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. ?

Tell her to eff orf

Do check if your husband had a clean break order (no spousal maintenance, not even 1p a year). If so she cannot now ask for spousal maintenance or increase it from 1p. I think so far on the thread we have just been talking about maintenance for children. If he had a clean break then all she might claim for children under 18 is child maintenance.

It sounds like the sale of the house and her keeping 80% of the price was a clean break.

then all she might claim for children under 18 is child maintenance

They live with dad

The house deal was a clean break. No SM on that basis.

Can you really return to court for SM when you have a different Spouse ? That's truly barking!!

Yes, you can font but not if you had a clean break (loads of couples have no court order over finances and people come back for increased spousal maintenance even 20 years after - one eco millionaire who says he had a clean break lost the document and the courts and lawyers no longer had a copy all those years later so he could not prove he;;'d had one and his ex got a lot. Shows always keep your documents for decades and decades. Another one -= I think a senior QC who divorced 20 years before found his first wife came back for more later and he'd been married to his new wife for 20 years _+ but again he did not have a clean break and his first wife had spousal maintenance (and wanted it increased).

This minority of money grabbers give genuine parents trying to arrange reasonable payments a bad name.

I'd reply one last time and ask if she has considered writing fiction for a lov9ng since she seems to be so good at it. Then I'd block her email address.

Well done OP. You've been awesome.

Well the cf is definitely on glue, but your dh is an idiot for overpaying for so long. Everyone's lifestyle expectations expand to use the income they have. By not reducing her income gradually as each child turned 18 he has turned what should have been a gentle gradual reduction which coincided with opportunities for her to reduce costs into a cliff edge.

Obviously neither you nor DH should give her a penny more than is already planned for. But the subsequent bad feeling and acrimony is partially his fault.

I’d reply with ‘thanks for your response; entertaining to read of course, although perhaps your time might be better spent looking for a job?’

I wouldn’t reply

But if I had to reply

Is there a reason that you, the parent of said children are not able to keep your own children in the lifestyle they are used to?

As long as the 18 year old still recieves child benefit and is in full time education maintenance still has to be paid im afraid

Xenia spousal maintenance automatically ends when the claiming party remarries - your example was where the man being claimed from was remarried. So assuming OP was being literal when she referred to the Ex's new husband they don't need to worry about clean break paperwork/nominal spousal maintenance. WRT child maintenance any court orders made after 2003 can be reassessed by the CMS after a year so OP shouldn't have any worries there either (unless they separated and got everything court ordered when the youngest was very tiny, even then it sounds like the kids will vote with their feet anyway).

Font - no you can’t. Spousal maintenance automatically ends on remarriage of the payee.

The last 3 posters really need to RTFT, or at least the op posts. Especially elusiveone after this:

'As long as the 18 year old still recieves child benefit and is in full time education maintenance still has to be paid im afraid"

No. It really doesn't. Firstly because of the terms of their agreement. Secondly, he is actually paying what the cms state is correct. And finally, and most pertinently, no, it really doesn't because the 18 year old is living with them not the ex wife

Most of that information was actually in the op, but certainly clarified by their later posts. Plus, there are 188 posts and the thread has been running for 2 days. Do you not think that things might possibly have moved on?

Cross posted, 2 posters who have RTFT have posted while I was writing that

Seriously, these type of people really exist??? Tell her to F OFF!!! Find out the exact amount he should be paying. Pay that (not a penny more) and then enjoy some time together. Life is too short and gone in a blink of an eye!

Secondly, he is actually paying what the cms state is correct

You forgot THIRDLY - CF is asking OP to pay the perceived difference even though they haven't contacted one another in 10 years and OP is cooking and cleaning and already paying for for CF kids

I couldn't work out who lived with whom because there seemed to be some children with the father and some the original mother but I might well be wrong. Good point that if there is a new husband rather than just partner of the mother now claiming the money her spousal maintenance (and we don't know she had any anyway as I think a later post said she had a clean break) would stop on remarriage.

Whilst I agree that the OP should certainly not be funding the ex-wife (and the ex-wife is a CF to even consider asking), I do have some sympathy for the ex-wife .

Presumably the DH was happy for her not to work during their marriage? This would have enabled his career to progress and for him to potentially leap frog his colleagues with childcare responsibilities. Ultimately leading to his stellar salary. Now she probably finds herself in her 50s with no means of earning a decent salary (albeit she is fortunate to now be supported by the new husband).

As a FT WOHM I used to think that SAHPs should support themselves after divorce, I.e. get a job (as most posters here have suggested). However I think there is an argument that if a man (or women) benefits from a SAHP in order to progress their career, then there should be some ongoing cost to pay for the advantage they have had in the work place. Maybe this would make men think twice about having their career enabled by a SAHP (and encourage more equal work life balance for both partners).

@Stretchoutandwait the marriage ended years ago though. If he had only just left his wife then I understand but she could have used the time wisely and spent the past few years re-training in something while she's been getting generous maintenance. Surely she didn't expect her ex husband to provide for her forever. She should have been doing something proactive while she had the time to give her a good chance of getting back to work.

@Stretchoutandwait

So the OP husband should work himself into an early grave because of a decision they made 23 years ago, despite all he has given since their divorced and the fact they have both remarried.

How long should OP continue to support her.

@BitchQueen90, I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I agree with you that in this case the wife has had the time and money to retrain ready for when the maintenance ran out. However, as a middle aged woman with no recent work experience, it is likely that she will never reach the earnings of the DH whose career she has enabled in the early years. Assuming that both the DH and ex-wife agreed to have 4 children and for her not to work, why shouldn't he have some ongoing responsibility towards helping her maintain the same lifestyle that he has? If he had such a high-powered and well-paid job, how much did he contribute to the daily care of these 4 children when they were married?

This case is probably not the best example, but I am just a bit surprised at the level of vitriol towards the ex-wife and the demands that she just get a job (as if it were that easy). There are too many examples on MN of women giving up their career to SAH and enable their husbands career, and then being shafted after divorce. As I said, maybe this isn't the best example, but it is an interesting point nonetheless.

However, as a middle aged woman with no recent work experience, it is likely that she will never reach the earnings of the DH whose career she has enabled in the early years. But that's point she doesn't have to earn the same as her EXH, she only has to earn what SHE needs to live on, bearing in mind her 2 husband is already supporting her new and improved lifestyle.

If you read all OP posts then your will see OP husband has supported over and above what he needed including employing a FT nanny to look after the children so she could live how she wanted.

but I am just a bit surprised at the level of vitriol towards the ex-wife and the demands that she just get a job Why should she, it's not just upto OP husband to pay for supporting their children.

@Clutterbugsmum, but my point is that decisions made years ago do have long term consequences. For a woman, to give up her career to bring up children has potentially massive long-term consequences, particularly in the event of divorce. Why should this not also be the case for a man whose career has benefited from a joint decision to have one parent stay at home?

The DH in question here seems to have done very well out of the set up. He has a family of 4 children, has built a very successful and well paid career (presumably without the hindrance of childcare responsibilities), and now has enough money to walk away from his well-paid job and pursue a hobby job.

I am not suggesting that he support the ex-wife forever (particularly as she has remarried), I'm just saying that I have some sympathy with the ex-wife in that her maintenance is being massively reduced much earlier than she perhaps anticipated (we don't know the age of the remaining children she has at home).