u/FormGirl

Hi all,
Hoping to hear from people who’ve been through similar situations in Australia.
I was in a relationship for about 4 years, but we only lived together (de facto) for around 14 months.
At the start of living together, I owned my home with around 70% equity. My ex came into the relationship with personal debt. He was later added to the mortgage for servicing purposes, but is not on the property title.
During the time we lived together:
We shared general living costs fairly evenly
He contributed something towards housing, but it was below market rent (more a contribution to expenses than rent in the usual sense)
We bought an investment property together, which is now in negative equity (largely due to pre-existing debt being rolled into the loan, along with funds used to support a business that has since failed)
We also started a small business together
Since separating:
The investment property isn’t viable and will likely need to be sold at a loss
The business is being wound down
My ex is now asking for a cash settlement and is increasingly obstructive and abusive and refuses to instruct his solicitor and is trying to push for an agreement without solicitors as he is hiding assets and refuses financial disclosure despite requesting and receiving mine.

There are no children, and aside from the joint investments, finances were mostly kept separate.
I’m trying to understand how things are typically viewed in practice, particularly where:
The overall relationship was longer, but cohabitation was relatively short
One party had a significantly stronger financial position at the start
One party is on the mortgage but not on the title
Joint debt/assets are impacted by one party’s pre-existing financial position
Contributions were more about shared living rather than building long-term joint wealth
For those who’ve been through similar situations, how much weight did the starting financial positions and short de facto period carry? Did outcomes reflect that, or was there more of a redistribution than expected?
Just trying to get a sense of real-world outcomes before progressing further legally.

Hi all,
Hoping to hear from people who’ve been through similar situations in Australia.
I was in a relationship for about 4 years, but we only lived together (de facto) for around 14 months.
At the start of living together, I owned my home with around 70% equity. My ex came into the relationship with personal debt. He was later added to the mortgage for servicing purposes, but is not on the property title.
During the time we lived together:
We shared general living costs fairly evenly
He contributed something towards housing, but it was below market rent (more a contribution to expenses than rent in the usual sense)
We bought an investment property together, which is now in negative equity (largely due to pre-existing debt being rolled into the loan, along with funds used to support a business that has since failed)
We also started a small business together
Since separating:
The investment property isn’t viable and will likely need to be sold at a loss
The business is being wound down
My ex is now asking for a cash settlement and is increasingly obstructive and abusive and refuses to instruct his solicitor and is trying to push for an agreement without solicitors as he is hiding assets and refuses financial disclosure despite requesting and receiving mine.

There are no children, and aside from the joint investments, finances were mostly kept separate.
I’m trying to understand how things are typically viewed in practice, particularly where:
The overall relationship was longer, but cohabitation was relatively short
One party had a significantly stronger financial position at the start
One party is on the mortgage but not on the title
Joint debt/assets are impacted by one party’s pre-existing financial position
Contributions were more about shared living rather than building long-term joint wealth
For those who’ve been through similar situations, how much weight did the starting financial positions and short de facto period carry? Did outcomes reflect that, or was there more of a redistribution than expected?
Just trying to get a sense of real-world outcomes before progressing further legally.