my house, he wants money from it

[whatnext]

We have been commonlaw 8 years. 2 kids; 6 and 7. House in my name with my large down payment. i saved for years for it. Have only worked part time since the kids were born. No daycare in the neighbourhood except unaffordable private daycare. He wouldn't look after them so I could return to work. We have been barely scraping by for ages, with lots of gaps where he is unemployed. We both want out and he wants money from the house for haphazardly supporting the family. I am not asking for spousal support and I'd rather he leaves the house alone than pay child support. Is their a formula for unjust enrichment to what he is entitled to from the house? I don't want to sell the house. And I don't know if I can make ends meet if I have to give him 50,000. I'm in Ontario. Should have had a cohab agreement. I thought that the house was in my name. period.

[rszalai]

That's one difference in common law relationship and being married. If you lived in common law relationship and it is on your name, then it is yours. Nothing for the other.

[dadtotheend]

She is concerned about unjust enrichment. Do a search on "unjust enrichment" in this forum. The search link is at the top of the page. There are 159 hits on that search term as of today.

The house has also increased in value considerably in the Ontario market in the last 8 years and the mortgage has presumably been paid down somewhat over 8 years. When equalizing family property the STBX will have a claim on the increased equity of the house, especially if he can sucessfully argue unjust enrichment.

[rszalai]

I thought there is no "equalization" when you live in common law.

[Mess]

There is no equalization with common law relationships.

There is no way to give you a clear answer with the information given. You put down a large down payment, but then only worked part time. Where were the mortgage payments coming from? He "haphazardly" supported the family, but how did you manage to live when he was unemployed?

The answer won't come from vague statements, it will come from dollars and cents. Did he pay into the mortgage? Did he pay for any maintainence? Did he do any repairs to the house? If you were (perhaps) putting all of your part-time salary into the mortgage, who was paying the groceries, property tax, insurance and utilities? All of these questions will have to be answered.

For unjust enrichment, from the few cases I've read about, the judges are happies when they can be presented with receipts or specific amounts that a cl spouse put into the house.

[rszalai]

I see what you mean. For me "equalization" meant automatically splitting the value regardless who put what in it, and it seems to me that mostly this is the process when people were married. The process you described calculates who put what in the property, no automatic splitting.
From the initial story it seems the husband wants to follow the simple equalization, while in their case the calculation will be able to say more or less who can get what it seems.

[dadtotheend]

If there is no equalization in common-law relationships why does a common law spouse get half of the other spouse's pension? That's equalization.

I could be wrong here, but I think there is equalization of net family property in common law.

[rszalai]

No, there is no equalization in common low. What's on my name is mine, what's on my spouse's name is hers. Bank accounts, RRSPs, debts. Fortunately.

[dadtotheend]

Originally Posted by dadtotheend

If there is no equalization in common-law relationships why does a common law spouse get half of the other spouse's pension?

Are you saying that a common law does not participate in pension entitlements?

[rszalai]

I'm quite far from pension time so I didn't research the pension, but I know that my much higher RRSP account was left untouched, her remained hers.