My Husband and I have been separated for ten years, during which time I paid him an agreed amount of spousal support. From that, he paid the mortgage on our commonly-owned house.
We just sold that house, and he argues that since he paid the mortgage - including principal payments - for ten years, he should be reimbursed the total principal he paid off during that period, and that after that deduction, we could divide the rest of the profit from the house in half.
I pointed out that despite being half owner of this valuable asset, I received no return whatsoever for the years he lived in it alone. It would not be fair if now I did not also receive my half of the profit. It would be totally equivalent if he had moved out at separation, I paid him the agreed support (from which he could pay rent or whatever), and we paid the mortgage off from rental income. Or alternatively if he paid half the mortgage to me, and I paid that to the bank. In effect, his claim to the equity is an accident of the "pockets" we agreed the financial flows would pass through and would be an unfair basis of dividing the profit from the sale.
Is there a precedent for his claim? Who is right?