Spousal Support query please?

[Sonnet]

Can a new partner's income/divorce settlement be used in the calculation for spousal support?
They are not cohabiting

Back ground : STB ex wife requires SM for life as not worked for 26 years. Been bringing children up who are all now grown up - a 14 and 17 year old left at home. STB ex H doesn't earn much and household lost WTC when he left. So living on CTC's, child benefit, CM from soon to be Ex. He was paying more money but now claims he cannot afford too as he has been doing this for over 2 years and he has run out of money.
He has a partner currently going through divorce who has a professional well paid job. Whilst not officially living together he spends a fair bit of time there and his DC have spent time there too.
Is there a legal case to say he didn't need to pay rent and bills and that money could be used to pay SM?

[GoosevonMoose]

If they were living together you'd have a case as it's done on need but as he maintains his own place it will have zero bearing, I'm afraid.

[Sonnet]

Thank you
What if he maintains his own place/bills but spends most of his time there - seen cutting her lawn and even picking her kids up from school?

Would evidence of this be needed ?

Thank you

[lizzyj4]

Personally, I don't get this requiring SM for life - why can she not retrain and/or get a job? Maybe if the husband was on a good income, I could understand it, but if they were claiming WTC before they split the exh clearly wasn't on a high income so how is he now supposed to support another adult for his whole life?

[Sonnet]

I get you lizzyj4.
But not having worked for 26 years and only on a low paid job before that doesn't make for an employable person....

[lizzyj4]

I can understand a lack of confidence and appreciate that divorce is a massive blow after a long-term marriage (I'm in my mid 50s recently divorced after 24 years, one child still under 16, a disabled adult child to support, no CM). However 26 years as a SAHP means 26 years of running a household and managing a family, she has plenty of experience and skills and just needs someone to help her frame it in a way that makes sense to employers. And perhaps help with building her confidence.

[Sonnet]

I couldn't agree more!
But she has absolutely no intention of working!
Believe me I've tried - sorting out prospective training courses, spent hours on her cv, helped look fur jobs - even found her one as an exams invigilator at the school opposite her house. Working just will never happen for her
The situation is that they are friends of our and DH and I are trying to keep the middle ground

I am trying to persuade her not to go down the latest route of claiming off his new partner. They genuinely do not live together!!

She has a legitimate reason for SM and her solicitor and barrister have told her there is no reason she won't get it for life. Her ex DH does not earn a lot but has assets that are worth a lot that form his inherited business. She will get more than enough out of this and her ex DH is paying cm over the minimum set by the csa

[Sonnet]

I also know that the DH is living off a personal and business overdraft due to the expense of 2 households. Until recently he paid all bills, Cm and then money for Sm (total £1500 a month)

[lizzyj4]

It sounds as if you have done a lot to try to help her. What a difficult situation. She needs to adjust her expectations, but I'm not sure how you can make her see that if she's so set on never working. My understanding is that spousal maintenance is hardly ever awarded for more than a couple of years these days, courts much prefer clean breaks (although I am in Scotland, it may be easier to get SM in other parts of the UK). So she's either going to be very poor for the rest of her life or have to come round to the idea of getting a job.

[Sonnet]

Thank you for your valued input!
This is dragging all the way to court at the moment and is a toxic situation. I want for both of them to get a fair split and move on...

He is cash poor but has inherited business assets of 1 million in land so will have to sell to give her a fair share but how he will afford SM on top I really don't know as he won't immediately have an income as business assets sold... he will of course get another job but at 49 and only ever working fur yourself it won't be easy!

[Sonnet]

I know about the job - it's not just the money it is the self esteem and new friends/life she would get.

She really sees it as the worst option. I always assumed enough was earned so she didn't have to work and it is only in helping her out with her finances post seiedation I saw they got bulk of monthly money through WTC and CTC. She now only gets CTC for 2 as the other 2 are at uni/work. She pulls out every reason why she can't get a job but it would really be the making of her. I do understand how scary it all is for her though!

[Sonnet]

Karma - she now has a barrister pays for by her parents and it is on her advice that she is wanting to claim on her ex DH 's new partner!

I actually know her and have done for years - defiantly no cohabitating!!! It will just make the situation more toxic and the kids get stuck in the middle!

[Sonnet]

Know the new partner I should say !

[GoosevonMoose]

The solicitor is a crook if the advice has been that the new partner will have any bearing whatsoever. She has older children to top it all off. An order for indefinite of SM otherwise known as joint lives is given in the case where there are very young children or there is an obvious reason the wife cannot work. SM comes from income and it doesn't matter where he spends his time so long as he maintains his place. She would be far more sensible to go after a larger share of the assets and a clean break. In fact that might be the solicitors strategy and really the SM is a red herring. It's all rather distasteful though.

[Sonnet]

Thank you ! Distasteful is putting it mildly.
I am suppose to be seeing her on Monday so will ask her to reconsider involving his new partner.

I have wondered about this solicitor before - very aggressive. I got her to the point of considering a training course but then she says her solicitor told her not too as it will reduce her case for SM!

Her ex DH meanwhile can't pay his bills and needs to sell his land hence no income in the future so he's worrying about another job...

So hard seeing it from both sides

Really appreciate all your comments as can't talk to anyone in real life

[MrsBertBibby]

Can I suggest you distance yourself from all the legal stuff? It sounds quite complicated. They both have lawyers, let them slug it out if they must.

[user1497582089]

I completed divorce last year. Ex wife wanted Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance, ie for life, at 4,500 pounds per month. A lot more than what I earned. Judge binned the application on the grounds that SM was awarded based on needs only and whether the paying partner could actually afford it based on their income and needs.

Joint lives SM is very rare and discouraged by the Courts as many ex partners see it as a Lifetime Pension to avoid working. If there are young children it may be awarded for 3 to 5 years maximum. But don't expect huge number. My ex-wife received 400/month for 2 years. A lot less than the expected 4,500/month for life. Judge's logic was simple. She is a young woman in good health who was already working.

Ex-wife attempted to argue she had a chronic back problem for many years, but showing the Judge her Gym Membership subscriptions soon squashed that lie.

Correct approach is for applicant (usually the wife) to list all of her income from; earning, Tax Credits, Child Benefit and Child Maintenance to give a monthly total. Then a budget of essential outgoings is produced. If the essential outgoings exceed the income the shortfall is meant to be covered by SM. However, the paying partner's needs and income will be taken into account too. If the paying partner is unable to afford the estimated SM then the receiving partner will have to adjust their lifestyle accordingly.

Key point to remember is that SM is based on needs only.

[Sonnet]

just come across these updates.

i did stand back based on a post above and because it all just seemed so wrong to me.

It will be going to a 3rd court hearing soon so guess the Judge will decide :)

[Hermonie2016]

Do you know if she they received directives from the FDR? It's foolish if they ignored these as final hearing will just impose a solution.

Sometimes the finances are used to punish the leaving spouse (and new partner) rather than actual need.Counselling may have helped her to come to terms with how her life is going to change.

[Sonnet]

I'm not sure Hermonie as I've tried to say out of it.

I think you've hit the nail on the head about punishment unfortunately!
I have encouraged counselling and I believe she may have started. What I do know though is she is dreading it all being over...
very sad for her