Property Expense Reimbursement After Divorce

When divorced couples remain co-owners of property, who pays for upkeep—and who gets reimbursed? The recent decision in Lantz v. Gibson (Dec. 3, 2025) sheds light on this often-overlooked issue.

This case involved a dispute between husband and wife over the sale proceeds from the marital home that the parties retained after divorce. The parties purchased a home during their marriage. They subsequently divorced and deferred the sale of the jointly-deeded marital home until an unspecified future date. Their divorce final judgment was entered in 2007 and ratified a marital settlement agreement drafted by the parties. The marital settlement agreement required the former wife to make the ongoing mortgage payments. The MSA also provided that any future sale proceeds from a deferred sale would be split 60/40 in her favor.

For 17 years, the former wife paid all property-related expenses, including taxes, insurance, and maintenance. She occasionally rented the home and did not share the rents she received with the former husband. The husband did not contribute to the carrying costs of the home.

When they agreed to sell in 2021, the former husband claimed his 40% share of the proceeds. The former wife refused, seeking reimbursement for half of the property-related expenses she had been covering after their divorce final judgment was entered.

The issue before the court was whether a co-owner who pays all property expenses after divorce has a right to reimbursement when the property is sold.

The First DCA began by reviewing general property law. Under F.S. §689.15, property held as “tenancy by the entirety” converts to a “tenancy in common” after entry of a divorce final judgment. Co-tenants generally share responsibility for property expenses. In this particular case, the MSA relieved the former husband of mortgage payments but was silent on other costs. Therefore, the court found the former husband remains liable for his share of non-mortgage expenses.

The First DCA also noted that the default rule providing for equal sharing of costs also applies to income, and that half the rental income the former wife received must be offset against the former husband’s half of the non-mortgage expenses.

This case illustrates that clarity matters when drafting marital settlement agreements. Jointly owned property can create long-term financial entanglements after divorce. Marital settlement agreements should be drafted with precision to avoid costly disputes years later.

Michael DeVoe is a divorce attorney in Orlando, Florida practicing contested divorce, uncontested divorce, timesharing, visitation, custody, paternity, child support, injunctions, and other family law cases.