To say no to paying DH maintenance bill.

[ivechangedmyusername]

Name changed but been here since before Mexican House thief and the small Korean lady in the Garden ..

DH has 4 dcs. (2 over 18 who now live with us/at Uni
I have 3. (2 over 18)

He paid £1500 a month in CM for 6yrs (as this covered the mortgage and was the divorce agreement. CMS was £918 so more than the minimum by quite a way. ) when ex remarried house was sold and ex retained 80% of the equity in exchange for no pension sharing. (Her share of the equity was £318k). She moved into her new (similarly wealthy , childless, ) husbands house. No mortgage. We know this because she tried (and failed) to move overseas with the dcs and part of the court process was full disclosure of their joint financial situation to prove they could afford to support the move.

My DH has been quite unwell mentally. He suffered from quite extreme stress from his job which whilst highly paid is equally highly stressful and performance based. We have evaluated our lives and decided that we would rather earn less and live longer - and have some more time for each other now the kids are older. He has taken unpaid leave from work which means he hasn't sought a new contract. He hasn't earned for 2 months whilst very unwell and has now decided to retrain in a completely different craft based field that will pay a quarter of what we he was previously earning.

Now to the AIBU . DH has emailed (the only way they can communicate even after a decade without a full scale screaming row. ) and told his ex what is happening and that CM will reduce in August to £325 per month. She has said that this is unacceptable and that his children 'still exist' and he needs to pay for them. He has told her that this is how it is going to be and that his maintenance payments should have reduced years ago when the eldest got to 18 but he didn't do that because he could afford not to. Now he needs to look after his health and this is what he can afford. CMS rate.
I have received an email from her today, the first time in a decade that she has spoken to me, telling me ;
' as you and my ex-husband have made a joint decision on this lifestyle choice, I think it only morally right that I look to you to make up the shortfall in maintenance.'. It is not my children's fault that their father is having some kind of midlife crisis and wants to go and commune with nature. He has children , they are not an optional financial obligation'. As you are supporting this plan, then it is only fair that you pay the shortfall in my children's finances in order to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to'.

For full disclosure, ex wife has not worked since eldest was born. (22yrs ago).
I have worked full time in a profession since 22 and only had a 3 month break after my first and 6 months for both subsequent babies.
My ex and I get on really well and he also pays me £500 pm in CMS for my only child now at home.
Husbands new job will not have a massive impact on our lifestyle except for the better (more time at home) .
AIBU so say no, I'm not paying what you perceive to be a shortfall and sod off and get a job. ?

“I’d love to hear the other side of the story”: only ever levelled at male posters and second wives

I think she is unreasonable to approach you about it- this is between her and your husband. So I would ignore the email, or simply reply to say that you aren't going to discuss this with her as it is between her and your DH.

However, CMS calculations can be on the low side (in my view) and are the minimum that should be given. They rarely seem to reflect the true cost of raising a child/children. I'm generally not supportive of NR parents who only pay the bare minimum to support their children, especially if they are able to maintain their own lifestyles whilst paying less to their children.

That said, to be fair I think each case is different and sometimes it is justified. I know in the past your DH has paid more than he would have been required to under CMS- but if I read your OP correctly this was the amount laid out in the settlement? If so, it wasn't him being exceptionally generous (nor was her keeping the majority of the equity)- it was the legal agreement made as part of the separation and that is not the same thing. Presumably the initial decision that she was going to be a SAHM was a joint one between them when they had children, so there would be certain entitlements as a consequence of those joint decisions on separation. So I don't think that is necessarily relevant, but just my opinion.

Is it a fair amount? Is £325 about half of what you expect the costs of supporting his 2 children who are still under 18? If it is, then £325 would seem reasonable. If it is not..... then I think you need to look at it again.

I would also say, if there are joint commitments made (e.g. school fees), then I think it would be unreasonable of your DH to unilaterally and with little notice to reduce his contribution to this. I don't know if that is relevant to this case or not.

@jacks11 if I remember rightly the original settlement was ordered by court to cover the mortgage, and was terminated by the exW selling the house and remarrying.

Seriously?

The ex-W has kids who are 14+. She had a 9-5 nanny paid for by the Ex-H. No excuse not to work therefore. She chose not to.
He also OVERPAID her child maintenance by 17k!!!
This is more than many people earn a year, and that is just the overpayment.
He also paid the mortgage and bills for a house she then rented out for £2.5k a month. For 2 years.
He has now been not earning for 6 months and still paying £1500 per month for 2 teenage kids. The other 2 live with and are supported by him. That's more than I earn. He has given her 6 months notice the gravy train will be ending.
He isn't saying "I won't pay". He is saying, this is my new income, I am paying what CMS says to. HE is not a CF.

The ex-W has a wealthy husband. He can support her.

Ex-W now wants new wife (OP) to continue to pay her to not work, when she has to work to support her own, younger kids.

There is only one CF here and it isn't the ex Husband nor OP.

I hope the last 2 kids DO go to live with OP and their father. Then the ex W will be paying HIM CMS and what's the bet she won't pay a cent, despite expecting it.

She's a fool if she had £2.5-4k tax free per month for YEARS and a PAID for Nanny full time and £318k house equity and she didn't set up herself for life.

Nothing to do with the OP, who is protective of her DH.

For all those saying/implying OP and her DH had an affair and she was the OW - did you not read where the OP says ex-W had lined up her ricer new-DH WELL before the marriage ended.
Seems 2nd wife's are always wrong and first-wifes never wrong or CF's.

I am a first wife. She needs to get a grip.

I'm only interested in hearing the other side of this story if it ends with first wife tripping over her expensive tennis racquet and ending up falling into a mahoosive vat of poo.

I'm only interested in hearing the other side of this story if it ends with first wife tripping over her expensive tennis racquet and ending up falling into a mahoosive vat of poo.

I'm only interested in hearing the other side of this story if it ends with first wife tripping over her expensive tennis racquet and ending up falling into a mahoosive vat of poo.

Let me be quite clear about that

Haha Fizzy.

FizzyGreenWater yes let's

I know I shouldn't say any more in the subject but as there has been a shocking fail of comprehension from some posters , I feel I need to clarify. I really did try to put it all in the OP (except the nanny as wasn't really pertinent to the finances)
However just for clarity.
There is absolutely NO WAY ex is looking to 'retrain' either now or in the future. She is very happy, traveling with her new husband on business and enjoys the role of corporate wife. Each to their own. I would be bored rigid but she enjoys it.
Kids are 16 & 14 (still with her for now)

The issue of 'compensation for loss of career/facilitating his career. At the divorce she had a choice of half of the pension pot (275k then ) or 75% of house equity. She didn't want the pension as wanted the cash. She negotiated an additional 5%.
The 80 % of the equity WAS the compensation for her 'loss'.
Add to that the fact that she moved in with new husband and RENTED THE HOUSE OUT AND TOOK THAT RENT (DIDN'T SHARE THAT RENT WITH THE JOINT OWNER AND MORTGAGE PAYER) requiring another court process to force the sale.
Ultimately she could always buy another property and rent that out to provide an income for herself without having to work. Even a small 2 bed house in this area would command a rent of over £1k a month.

She has gone quiet, which is never good.. expecting solicitors letter any day filled with ridiculous demands.
Younger kids now looked after by au pair when she's not around - or come to us.

Nanny was not only full time but there used to be angry demands to 'get on to the agency' for a replacement should Nanny have the audacity to be sick or take a holiday.
We took advantage of this by refusing, at which point she would say 'then you can do it'.. so we did. !

@Fontofnoknowledge - name change fail, soz

FWIW, either user name YADNBU. She is an epic twunt.

She is taking the piss, yes.

But - he had an affair. OP might minimise that with “it was a kiss and he left 2 days later and she was having an affair too”, but - kisses don’t come from nowhere.

XW was at home looking after his 4 kids under 10 (even if that is with a nanny, was that nanny 24-7? No, didn’t think so) whilst he was working away and getting into an affair with someone else.

Doesn’t exactly cover him in glory.

OP mentions that XW is a trophy wife for her new husband - hosting cocktail parties, schmoozing the other wives... that’s actually hard work and it does oil wheels. I’ve watched my director’s wife do it - getting him invited in return to senior board member ski weekends.

If XW is doing that for current high earning husband, I’d put money on her doing it for her XW too.

She sounds bitter and completely unrealistic about the money.

But I absolutely would put money on her £318K from the house being pretty minor compared to his pension!

That she has married another wealthy man is irrelevant, that could end tomorrow. I suspect if you add the overpayments up and add that to the £318K, then deduct legitimate costs of child rearing, she’s still got less than she’d have had taking 50:50 on house and pension.

Btw: I astounded my solicitor by suggesting a 20:80 asset split by excluding cheating XH’s business, and have never claimed £400 a month CMS that I could. So please don’t take the above opinion as biased by me living the life of Riley on my XH’s account!

I just think that the XH here (also a cheat, remember) probably hasn’t done as badly financially out of this as it would seem here - from XW’s support of his early career, to a not ridiculous equity split when you look at pension.

I take back my comment about the pension value - as OP had a name change fail, that info wasn’t in a “green” post!

Well, I bet her affair involved more than a kiss.

I do wonder why she even had children. She obviously doesn't want them, they cramp her style.

Just to go back to whoever’s point on ‘joint decision made to have a SAHP’, do people not reevaluate decisions after divorce /new partners/just every year as DCs get older etc?
If the decision was made when they were a couple, then surely it no longer stands when they break up and have to decide again!
Also do all ex wives receiving maintenance expect it to never end? Having read mumsnet, I would have the fear that the ex would give up work altogether and pay 5p maintenance.
Plus, if they had stayed together, wouldn’t you keep evaluating the stressful job that is making the DH physically ill. I mean if they were married, then what would she do if he died or was critically ill and unable to work.

Just wondering as I work part time and would consider full time/increasing hours as DCs get older.

I'm so crap at the namechange thing. I only did it in case she was on here but tbh I don't care . I've not written anything that's untrue. So if she wants to 'use it in evidence' she can crack on.

Ellisandra - Nanny was live in. So I guess 24/7 .. I wasn't there but on the basis that Nannies used to come and go like buses , I had always assumed it was because of the hours /advantage taking based on what I have subsequently learned of personality .

Yes we did have an affair for six weeks. Although that was the entire time from meeting to him leaving. And runs the full gamut from saying hello to realising we had fallen for each other (about 7 meetings of under an hour each) . We kissed on the last but one and confessed feelings for each other. These things are not always straightforward or have a defining line. I had no idea he felt the same until that 6th meeting. The time from the decision/kiss/confession to him actually telling her and leaving (same day) was 8 days. During which he was away from home for the entire period. (Working)

Indeed kisses don't come from 'nowhere' and it was technically an affair for that 8 day period. Of course people in unhappy marriages should leave first, sometimes life is not so straightforward- I know from DH's reasoning that he was just keeping his head down. He knew the marriage was over, and knew it would mean seeing even less of his children. So until he had a reason (me) he put up with the situation every weekend for months. Not the best move but it was what it was.
To expect him (and me) to finance her lifestyle because of a 8 day non-sexual affair.. for a marriage that ended a decade ago , where we look after two of the children full time - and have overpaid 17k maintenance for the other two, is perhaps I would suggest - a Little beyond 'reasonable expectation' even if I had been shagging him senseless for a couple of years in the marital bed ..!

Let's not forget she was having an affair with the man SHE subsequently married, at LEAST six months before he left. Whilst two wrongs don't make a right, two wrongs do not make one party entitled to a meal ticket for life.

To be honest, I don't see anything wrong with him having an affair. The marriage was already over in spirit, and she was the one who ended it when she started playing away. The only reason she didn't end it properly, was that she didn't want to give up her meal ticket. She was getting all the advantages of the marriage, whilst also no doubt having luxury breaks, meals and gifts, paid for by another man.