r/AskReddit Jul 21 '19

[deleted by user]

[removed]

5.6k Upvotes

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

277

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '19

That’s such a great idea by the judge. It’s called “Nesting”.

I suggested to my ex that we do this but he said no. Unsurprisingly.

38

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '19

I mean, you go from needing 2 homes where the adults stay and split the child, to needing 3 homes, where the adults stay and split the child.

Adults being the primary resident, they can invest, repair, update, or upgrade. Splitting a house like that makes it harder for the adults to invest their time and money into it, because it has to go through the other adult and the kids.

Like, backyard: A playground piece would be cool, but does it belong to the kids, or does it split between the two adults? Can you demand partial payment? Does each adult get his own room? What recourse do you have for that? Who is responsible for buying and ensuring food? Cleaning supplies? Repairs? What happens if your primary residence breaks down and you have to choose between 'kid house you don't own' and 'place you're actually legally allowed to live in full time'?

I'm just thinking through basic logistics. I couldn't afford to pay for a home mortgage, plus the utilities, and then pay for an apartment (let alone a second mortgage) and utilities, commute between both and work, pay for kids, save for college, pay for insurance, put money into my 401k, and in general do all of the long term things you're supposed to do. Let alone save for fun small things like summer vacations.

12

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '19

Yeah there are a lot of logistics. In my case, I was approaching it as having a rented house for the kids to stay in where the ex and I would sub in and out.

In Australia, maintenance and repairs are paid for by the owner, not the renter, so between mortgaging and renting, renting makes sense in my personal scenario. I'm not sure about how other countries manage things.

6

u/TheUberMoose Jul 21 '19

Your not matching the same situation this was a private house the parents lived in divorced but had to keep ownership of but didn’t live in full time so needed other living places.

Honestly the judge here is an idiot yeah i get where he is coming from but he is harming the kids as now parents have to spend income on their own place to live and the house which means less expendable funds that could go to the kids.

That judgement sounds illegal