New partners,pregnancy and divorce

[morganac]

I met my boyfriend at the tail end of his two year separation on a short marriage, he has one young child. After 1.5 years living together in a rented flat I have fallen pregnant while he and his wife have had delays on divorce and fdr proceedings.

I keep my finances totally seperate from my boyfriend, work full time and we have no plans to marry. The recent fdr court ruling has awarded large amounts of child and spousal support, based on my boyfriend co-habiting and my job which means his ex can enjoy a high standard of living, choose to work p/t. The impact of this is that i will have to provide all the financials for my home and child, with minimal input from my boyfriend and will not have same choice for p/t work.

Can a speculation on my salary and contribution to the household be fair? i am having a child with this man but i have not signed uo to effectively supprt a wife i have never had? can an appeal on he fdr be made?

Do you mean your boyfriend agreed large amounts of child support and spouse maintenance "By Consent?" There is no court ruling at the FDR. The aim of the FDR is to try to reach agreement. If no agreement is reached the judge just gives an opinion as to the likely outcome should the case go to a Final Hearing. At the FH the evidence is scrutinised more carefully by a different judgement before a ruling is made.

Speculation on your salary and contribution to the household would be considered fair if your boyfriend didn't disclose the details on his Form E. In divorce settlements the consideration is the first family and the welfare of any dependent children who lived in that family. IF during the marriage your boyfriend and his ex had a child together, organised their life so that he was the main breadwinner and she didn't work or worked part time/flexible hours because of her commitment to childcare wouldn't be deemed unreasonable for that to continue, at least a few years until the child starts school.

The bottom line is your partner has to meet his responsibilities and obligations to the first family before taking on more. Sorry.

I know the question isn't about fairness but rather a question about the process, but I do question why a second partner should have to contribute to the maintenance of a first. I know the CSA no longer takes account of a new patners income, so does anybody know why it is still the case in the courts?

The rationale is that you don't contribute to her living costs. He does, meaning he can't afford to contribute as much to his.