Spousal Maintenance...

[boobah1970]

Since divorcing in 2011 I have been paying Child Maintenace ( the amount is above the CSA guidance figure ) and spousal maintenance as at the point in time there was a 'need' for £125 pm. The ex wife was working 3 days a week and the terms of the spousal was that it would end when she returned to work full time. 4 years on she has had several promotions and is now earning an extra £400 net a month but only working 4 days week as she knows she will still get an additional £125 a month from me as long as she doesn't go back full time.. In addition to the child maintenance I also fund all their school uniforms and other clothing costs, birthday parties, school trips away etc.. Is it reasonable to still demand spousal maintenance when your salary has increased by over 3 times the need for it?

I think if your court agreement just said "until she's working full time" then you'd need to return to court to get it amended. Usually they set a date don't they? My DH's says he has to pay until a date that was set at the time of the divorce - this was to give his ex time to get into full time work, etc but he can stop paying regardless of whether she's done that or not. (She'd have to return to court if she wanted him to go on paying.)

It going to end up with a re-application to the court, I believe she is banking I won't want to pay the legal fees, but I'm not prepared to pay the extra money year after year while she still works 4 days a week ( both children are are at school and she is a teacher so holiday childcare is not an issue to returning full time ) . I don't thinks she fully realises that spousal maintenance is there to suplement her income due to a shortfall and subsidise her lifestyle. There must be surplus cash around as she has even taken on a cleaner once a week.

Do you have the children 50% of the time.

If not I think you're underestimating the amount of time shopping/cooking/running a household that children are in.
My dh is a teacher, he marks/plans every night and every weekend - it's very full on in term time. Without me at home part time the house would not run.

If you have them 50% of the time and do all of the above then my point doesn't apply.

dont mean to burst your bubble whatyouseeis you are unlikely to get spousail maintance long term with those terms as the judge will expect you to get a full time job to support yourself (CM is different).

take it to court OP you will most likely get the ruling amended now that they are earning more and these days SM in unlikely to be award indefinitaly (and even if it was judges are more likely to set it aside ).

Thankfully its changing as my friend at one point was paying SM to his EX when she earnt double his salary as she thought tooth and nail to try and protect her SM despite earning far more then him and she dragged it out so long she had to pay all the legal costs and back date all the SM paid during the court process (some how she managed to drag it out for 18 months)

@worridmum, Thats exactly what my solicitor has said, the SM was there to fill a need in 2011, 4 years later when her salary has increased 4 x the value of the SM the SM is now like bonus money on top. She is clinging to the wording of the agreement that says it only ends when she returns to work full time.

@whatyouseeiswhatyouget/Laurie I am not saying she needs to return to work 5 days a week, but when her income increases by 4 x the SM then she no longer needs it.

I think you've got a badly worded agreement really. If I was getting £125 extra a month for not working a 5th day in the week, I think I'd be unlikely to bother. After tax and possibly childcare you'd hardly be making any extra.

Much better to have an agreement that's time limited, meaning the partner receiving the SM can decide for themselves what extra they need or want to earn and you're both free to make autonomous financial decisions.

Quite, hence the return to the solicitors to get the 'return to full time' clause removed as the ex wife could continue to increase her salary year on year but remain on 4 days and claim for SM. However I am advised that the courts will also look dimly on someone claiming the SM when their income has far exceeded the original need.

If she returned 5 days a week she would be approx £400 a month better off after deductions.. and zero childcare costs ( parents on doorstep )

She might still prefer to be 4 days a week. I do 4 days a week, as I find it a lot more plesant in terms of work-life balance than 5 days - can do one school pick up, speak to other parents or teachers, etc. Her parents get one day off and as a teacher she probably does her marking on the 5th day, rather than trying to do it with kids around.

I think that rather than saying she ought to be full time, your best argument would be that she already is working almost full time (government often counts 30 hours as full time -eg for tax credits, etc), and is earning a lot more than she was previously. And that she's given you no indication that she ever intends to go full time, so therefore you can reasonably enough expect some sort of end date rather than leaving it entirely in her hands.

I'm not expecting her to go back full time. I just want the full time clause removed as it gives the opportunity to take the proverbial, the other two clauses are more reasonable ' kids reach 18 or she starts to co-habit '. I voluntarily pay more than the prescribed CSA amount, fund all school uniforms, trips, parties etc so ultimately pay alot more than expected.

I have to be very careful when sorting finances out with her as during the original medaition/divorce proceedings she altered bank statemets to cover up what she was spending money on.. so everything has to be double checked.

How much more than CSA do you pay? If it's more than £125 a month more, then wouldn't it just be simpler to reduce that? You could also stop paying for uniforms, etc as that should really be funded by her if she's receiving child support from you.

Or are you bothered about whether it's labled as child support, or spousal maintenance?

About £40 more per month, I originally offered to pay for the uniforms. I don't want to be seen as a dad that pays the bare minimum CSA and nothing more, so happily at my discretion pay for extra things however she see it as an opportunity to send lots of emails asking for more money for new shoes or cub camps etc.. ( I also ensure they have everything they need at my house so they dont have to turn up with bags or clothes for the weekend and toys etc ) Solicitor did make the point that if the CM money goes up then that is counted towards her total income so the SM can be reduced accordingly.

AS yellowdaisies said, see how many hours per week she is working, rather than days, and see if it could be considered full time.

But you also have to factor in that spousal maintenance is to compensate for loss of earnings, particularly when taking care of the children.

How much would she be earning, if she had not been working pt previously, and if she didn't have the children most of the time (if you aren't 50%)?

I was advised by my solicitor that SM is based on need ( the gap between her income and what she says her expenditure is ) .. this it the official line i received .. Very broadly, a Judge will look at how much the recipient spouse needs to run their household. From this will then be deducted, the extent to which the recipient spouse can be expected to continue towards her or his own income need by way of salary, benefits, tax credits and receipt of child maintenance.

If there is then a shortfall between the income need and the recipient spouse’s income then an enquiry is made as to whether the other spouse can afford to meet that shortfall.

However her salary now through promotion and only working 4 days a week exceeds the full time salary she was on prior to having the children.

It's both, after a quick google, and it will vary in practice, according to the court.

But
However her salary now through promotion and only working 4 days a week exceeds the full time salary she was on prior to having the children.

How is your salary, though? It must also have increased.
How much would she expect to earn now if she hadn't had children or gone to work pt (initially less than 4 days) and time taken off?

My salary has only increased by £1500 since 2011 when the agreement was drawn up, hers has increased by £7500 largely thru promotions and changing jobs. One promotion also took place during the late stages of the divorce but was not declared until it completed otherwise it may have reduced the SM

If she had that potential earning power, how come she was PT? Why didn't you take a back seat instead?
And I wonder how much she could be earning now if she had been FT all the time.

Prior to having children she was a classroom teacher, a year after returning to work part time she was able to get a acting deputy head role, followed by two more similar roles, teaching can offer similar career progression when full time or part, she has actually overtaken her full time counterparts.

I'm amazed at what some women get. I raised my children for over 15 years alone working full time. No maintenance. My house was pristine almost show home clean. My kids dressed well and never went without. It's axing what some get away with. A day off to clean. You couldn't make up this shit

She doesn't even clean on the day off, she pays for a cleaner to come each Monday!

She's looking after his kids full time - why shouldn't she have a cleaner?

She doesn't have the kids full time, read the whole thread