daft financial settlement offer?

[pinkhalf]

Divorcing husband. I have just got his first without prejudice offer on finance.

Its rubbish, I think. 50/50 on equity, he keeps his pensions, his investments, and his investment in his mothers house. We split debts equally.

Me? I get to keep my pension. 50 per cent of the house. Or I can buy him out for around 170000 to avoid disrupting our daughters life.

I am the main carer for our child who will start school next year - no read sole carer at the moment as he does no over nights. I work part time. I earn a third of what he does, and he works for a financial fund with bonuses.We were married for seven years, but had a realtionship for 10 years before.

So the offer is laughable - but really, is it normal to have such stupid offers? I mean, I assume I'm due more than this. Its not really an attempt to agree anything - it cant be anything that a court would agree, given we have a childand I'm going to struggle to raise a mortgage sufficient to stay in London....

is this just standard greedy high earner bullshit?

[TheFormidableMrsC]

It's not a dilemma at all. You need to start mediation, you will have to do that anyway as the court expects it. Your solicitor can refer you and get the ball rolling. Your ex can refuse, of course, however, this will reflect badly on him in the longer term. You need to consider the housing needs of yourself and your children, your future ability to earn, the fact you DO have a claim on half his pension. He will have to provide valuations of those anyway and not just pie in the sky figures that he thinks he can pull out of thin air. Spousal maintenance should be claimable for a period and obviously child maintenance. Really, the best thing you can do is sit with your solicitor and go through and make a list of proposals that work for you. Then take it to mediation. Apply for the schools, just carry on as "normal". This isn't going to be resolved overnight thus you must get on and do all the things you would have done if he had been there. I think it is highly unlikely you will be forced to sell the house under these circumstances, especially as he has other properties (all of which belong in the marital pot, however much he dislikes that notion).

[MisForMumNotMaid]

You sound like you're actually coming from quite a strong place emotionally. I think all the replies offer a rare for mumsnet unanimous 'its a crazy offer' response.

I'm sure Its designed to unsettle you and reduce your expectations.

It also reads to me as though staying in the house at least throughout your DD's school years is a very high priority for you.

Do you have the possibility of raising any cash to have as a negotiating tool to settle? I'm thinking from the angle some people value £50k in their pocket as more than 50% of a £250k pension. If you could raise some cash to meet his cash desire and keep a fair percentage of the pension/ investments would that be a better deal for you. Something for under your hat but its all things to throw around whilst your working your way towards meeting your needs.

I'm sorry use of the term 'move on' has caused such offence. I never ment to imply move on at the expense of need or that moving on itself is an easy or quick process.

[ALaughAMinute]

You might be entitled to stay in the house until your DC is eighteen. The law says the needs of your child must come first. Don't agree to anything until you get the advice of a good lawyer.

[pinkhalf]

I think I could raise something. I need financial advice - an IFA? If anyone has a good suggestion on that front I would be glad to hear it.

MrsC, it is a good point about carrying on as normal. I shall do just that. We did start mediation but I had to call a halt on that because of his conduct towards our child. I wonder if it could be restarted. I am not frightened of court though he threatens it. His current offer is so silly however that he couldn't go to court on that basis.

I am completely accepting of the divorce, we could never be together again. Obviously that is sad but it could not carry on.

[smoothieooo]

That's a shabby offer Pink - and I agree with the proposal that your counter-offer should be to ask for at least 95% of the equity of the house as a starting point.

I'm still mulling over my STB-exH's offer which is not unreasonable - he will pay the mortgage until the youngest DC is 18 (he's currently 15.5) then we will sell and split the equity 60:40 in my favour. It will be a struggle to get a mortgage (I'll be 51 by then) even with a sizeable deposit and I don't really want to move away from my area in N. London/Middlesex...

I'm a huge fan of anything MrsC has to say too!

[LalaDipsey]

Hi, sorry to butt in but hope I can contribute too - what do you mean by a clean break?
I have just put an offer to STBXH. We have £60k equity, he has a few grand in the bank, I have a few grand of debt, his pensions are worth maybe £10-£20k more than mine. I have just offered him £7k for him to sign the house to me. He has asked for a clean break and I don't really understand?? We have 3dc under 6.
My understanding to OP is that equity won't be split 50/50 when there are children needing the home and especially when they are young. My solicitor kind of said there's 5 of us (me, H and 3dc) so equity should at a max for him be 20%.
I agree his offer is ludicrous but also think once an offer is on the table at least you can start negotiating - even with the small amount I and H are negotiating over it has taken a long time to get to the position where there's an offer and it is a bit of a relief!

[DeoGratias]

My ex got 60% as I earned more. Why at 38 with only a few years out of law could you not go back to full time work and support yourself and even out earn your other half (writing as a woman who paid a lot out to a man here and think divorce law is terribly unfair on higher earners).

[DivorceAlchemist]

Has full financial disclosure taken place yet? Form Es completed and exchanged?

[pinkhalf]

We have made voluntary from e disclosure. The financial disclosure does not seem incomplete to my eye. It does skate over a few areas, namely bonus. These could be six fugure sums.

I am not adverse to returning to work full time of course once our child is in school. The issue being I will have been out of the most high earning field for 13 years and therefore I wonder as to the practicality of such a return. The knock on effects of such jobs are pulling all nighters and very long hours at the office requiring nannies to take of the child. Doubtful that is really in the best interests of our child, particularly since current employment offers great flexibility interms of hours and working from home. I would say that I am at the top end of my current field, however, with scope for promotion. I would have to retrain in another - ok possible perhaps - but that cant be done in the space of year or so. This has to be contrasted with his proposed contact arrangements where I do the donkey work during the week and he gets the child at the weekends. Mmm.

Further, whether the law is unfair on higher earners is moot. This offer is unreasonable even by current standards. I wouldn't aim to take everything from this man but his bum offer suggests that rather stupidly, it may actually be in my best interests to do so. Either it is calculated to be stupid or drive me to mediation, I dont know.

[pinkhalf]

I think his view is that this is sexuality equality. I earned this, you earned that. I keep my things you keep yours. Child? Nothing except legally set mimimum.

I have had a relationship with him for nearly 20 years.

[pinkhalf]

He has only made this offer after I threatened him with maintenance pending suit. He refused to pay reasonable sums to maintain the child and the house. So he has to pay that now and wants out before he has even less resource to pay the lawyers.

[tribpot]

It has nothing to do with sexual equality - if I were divorcing my DH the situation would be reversed, i.e. he is the SAHD and I am the breadwinner. It's about recognising long term financial impacts on the partnership if these are being borne disproportionately by one member of the partnership. You could have both gone back to work part time when your child was born and shared all childcare responsibilities equally. You both chose a different arrangement of responsibilities. Those come with penalties. If he had wanted to avoid this situation now he should have made a salary sacrifice earlier.

Unfortunately I think you may have the wrong attitude to this negotiation if you are now looking to offer a compromise. His offer seems to be an extreme position from which he can negotiate a few concessions and still reach the position he he really wants. If you start from a position of compromise you are going to get dragged much further towards his desired position than your own.

[TheFormidableMrsC]

tribpot is absolutely right, compromise is not a word that should be passing your lips at this stage. You can think it, sure, but don't dare say it! I was perfectly willing to compromise, indeed offered a very reasonable split that would have seen my ex walk away with a sizeable chunk of the equity and given me a chance to get back on my feet professionally and emotionally. He said no. He fucked up. I would suggest a hardball approach, the compromise needs to come from him, not you. He is not thinking about the best interests of your child and most certainly not you. This is all about him. In court, your child comes first.

[DeoGratias]

Many people who to go court spend all the sum they actually have to split between them on lawyers and don't get a penny so I would not rush to avoid compromises. We negotiated directly at home and yes his 60% might be high but it would have cost us the differnce between mty offer and his (which was higher than 60% as he wanted maintenance for life as well despite working full time) to litigate the issue. Better the spouse has the money than lawyers surely?

[TheFormidableMrsC]

DeoGratias, I am not suggesting the OP rushes to court, however, I don't think that she should be seen to be openly compromising at the moment. My view is that she would be better working out an offer to her ex that suits her and working from there. He is clearly trying to avoid his responsibilities and at this time, she is vulnerable to exploitation.

It was slightly different for me as I was a self-representing litigant and did not have solicitor/barrister fees. However, sometimes the court route is unavoidable when you are dealing with somebody who is absolutely not prepared to negotiate or budge an inch. I would have given anything to avoid it, it was an absolute nightmare and has cost me two years of my life I will never get back. However, it was the right thing to do and the outcome I achieved justified it.

I am hopeful that the OP can make some progress via mediation. It really is the best way all around...but it has to be fair and the child absolutely must come first.

[financialwizard]

Hmm interesting that I came across this because I think my ex is just about to go that route and our circumstances are almost identical. Whilst I do actually want him to have some money from the house so that he can buy a property where we live I can't agree to a 50/50 split of the equity because the reality is I am going to need at least 86% of it to enable me to buy a property that can house the children. My mortgage borrowing power is approximately 33% of his and I need a bigger property because one of my children was born from a previous screwed up marriage (great I am).

I am also self representing when it comes to the financial side of things but have had legal advice on what my starting point should be, and my solicitor advised 100% of the equity and 50% of his pension which seems overly harsh given that we have only been married 7 years.

I am going for a clean break order though because in the future I could inherit quite significantly if my grandparents or parents don't need care (unlikely - Mum is not well now).

Personally I think it is the unknown that is stressing me out more than anything. At least if I knew what he wanted I could counter it.

[pinkhalf]

I am so utterly tired. He has now offered 55/45 and the rest of the terms are the same, with a clean break. This does nothing for me or his daughter. I know its bullshit but the question is what I do now.

He threatens to take me to court on a 50 per cent basis if I refuse this "generous" offer (what a threat I dont think). In effect, I have wasted my time and effort trying to broker an agreement with this man that does not go to court.

I have to take him to court. I don't see that I can get a reasonable offer out of him. His offer is exactly the same with a small adjustment on the split on the basis that I can suddenly earn a six figure sum with a young child. That won't happen.

He is also taking me to court about child access and wants 50 per cent even though his behaviour suggests he should only have supervised contact and I can't ever see us having an amicable relationship take make a shared care relationship work - another drain on me. I am so utterly tired and I have run out of money. I can't afford to accept his offer but I don't see how I can carry on like this. I can't run two court cases but each are vital. I'm pretty depressed currently, I've injured my back and feel utterly bullied.

I really want to cut to the chase and get on with it - anyone else have experience of a DH with his head in the sand about finance. How did you resolve it? I don't want six months of incremental offers where he grinds me down.

[pootlebug]

I think he is trying to set a low benchmark so that when he comes back with his next (better, but still not great) offer, you think to yourself that it's so much better so accept it. Don't fall for it!

[pinkhalf]

Oh its crap - really bad. I think the issue is that I know a court won't sign off on it. He must think I'm cracked if I will. So why waste the time by making the same offer with a very small adjustment? It's wastes my time and his.

[ThisIsStartingToBoreMe]

Why does his behaviour suggest he should only have supervised access?

[AyeAmarok]

He's probably only suggesting 50% contact to avoid paying maintenance for the children. Don't fall for it.

[pinkhalf]

The authorities suggest it should be supervised - I'm okay with this. He isn't.

[ThisIsStartingToBoreMe]

What authorities

[DeoGratias]

My ex got 59% of joint assets but I had always worked full time and earned more. There is a shortage at present of good solicitors to work full time - you might find it is better for your child and family and finances if you go back full time now. I always worked full time as a lawyer when the children were babies even . It is not impossible to achieve. That way you could get a mortgage to release £170k equity from the home to buy out our husband's share perhaps?

Also how much are the investments? 55% split in the house for someone fairly young like you are with about 30 years of working life ahead of you in high paid work as a solicitor is not too bad a deal. Clean breaks are psychologically better.

I suspect the court will not order supervised contact only but who knows

[tbtc20]

Sorry to hijack this thread, but there seem to be some experienced and knowledgeable people here.

I am mid-divorce. Decree nisi has been filed. I've submitted Form E.
I am leaving an EA marriage. He has thrown around all manner of threats, most of which are bollocks, but the ones regarding our 2 children (6 & 16) do keep me awake at night.

Background - I have always been the main breadwinner, have a modest pension. I work full time from home.

He has increasingly worked less and less and thus been more and more dependent on me.

He claims he will say he gave up his job prospects in order to care for the children. He says he has grave concerns about how I will care for DS2.

So, he is claiming to hold the more traditional female role.

Of course, the thought of my children not living with me is unbearable.
FWIW, I have never suggested to him that I would fight him for anything more than 50:50 - it's him who started this war.

The reality is that he barely works at the moment.
I do pretty much all of the housework and house admin. I take DS1 to the bus in town every morning and also do most of the pick ups (he's at 6th form).

On days he's working (about 5 so far this year) I also sort DS2 out. Working from home gives me flexibility and I use after school club. As I work for a US company I am often working in the late evening.

He did indeed give up a nice p/t job - IN ORDER TO GO TRAVELLING FOR 3 MONTHS.

Essentially he has a Nanny like role. He's using DS2 as a pawn at the moment, which is heartbreaking, but also highlights just what he thinks SAHDs do e.g. he only ever used to be DS2 to bed unless I was not there ie default was Mum, but he was happy to step in. Now DS2 always asks for Daddy, so he puts him to bed. I then go around the house finishing off what is actually putting children to bed ie putting the toothbrush and paste back where it goes, picking clothes up off the floor, tidying up, books back on shelf etc. He thinks putting him to bed is getting him to brush his teeth and reading him a story. Happy happy DS2 - isn't made to wash, doesn't put his clothes away etc. You can see why Daddy's the goody.

I'm just so worried as the full time worker he's going to find some way to have the kids (and thus the house)

OMG..this is an essay. Feeling like I shouldn't send it now...but hey it's been cathartic to write it.