, prenups are accepted

Is this the case p, has anything changed at all?

There is another section further down that says , circumstance changes means the bfa can be deemed invalid like always

So is any of this stuff new and/or significant?

Nothing in there really surprised me at all. BFAs are not generally that useful for what most people imagine them to be for.

If you're worried about your assets in a relationship, then you should just watch what you do financially in a relationship. Its really not that hard.

Mr. Fabulous · 23rd Jul, 2014

TMNT said:
I have a little philosophy

Money, politics and religion are the root of all evil

What are you doing on a property investment forum then?

TMNT · 24th Jul, 2014

Mr. Fabulous said:
What are you doing on a property investment forum then?

I don't get involved the threads the involve politics or religion, in fact I don't even read them,

As for money, yes, investment is majority about money, but I try my best not to let it corrupt me, my friends and family

Terry_w · 24th Jul, 2014

TMNT said:
But it says that due to recent l...inding Financial Agreements they are called.d

asset split in divorce

More options

TMNT

D.T.

alexlee

TMNT

thatbum

nhg

Terry_w

TMNT

Terry_w

thatbum

TMNT

datto

lizzie

TMNT

TMNT

TMNT

thatbum

Mr. Fabulous

TMNT

Terry_w

Similar threads