1. General Principles of Sharing and Nature of the Asset
The fundamental rule in the liquidation of houses or vehicles purchased with credit during the divorce process is to classify the asset as “personal property” or “acquired property” based on the periods when the payments were made. According to the established jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Appeals:
Pre-Marital Payments: Down payments and loan installments paid before the marriage union was established are considered the personal property of the respective spouse.
Payments During Marriage: Loan repayments made during the continuation of the property regime (within the marriage union) are considered “acquired property,” as it is presumed, unless proven otherwise, that they were made with income obtained through work.
Post-Divorce (Outstanding) Payments: The property regime ends as of the date the divorce case is filed. Installments extending beyond this date are considered the personal debt of the debtor spouse and are considered the liability (debt) of the asset in the liquidation account.
2. Calculation Methodology: Proportional Allocation Method
In the decisions of the 8th Civil Chamber and the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it is emphasized that the “proportional allocation method” should be used in the liquidation of assets purchased with credit. The calculation consists of the following stages:
Determination of Ratio: The ratio of the number of installments (or amount) paid within the marriage union to the total number of loan installments (or total loan amount) is determined.
Market Value Basis: The current market value (fair market value) of the asset subject to liquidation (house or vehicle) is determined as of the date closest to the decision date.
Determination of Surplus Value: The determined “in-marriage payment ratio” is multiplied by the asset’s current market value. The amount obtained as a result of this process is considered the “surplus value”.
Share in Acquired Assets: Half (1/2) of the calculated surplus value is ruled as the other spouse’s share in acquired assets.
3. Equalization of Debts and Personal Contributions
During the liquidation process, the asset’s debts and personal property contributions should be deducted from the calculation:
Deduction of Loan Debt: The ratio of the amount of the loan debt that has not yet matured as of the date the property regime ended to the total loan is determined. This ratio is multiplied by the asset’s market value on the liquidation date to determine the “debt amount,” and this amount is deducted from the total value.
Down Payment and Personal Property Contribution: If the down payment used in the acquisition of the asset was covered by one spouse’s personal property (e.g., pre-marital savings, sale of jewelry, or inheritance), a calculation for the “value increase share” or “equalization” is made for this amount. The ratio of the payment made from personal property to the asset’s purchase value is determined, and this ratio is multiplied by the current value and reimbursed to the respective spouse.
Asset-Liability Balance: If, as of the divorce date, the remaining loan debt exceeds the current value of the vehicle or house (if liabilities exceed assets), no claim for participation can be awarded, as there is no surplus value left to be distributed.
4. Special Cases Regarding Vehicles
The same principles apply to the sharing of vehicles as to immovables. However, the calculation may vary due to depreciation of vehicles or high loan debt. For example, if part of the installments for a vehicle purchased with a loan before marriage was paid during the marriage, a calculation is made only based on the ratio of the installments paid during the marriage to the total installments. If the vehicle was acquired during marriage and an old vehicle was given in exchange, it should be investigated whether the traded vehicle was personal property, and equalization should be made accordingly.
5. Secondary Source Assessment
In decisions regarding cooperative payments presented as a secondary source, a logic similar to loan installments is observed. For cooperative shares, it is stated that membership fee payments made before marriage should be proportioned to payments made during marriage, and the claim for participation should be calculated by multiplying this ratio by the fair market value at the liquidation date. This situation shows parallelism with the “proportionality” principle in loan installments.
In conclusion; in properties acquired with a loan, spouses’ receivable rights are calculated only based on the ratio of the installments paid during the marriage to the total payment, and taking the current value of the property at the end of the divorce case as the basis. A written suggestion.
Krediyle alınan ev veya araç tapuda kimin adına olursa olsun paylaşılır mı?
Evet. Tapunun kimin adına kayıtlı olduğu tek başına belirleyici değildir. Evlilik birliği içinde ödenen kredi taksitlerine isabet eden kısım edinilmiş mal sayılır ve bu oran üzerinden katılma alacağı hesaplanır. Evlilik öncesi ödemeler ise kişisel mal olarak değerlendirilir.
Boşanmadan sonra ödenen kredi taksitleri paylaşılır mı?
Hayır. Boşanma davasının açıldığı tarih itibarıyla mal rejimi sona erer. Bu tarihten sonra ödenen kredi taksitleri, borçlu eşin kişisel borcu kabul edilir ve paylaşım hesabında malın pasifi (borcu) olarak dikkate alınır.
Peşinat kişisel maldan (miras, ziynet, evlilik öncesi birikim) ödenmişse ne olur?
Peşinatın kişisel maldan karşılandığı ispatlanırsa, bu tutar için değer artış payı veya denkleştirme alacağı hesaplanır. Peşinatın malın alım bedeline oranı bulunur ve bu oran, malın tasfiye tarihindeki rayiç değeriyle çarpılarak ilgili eşe iade edilir.
Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?
The division of homes and vehicles purchased with credit is one of the most technical and frequently errored areas in divorce cases. An incorrectly made calculation;
confusing the distinction between pre-marital and marital payments,
taking the purchase price instead of the market value as a basis,
disregarding personal property contributions,
can lead to significant loss of rights due to reasons such as an incorrectly established asset-liability balance. For this reason, especially for individuals seeking a Tuzla divorce lawyer, a Tuzla property division lawyer, and a Tuzla family lawyer, expert support proficient in Supreme Court precedents is of great importance.
In Istanbul’s Anatolian Side, particularly in Tuzla, Kartal, Pendik, Maltepe, Ataşehir, and Kadıköy, in cases involving the division of assets purchased with credit, participation claims, and value increase shares, 2M Law Office provides strategic litigation planning based on Supreme Court practice, effective management of the expert witness process, and legal consultancy to prevent loss of rights. A single calculation error made in assets purchased with credit can completely change the outcome of the case.
