Selling a House in Divorce: What Owners Should Know

Marco wants to keep the house.

Anna wants to be paid out for her share.

However, they have different views on what the property is worth today.

Marco assumes CHF 1.15 million.

Anna believes that at least CHF 1.3 million would be realistic.

One estate agent quotes CHF 1.18 million.

Another sees a possible sale price significantly higher.

Who is right?

This is exactly where it becomes clear why a property during a separation is not only an emotional issue, but also a financial one.

Anna and Marco are a fictional example. Their situation represents typical questions that can arise with jointly owned residential property after a separation.

Three basic options

With a jointly owned property, three options are often considered:

1. One person takes over the property.

2. The property is sold.

3. Both remain owners for the time being.

Which option makes sense depends on the personal, financial and legal situation.

Option 1: One person takes over the house

Back to Anna and Marco.

Marco wants to stay.

This first raises a crucial question:

Can he actually finance the house on his own?

Because it is not enough for Anna to be willing to give up her share.

The financing also has to work.

If there is a joint mortgage, it should therefore be clarified with the bank at an early stage whether a takeover or adjustment of the financing is possible.

And then comes the next difficult question:

At what value will Anna be bought out?

This is exactly where conflicts can arise.

Why a realistic property valuation now becomes especially important

In a normal sale, both owners generally want to achieve the best possible price.

In an internal takeover, however, different interests can arise.

The person taking over the house tends to benefit from a lower value.

The person being paid out tends to benefit from a higher value.

That is why the property valuation should be as objective and transparent as possible.

A single figure without an explanation does not necessarily solve the problem.

Option 2: The house is sold

Anna and Marco could also decide:

Neither of them takes over the property.

The house is sold on the market.

This creates a more objective reference point: the price a buyer is actually willing to pay.

But even then, decisions remain open.

What asking price should be used to start?

Which estate agent will handle the sale?

How quickly should the house be sold?

Which investments should still be made before the sale?

Who pays for them?

And what happens until the handover?

Especially during a separation, a clearly defined sales strategy is therefore important.

The most dangerous sentence: “The main thing is to get rid of the house quickly”

A separation can be stressful.

It is therefore understandable to want to resolve shared financial matters as quickly as possible.

When selling a property, however, excessive time pressure can become problematic.

A property should not automatically be brought to market well below its value just to close the matter as quickly as possible.

Conversely, insisting on an unrealistically high price can also prolong the conflict.

The goal should therefore be:

realistic price + clear timeline + transparent strategy.

Option 3: Both remain owners for the time being

Sometimes the property is not sold immediately.

For example, because the children are to remain in the house for the time being.

Or because a sale is not desired at the current time.

This can also be an option in principle.

However, the use of the property, costs, mortgage, maintenance and any later intention to sell should then be clearly defined.

The longer a jointly owned property remains unresolved, the more important clear agreements become.

The mortgage must be addressed from the outset

A common mistake would be to first discuss the division of the property value and only look at the financing afterwards.

If there is an existing mortgage, the bank should be involved at an early stage.

Relevant points may include:

current mortgage
terms
affordability
possible takeover by one person
any adjustment to the financing
consequences of a sale

The property may have a high value on paper and still be difficult for one person to take over.

Do not confuse sale price with net proceeds

Suppose the house is sold for CHF 1.3 million.

That does not automatically mean that CHF 1.3 million can be distributed between the parties involved.

Depending on the situation, the following may still be relevant, for example:

existing mortgage
property gains tax
estate agent fees
other selling costs
possible costs related to the financing

That is why, in a separation, the net proceeds are often more important than the sale price alone.

Only then can it be assessed what amount will actually be available from the sale.

The official Swiss authorities point out that property gains from real estate sales are taxed; the exact burden depends on the canton and the specific situation.

Back to Anna and Marco

Let us assume that both eventually decide to sell.

They now receive three estate agent assessments.

Agent A: a rather conservative price, with a focus on a quick sale.

Agent B: a higher asking price and a longer marketing strategy.

Agent C: a similar valuation to A, but a different marketing approach and different terms.

Suddenly, the discussion changes.

It is no longer only about:

“What do you think our house is worth?”

But rather:

“Which strategy makes the most sense for our shared situation?”

This can help shift an emotional discussion towards more transparent decision-making criteria.

During a separation, the estate agent should not become the next point of conflict

If both owners need to sell, the choice of estate agent should be transparent.

It can become problematic if one person chooses an acquaintance on their own and the other feels they have no influence over the valuation and sale.

A shared list of criteria is better.

Both owners can compare the same points, for example:

property valuation
reasoning behind the valuation
proposed asking price
sales strategy
expected timeframe
services
commission and other costs
experience with comparable properties

The decision is then not based on personal preference, but on transparent offers.

This is exactly where Makli’s model fits particularly well

A separation is a situation in which neutrality and comparability can be especially valuable.

Instead of one person choosing an estate agent and the other having to accept that assessment, the property can be entered once.

Suitable estate agents can submit concrete offers.

Both owners can then view the same offers and compare, for example:

valuation → strategy → services → terms.

Makli’s basic principle is:

You do not search for an estate agent. Estate agents apply to you.

The platform does not decide what should happen to the property.

But it can create a shared basis for decision-making if a sale is being considered. Makli

8 questions that should be clarified before a sale

Before the house is listed:

Who owns the property according to the land register?
Does one person want to, or can one person, take over the house?
What does the bank say about the financing?
What is the realistic property value?
Approximately how high would the net proceeds be in the event of a sale?
How quickly should the property be sold?
Which criteria will be used to choose the estate agent?
Who decides on price changes and purchase offers during the sale?

The earlier these questions are clarified, the less potential for conflict there is during the actual marketing process.

Conclusion: Turning an emotional situation into a transparent decision

In a separation, a jointly owned house is often more than just an asset.

It is connected with memories, family and future plans.

That is precisely why financial decisions should be made as transparently as possible.

Not:

“My estate agent says CHF 1.3 million.”

But:

“We have several assessments and understand how the different strategies are justified.”

Not:

“Let’s simply take the cheapest estate agent.”

But:

“Which overall package suits our situation?”

And not:

“We need to get rid of the house immediately.”

But:

“What timeframe do we really need, and what impact does it have on the sale?”

In this way, a difficult personal situation can at least be placed on a more objective decision-making basis when it comes to selling the property.

If a sale is being discussed, the property can be entered on Makli for owners free of charge and without obligation. Suitable estate agents can submit offers, which can then be compared together.

Sources: Official federal information on the taxation of real estate and property gains; for the specific division of matrimonial property, ownership structure and financing, the individual situation and, where appropriate, the bank, notary or qualified legal advice are decisive.