any working mums successfully claimed spousal maintenence?

[ineedagoodsolicitor]

I am going through the early stages of divorce.

I earn approximately 2/3 of what my h does, partly because in a lower paid job but mostly because I work part-time (28 hours a week) to accomodate school runs, after school activities and because I have an extra 4 weeks unpaid annual leave to cover more of the school holidays and days off when the dc are off school ill.

H has been happy for this to be the norm, in fact he would have liked me to have even more unpaid time off with the dc and work less hours per week, the money was not an issue.

Given the economic climate there is unfortunately now no scope to increase back up to full time (an across the board temporary short working week is being considered) and I'm unlikely to land another post where I can dictate the part-time hours and request/be given extra unpaid annual leave.

I will earn considerably less than h therefore for the forseeable future as a result of our joint decision over how much I would work due to being the main childcarer iykwim.

HOWEVER, because I still earn over £2,000 net per month and could support the dc by myself with some CSA contribution I am finding that spousal maintenance is not considered "appropriate/necessary". What will be affected is my ability to change the car when it is becoming unreliable/save for retirement/take the dc abroad to visit my family/undertake any major works required about the house without stressing over the cost.

I earn less than I would have if we had not married and had children while h's earning capacity has increased quite substantially during our marriage, he has had support at home, namely me !

Has anyone in a similar situation successfully obtained spousal maintenance and on what grounds ?

P.S. Yes, I'm do feel greedy and grasping but I'm staring into a much bleaker financial future compared to h's which seems unfair. Had we hired a nanny and kept my career up where it was (which he did not think should happen) I'd have a similar earning capacity to him now.

Thanks everybody

STIDW
I'm guessing that even though h's net income is well over £3,000 per month, as mine is over £2,000 it would be unlikely that a court would order top up levels of child maintenance because I can support myself and the dc on basic CM.

No-one I have spoken to yet has suggested there is CSA cap level based on £2,000 net sal for NRP.

The reason we are trying to avoid hiring solicitors until we have thrashed out as much as possible ourselves is that the assets we have are, I'm guessing, above average and the fee quotes we were both given when we went for a free 1/2 hour initial consultation were also surprisingly higher than we were initially quoted over the 'phone before disclosing our assets. The asset situation is not complicated, it is easily divisible without selling property or assigning debt etc, so I just think we need to be wary of letting solicitors loose on our affairs until we reach an impasse over percentage splits and CM levels which knowing h is a point we will get to soon enough.

I brought assets into the marriage and h inherited during the marriage but so far we are just treating everything as matrimonal assets in the spirit of "with all my worldly goods I thee endow" vows etc.

It sounds like you are both being pretty reasonable about it anyway - which is a good thing.

BMB spousal maintenance does end if you remarry, but if you cohabited it would depend on the income of your partner - if the partner was earning say £10,000 a year it probably wouldn't change maintenance. It's always possible to voluntarily give up spousal maintenance if the new live-in-partner didn't want their income assessed.

CSA capped amount of net income is £2k per week so your husband would need to earning in excess of £104k net per annum for CM top up payments to be a consideration.

A clean break (no further financial obligation between spouses) is the first consideration. That could possibly be achieved if you have a greater share of the capital with no SM. There isn't a huge discrepancy in incomes and some regard is given to future earning potential. Alternatively you could settle for less capital and some SM. If there are substantial assets there is less justification to move away from 50:50. The aim is to achieve a balance so both parties are on a similar footing.

One thing to be aware of is that some judges in some areas will insist on a nominal amount of SM, say 5p a year, as insurance so the children don't suffer hardship should the parent with the majority of care be unable to work because of illness, redundancy etc.

I take your point about the expense of solicitors. Some solicitors will take clients on an ad hoc basis so that you can pay for one or two meetings for advice only. Then you can go away and negotiate an agreement between you before a solicitor drafts a "consent" order which becomes legally binding once it's ratified by the courts.

Not seeing a solicitor early on may be a false economy. Someone agreeing something, finding they have sold themselves short and changing their mind can inflame the situation leading to protracted and expensive legal proceedings as well as damaging long term family relationships.

Sorry, I forgot to explain that an nominal order leaves the way open to apply for variation increasing the nominal amount of spouse maintenance should circumstances change. Without a nominal order it wouldn't be possible to claim SM in the future.

Thanks STIDW I had missed that the CSA cap levels were weekly net pay.

I do agree re the false economy of not engaging the right professionals early enough ! I'm just very concious of the fact that dh is already wanting to concede the minimum (he has contact with a solicitor at work who it appears he has spoken to quite a lot recently) and h is of the opinion that he works hard for his salary plus as I'm the one who is wanting the divorce, the fact that I earn less ( partly due to having 90% responsibility for the children) is totally my cross to bear.
One of the reasons our marriage has floundered...... my part-time hours + the hours housework/looking after children by myself are way in excess of his working week, even factoring in travel time but he apparently has a monopoly as far as working long hours/being tired is concerned.

I know h too well, very soon I'm going to have a battle on my hands and solicitors will involved heavily enough when we reach impasse as far as what we both think is reasonable with regards asset splitting. I am concerned about your statement that if there are substantial assets, there is less justification to move away from 50/50 asset split. Looks like I'm not going to be eligible for SM so an asset split in mine and the dc's favour was my only hope of redress regarding the uneven earning potential. It's particularly emotive as I have been the driving force behind acquiring/managing/maintaining most of our asset base, some of which I brought into the marriage 15 years ago, h has contributed by inheriting a £30,000 asset some years ago which is incredibly now worth 5 times as much and obviously by earning a good salary which, combined with my insistence on keeping a career going and therefore contributing to the joint family finances, left us spare money each month to invest.

In your opinion what roughly might be considered to be "substantial assets" such that a judge may decide it not necessary to move away from a 50/50 split ? Neither of us has had an affair btw so no-one has the moral high ground here.

You mentioned clean break, which was heavily trailed by the solicitor I spoke to but I'm unclear now as to whether that means no SM or no CM too.

H's pensions are worth considerably more than mine at this point in time and the gap will widen as retirement dates approach. I think however I'd prefer to settle for a bigger share of assets now and relinquish any claim on future pension. I'd like to keep the dc as the only tie between us iyswim.

I realise I'm asking a lot of questions and I am very grateful if you are able to give any indication of possible answers. I am presuming that I will eventually be at the mercy of a judge and their opinion of what constitutes reasonable, so there are many unknown factors we can't predict the outcome of.

hi ineed
other posters on this thread know a lot more about how the actual courts work than I do, but one thing I can say is that thereis no family law principle to say that if a man 'works hard' and the wife wants the divorce not him, she somehow deserves less. Courts have to balance the 'clean break' principle with that of fairness (and also, if there is money left, compensation for lost earnings), and in recent cases 'fairness' has tended to include a larger share of assets/maintenance to a wife who gave up career progression to bring up children (have a look at cases if you like - sorry still in lecturer mode - White v White, Miller v Miller, McFarlane v McFarlane. All big money cases, but the principles were quite clearly stated- childrearing is considered to be a contribution to the career success of the other partner). Your work re. family investments etc would be recognised as such if the case went to court.

nb affairs etc would not be taken into account by a court- only extremely poor conduct on either side such as violence!

substantial assets would I guess mean things like the investment you mention, and the house. Definitely the pension. I wouldn't relinquish any claim on it tbh- although I understand your wish for the break, you'll be connected through the children anyway and the pension is not as much of a tie as that...

a personal addition- I really worry terribly for women like yourself who give up a lot and end up basically enriching a middle aged man who then gets richer by being freed almost entirely from childcare responsibilities, and often ends up with the pension as well because his ex cannot handle dealing with his intransigence and meanness....awful.

allegrageller

It is unfortuunate that my 90% provision of childcare and other home responsibilities, maintaining property, managing money etc is masked by the fact that I also work and earn good money unlike SAHMs who did the childcare/home/money stuff and must therefore be provided for in terms of SM as they have supported their h's career.

I'm not bitter yet, ask me after the finances have been sorted and it might be a different story !

The real loser here is h as the dc are IMHO gorgeous, delightful children with a zest for life and new experiences (except vegetables/strange food). They are bright, articulate, fairly respectful children but with all the needs that children have over and above an adult. H can only tolerate them for so long before he is infuriated by them in one way or another. I do worry about their opinion of him as a father in the long run. He does do expensive fun activities with them (for a limited period of time) but no inclination to undertake chores associated with being a parent, homework help, music practice, shoe polishing, all the stuff my dad did make time for despite being the sole earner and that showed us how deeply he cared for us just as much as my mum did. Apparently that's all my job because I work part-time. Yeah, right, the unpaid stuff falls to me, don't get me wrong, I love it, it is terribly rewarding when you are around the dc enough to see the results but it won't put money into my pension or funds into savings for a replacement car, trip to see my parents abroad.

Yes, even if h considers himself to have succeeded financially in life after the divorce, there are other things to consider and he doesn't "get it" at this point in time, maybe he will later.

clean break - would mean no spousal maint.
Child maint is COMPLETELY separate, and even if you agreed no CM (which I am sure you won't) you can always go to CSA and claim it later (think you have to have a year between court order and claim?).

I know what you mean OP. It was the same in my house. Don't want to hijack your post but when Hlost his job & I started 70+ hours+commuting he still did 20% of housework 30% of childcare, youngest only did 2 pieces of homework in 1st year til I went to parents evening. When he got a job much later he walked out to get a "better quality of life". Would like to hug Allegrageller - she is so right. Didn't know that about SM until STIDW posted. Don't go for clean break. And pensionwise, I would suggest you don't sign any of it away unless H is significantly younger than you. Women usually get better pension (which unless you are v. young you can usually get earlier because the courts think they will live longer).

mean - get earlier) because courts think they will live longer.... soz

Mymymble, words fail me at your h's selfishness and sense of entitlement !

OP

thanks for the hug Mymymble :)

I def agree- clean break tends to favour the 'hardworking' man who has advanced his career by leaving the domestic stuff to someone else...

H just sent letter to solicitor. Won't agree to let us move back to family home from where we bought (repayment only) for my job when he was unemployed - he has moved to London & I am now unemployed. - Unless my mum sells her house (near family home) |& moves in with us, Horrible shock to me & her. She on 15 year teachers' pension. Mortgage on family home less than where we are living in now. Feel like the law was invented to destroy us....

Urgent advice required, please anyone, i;ve 2 kids, one at schl one about to start in aug, x unwilling to discuss anything, only sees kids 7 hrs 1 day week if lucky, i work 20 hrs, can just afford to take on existing mortgage, he wants 50/50 his lawyer requesting this, i need 60/40 my lawyer seems very unsure that i'd get this, really panicking unable to afford property in this area if i need to move will have to give up work move back home with my mum god!!!! ANYONE OUT THERE WITH ANY HELPFULL ADVICE, at the mo he does'nt pay minimun 20% csa says he should, feel im treading quicksand and going under really panicking, anyone with advice id appreciate it.

nrlycrackinup, sorry I can't be more helpful but as I said on the thread you started your solicitor is correct, in Scotland settlements don't tend to diverge that much from 50:50. Also spouse maintenance is relatively unusual and unlike England & Wales any spouse maintenance it is usually limited to 3 years.

Have you applied to the CSA? If you have and your husband is PAYE it will only be a matter of time before the CSA catch up with him. If he is self employed it's a bit more tricky.