I'm posting this on behalf of a family friend.

He's a retired 72-yr-old and in the middle of a divorce

(to a Turkish lady he was married to for 9 years).

At one stage he thought he was going to lose the house he's lived in for 50 years and owns outright (worth 90K),

but it is looking increasingly as though he will get to keep the house

but will have to pay her between 15K and 25K

(not sure why since she's already taken his entire 25K life savings whilst they were married, but who am I to question the law).

He wants to know...

(a) Since the house is not part of the deal, can he legally give it to his daughter or at least sell it her for a trivial sum?

(b) If so, if his divorce payments thereafter become late, will the courts then make her give the house back even though she legally owns it?

Id be worried on who is giving the advice that he can keep the house.

Sounds like its a payoff to me.

She, the other half is entitled to HALF of ALL assets as they are married and all assets and property belong to both.

It matters not that she has stripped his savings. Its their money, not his and hers.

The 25K was put into a property that she now lives in over in Turkey. As for keeping his house: I'm not sure if it was the judge or his barrister but they have already had one day in court and this is where they are at currently because he had to look into two things. One was getting proof that she was lying about her income, and the other was seeing if he could get hold of a sum of money in order to not have to sell his house (it amounted to between 15-25K). I have another question. If the other half is entitled to half, how come Macca's wife "only" got 20-odd million when he's worth so much more? Not trying to be awkward, just wondering how the legal system works.

I have another question. If the other half is entitled to half, how come Macca's wife "only" got 20-odd million when he's worth so much more? Not trying to be awkward, just wondering how the legal system works.

Because "half each" is the starting point, and pre-supposes a number of factors.

Was there a "pre-nup"?

Did each "bring equally, materially" to the marriage?. (Giving up a promising and lucrative career, to stay at home building the family's base, is held to be contributing just as much as going out and earning lots, btw, and applies equally to either spouse!).

She may get nothing if she hasnt contributed to the marriage in any way. However that contribution may not neccessarily be tangible so cooking his tea whilst he is out at work will be enough to claim something. It wont automatically be half but that will be a starting point. Her assets and lifestyle in Turkey will be taken into account so it is unlikely he will lose his house but things like pensions will be looked at and again that may be divided to provide her with an income or the pension co may be ordered to hand over a limp sum and that will affect his pension anyway

as for the Macca divorce she shot herself in the remaining foot by saying she intened to give millions of the settlement to charity, thus proving that she didnt need the money to fund her lifestyle.

Thanks for the reply. She had nothing when they met (or at least she said she didn't) and married ten years ago. He was a factory worker but put money aside in a pension plan for years and retired 7 years ago. The judge has ruled that he has to pay £17K within three months. The papers are still being drawn up so can't tell you of the specifics. Three months seems to be a short time to find a whopping £17K. Questions: (a) Can he offer to pay x amount over a lengthy period? (b) What would happen if he doesn't pay? I realise he will be in contempt of court, but what specifically happens to a person if they don't pay?

no he has been instructed. The most obvious starting point is the pension company if he has no other assets. Other than that he can take out a loan using his house as security as he wont gte a mortgage at his age. Better off doing either of those than starting a needless fight over delaying payments as all that will do is rack up charges, coud get him improsoned for contempt and may lose his house.

If they are ordered to a eansion co can do the necessaries in about a fortnight and most of that time will be taken up on getting the necessary proof of identity. First thing he should do is ask them and if they um and ah but admit it is possible then he could go back to court for an order for sucj an arrangement. Probably cheaper than the loan interest.

By the way, you knew what the situation was before you posted your question, why did you hide this information? We advise on what we can see and trying to get an opinion on a posting that deliberately hides things will not get you many replies. We need to know as much as posiible, we are not here to help people break the law

I'm not sure what you mean when you say I deliberately hid something or what that something is but I apologise anyway if I have inadvertently offended you. I am very grateful for your assistance and will come back for more questions because you have been very helpful. Thank you.