Divorce / separation question

[nobbie48]

A friend down east (NS) came home and found that his key didn't fit the door lock. His wife yells through the door "You don't live here anymore." Without elaborating, she is the problem, not him. He is temporarily living with friends.

She has screwed up his credit so he is minimizing legal costs. He always came home and gave her his paycheck assuming that she was paying his credit cards and bills. She only paid hers the last while so he looks like the slacker.

He is trying to be more than fair but she is dillusional. He wants to buy a cheap place to live but is afraid if anything shows on his asset sheet she will grab half.

At what point are new assets not considered common property? A legal reference would be appreciated.

[eastcoast_gsx]

If it was a joint house, he needs to get back in the house NOW! If he is on the title/lease/etc... the cops CANNOT throw him out (unless he is violent or abusive to her)

PS: He is close to the ocean, lots of things disapear into the ocean never to be found again... one time I had this shoe that fell out of a boat, haven't seen it since.

[DOHC1]

+1 to that. Move back in Tony Soprano style

[ssuzuki]

+1 to that. Move back in Tony Soprano style

I have the boat if you need it (stugust)

[Lumpy]

If it was a joint house, he needs to get back in the house NOW! If he is on the title/lease/etc... the cops CANNOT throw him out (unless he is violent or abusive to her)

PS: He is close to the ocean, lots of things disapear into the ocean never to be found again... one time I had this shoe that fell out of a boat, haven't seen it since.

Is there a chance I can rent that boat from you? I got more then a shoe that needs to fall out ! To the OP, tell your friend to do a quick credit check on himself first. See whats going on and then act quickly, and yes he needs to get into that house now.

[invictus43]

If it was a joint house, he needs to get back in the house NOW! If he is on the title/lease/etc... the cops CANNOT throw him out (unless he is violent or abusive to her)

He may have the right to go back, but that doesn't mean he wants to. He doesn't forfeit his right to the house by not being there.

[eastcoast_gsx]

He may have the right to go back, but that doesn't mean he wants to. He doesn't forfeit his right to the house by not being there.

As I understand it, it makes it a hell of allot harder.... Isn't the old saying "possession is 9/10ths of the law"...

[OpenGambit]

As I understand it, it makes it a hell of allot harder.... Isn't the old saying "possession is 9/10ths of the law"...

wrong.

[eastcoast_gsx]

wrong.

OK, enlighten us.

[Baggsy]

If it was a joint house, he needs to get back in the house NOW! If he is on the title/lease/etc... the cops CANNOT throw him out (unless she says he is violent or abusive to her)

PS: He is close to the ocean, lots of things disapear into the ocean never to be found again... one time I had this shoe that fell out of a boat, haven't seen it since.

Fixed

[suprPHREAK]

I just took a short course in civil law, and this is what I remember:

Anything related to the matrimonial home becomes a shared asset (or liability). So, regardless of whose name is on the deed, it is equally owned by both. The only things that are protected from divorce are inheritance and settlements (legal, insurance), so long as they are not at all spent in the matrimonial home (use the inheritance to build a deck, its now part of the shared asset). There must somehow be proof that they are living separately in order for anything to be protected, but I would suggest he rents for the next 12 months before the divorce can be officiated.

Now, as long as the two are separated, and living separately, then newly acquired assets may not be considered joint. I'm not sure to what extent this is, though. I would think that if he bought a car at this point to get to work, it would be his, but I'm not sure if he bought a new home, if it would also just be his (I think it is, because it is not considered the matrimonial residence).

When the divorce takes place, the first thing that will happen is that all parts of the matrimonial home will be assigned a value, and divided 50/50. This means that each persons assets and liabilities will be tallied as well. In the end, one person will make off with more money, as an attempt to balance things out. Its called an equalization payment (the person with more assets will get less cash, or the person with more liabilities will get more, so that in theory both people come out 50/50. Great way to pay off credit cards). After that, things like spousal support will be determined on a basis of how much the lesser person makes, and how much is needed for them to survive, and for how long (this number can get stupid, though).

Ultimately, best to consult a lawyer, as that will be needed no matter what. I hope there are no kids involved, otherwise it becomes even more of a mess.

[OpenGambit]

At what point are new assets not considered common property? A legal reference would be appreciated.

Date of separation.

[nobbie48]

Date of separation.

Would that have to be a written document or does it suffice that he had to spend the night in a motel? He is trying to be too nice IMO.

[OpenGambit]

It does not have to be a written document, however I don't know enough facts to say for sure when the date of separation was ( this is usually a litigation point/ settlement point and its not really something anyone can say 100 %)

That being said - spending 1 night in a motel probably not, spending a night in a motel and then never going back- probably. he needs to consult his lawyer for a legal opinion.

Wouldn't want to be in your friend's shoes.

( ps I also don't know if NS law is very different from Ontario's - your friend needs to obtain legal advice from a NS lawyer.)

[sircastic]

Would that have to be a written document or does it suffice that he had to spend the night in a motel? He is trying to be too nice IMO.

What suprphreak posted is right on the money for Ontario law. I only know Ontario law from going through this process. The separation date is the date that it was decided that the two are no longer a couple. In this case it would be when she changed the locks.

One party or the other cannot be thrown out of the matrimonial home unless there are charges of abuse, or similar reasons. It's probably in his best interest to continue living elsewhere and arrange with her to collect any prized possessions and personal belongings. Everything else can be inventoried in the separation agreement and a value assigned, then it becomes a he wants / she wants scenario and the equalization payment.

[SunnY S]

If that guy had any cojones, he would kick the door down and show her whos boss.

[sircastic]

If that guy had any cojones, he would kick the door down and show her whos boss.

What would that solve? Who would that benefit other than her? All it shows is that he has a temper and would give her reason to call the cops.

Cool heads are what's needed in this situation.

[Lina]

You can actually still be separated while living under the same roof. The law states that you just no longer live as husband and wife. Ie separate rooms.

[sircastic]

You can actually still be separated while living under the same roof. The law states that you just no longer live as husband and wife. Ie separate rooms.

This is correct, it's the date that is decided that they are no longer a couple.

[Baggsy]

You can actually still be separated while living under the same roof. The law states that you just no longer live as husband and wife. Ie separate rooms.

It's not so easy once the locks are changed.