Divorce and property decisions

Divorce is never an easy decision to make, and when shared property is involved, it becomes even more complicated. While it might feel like you need to get all the divorce proceedings done immediately, you shouldn’t rush property decisions. Whether you’re considering selling, buying out the other partner, or keeping the property, it is essential that you understand the options so that you make the right financial decision and create a clearer path forward.

According to Adrian Goslett, CEO and regional director of REMAX Southern Africa, when it comes to approaching the property side of a separation, usually the best option depends on a range of factors, such as affordability, bond obligations, the presence of children, and whether one or both parties want to keep the home long-term. While every situation is different, there are three common paths people generally consider.

The first option is selling the property and splitting the profits. This is often the most straightforward option, especially when neither party can financially afford the property alone, or when both want a clear financial separation. Selling the property can allow both parties to settle any outstanding bond, divide any equity fairly, and have a fresh start with fewer shared financial ties.

Goslett advises that the timing of the sale is important. “It’s crucial that you take your time when selling a property as rushed sales can sometimes lead to lower offers, particularly if the property is not prepared or priced correctly. Working with an experienced property professional can help ensure the home is positioned well and sold at fair value.”

Another possibility is for one spouse or partner to buy out the other. This option is often considered when one party wants stability, especially if children are involved and staying in the same environment feels like the best solution. In a buyout arrangement, the person keeping the property usually compensates the other for their share of the equity.

However, buyouts require careful financial consideration. The remaining owner must qualify for the bond in their own name, and the property may still need to be formally transferred into their name through a conveyancer and registered at the Deeds Office. It’s also important to factor in the full cost of ownership, including conveyancing and potential transfer costs, along with the ongoing expenses of ownership such as rates and taxes, levies, maintenance, and insurance.

The third option is keeping the property jointly, at least for a short period of time. Some separating couples choose to hold onto the property temporarily, especially if the market conditions are not ideal for selling, or if they are waiting for a better moment to make a longer-term decision.

While this approach can work under the right circumstances, it requires clear communication and legal agreements. Both parties remain financially tied to the home, and disagreements can arise over who pays for what, who deals with maintenance, and how decisions are made. If the relationship is strained, keeping the property jointly can prolong conflict rather than relieve it.

Goslett advises that professional support can make a significant difference during this process. “A property practitioner can provide neutral, practical advice about market value, selling timeframes, and what options are realistic. This helps bring clarity into a situation that can feel very uncertain.”

Regardless of the option you choose, it’s important for separating couples to be informed about the home’s current value, the outstanding bond amount, and any costs involved in selling or transferring ownership. These details form the foundation of a fair agreement and can prevent misunderstandings later down the line.

Issued by Kesia Abrahams