Ex wants annulment several years after divorce - should I be suspicious?

[SansaryaAgain]

Ex-DH and I divorced amicably enough 8 years ago. He remarried some years ago and we lost touch.

He recently contacted me to say his wife is keen for us to "confirm our divorce" with the church, and shortly afterwards I got some paperwork from the church office. I told him I would look at it. I wasn't sure exactly what confirming our divorce involved but figured it couldn't be an annulment as we wouldn't be eligible for one.

However, it is an annulment he's after. He's claiming it on grounds of "severe mutual lack of judgement", which I find odd as we were both adults at the time we married. We drifted apart and realised we'd made a mistake, but I didn't think that was grounds for annulment!

Anyway what I'd really like to know is if we get the annulment, could he use it to argue that, as our marriage is void, the terms of our divorce are invalid and demand back the financial settlement I got? I know there are several solicitors on MN, so am hoping one can answer my question.

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

Village gossip? That’s a bit of an assumption. A wrong one too. It is a family member.

But you carry on telling me what I know/don’t know if it makes you feel better 😂

[donquixotedelamancha]

Anyway what I'd really like to know is if we get the annulment, could he use it to argue that, as our marriage is void, the terms of our divorce are invalid and demand back the financial settlement I got?

Maybe, if he's arguing some severe lack of mental capacity; but I don't think that is the point. There are no grounds for an annulment- just write the truth....

we were both adults at the time we married. We drifted apart and realised we'd made a mistake

...then send it directly to the church investigator.

[Jaxhog]

Just say no, you wish him well but this document isn't something you can in honesty sign.
This. It also puts the ball in his court to explain why he wants you to lie for him.

[YetAnotherSpartacus]

Not commenting on the settlement issue, but frankly, I'd bin those forms on the moral grounds that they compel you to lie (venial sin that :)). They might fulfil his fantasies and those of his new wife (wonder what her investment is), as well as give them certain benefits, but it's not your role to provide the grounds for this. He/they might well go ahead anyway, but it wouldn't have your signature and therefore implicit agreement re any circumstances that involve you.

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

Otterseatpuffinsdontthey

I’m not sure what you’re trying to tell me? Their marriage ceremony wasn’t legal so it’s not comparable with the op’s situation.

If people want the legal rights that come with marriage they need to make sure they have a marriage that is recognised as lawful by the state. That’s good advice and applies to anyone getting married anywhere but particularly where people have a religious (or spiritual) ceremony and haven’t checked it is definitely legally binding. That happens in this country.

Whether Mick Jagger behaved badly or tried to wheedle out of paying a fair amount is irrelevant and I haven’t posted an opinion on that.

Some people really don’t understand what constitutes the law in the UK. Baffling!

[ladystarkers]

Just refuse.

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

This is interesting: www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/pope-francis-reforms-annulment-process-9-things-to-know-and-share

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

Not necessarily, sooper. CofE schools tend to ask for church attendance. Many if not most RC ones will only ask for the certificate of baptism.

The exception tends to be in areas where there are big pressures on school places and there may be hundreds of baptised children applying for the same 30places.

[Sprinklestar]

How ridiculous. And insulting! I'd be tempted to write back and say that the document is full of mistakes as there was nothing wrong with your ex's judgement when you were married... But then I don't do religion and certainly have no time for the church thinking it has more legal powers than the courts. Pathetic!

[GeorgeTheHamster]

It's definitely something to do with the Catholic Church. Are they after school places?

If you have a court order confirming the financial settlement then this can't be overturned now, and could never be overturned by the Church. Only maintenance remains variable - get the order out and look at the final few paras re dismissal of claims.

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

It’s very childish but I’m wondering if RC1967 is the Janet of the Catholic Church...

[namechange2222]

sooperdooper as part of the admission into our local RC schools I don't remember the parents religion or marital status being asked for. Yes, you're correct that the child needs to be attending mass and, of course, be baptised but a child could do this without having a RC parent. Many RC baptised children do not live with RC parents, ( think of children in care as an example) They are not penalised as long as a care giver enables them to attend mass

[SansaryaAgain]

Ex-SIL who I am still close to (not ex-H's sister but his brother's wife), now tells me that ex-H has informed them the church may want to speak to them, as witnesses who knew both of us. However, they live abroad and ex-H has not seen his brother in person for 15 years.

Although my Catholicism is very lapsed, I cannot in good conscience lie and say that lack of judgement came into play here. In fact it isn't just his lack of judgement that he's cited, but "mutual" lack of judgement.

His wife knew the situation before they married and made her choice. It's a bit rich to expect me to go along with a lie now!

[Otterseatpuffinsdontthey]

Movingon
Oh God - I wish I was as clever as you!
Try another angle, or two:
MORALS
ULTERIOR MOTIVE(S)

[NC4now]

Well that’s what it comes down to. Telling the truth. The motive is fairly irrelevant to you.
If you can’t support the assertion that it was poor judgement, then don’t.

[OVienna]

I know someone who grew up in the US whose divorced parents were granted an annulment but she was apparently declared 'legitimate'. It's not uncommon in the US (where I grew up too) but I have never heard of it here. I am confident there would be no bearing on your financial settlement but I agree it's an offensive way to characterise your relationship and I can see why you wouldn't want to sign it. I think he can proceed without your consent. You would be well within your rights not to get involved.

[OVienna]

If they are conducting a full investigation I would decline to participate. That seems crazy. I can't think what he'd be getting out if this. All very weird.

[bastardkitty]

I am wondering if he lied about being divorced in order to get married in church, and has created some complicated story because he got found out.

[OVienna]

I am very cynical and I would also wonder if he's looking for some sort of financial play here. Did your SIL know WHY he was pursuing it? I can't see how a financial claim would succeed but I might be paranoid enough to dig my agreement out and have a quick chat with my solicitor.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

It’s the mutual bit that’s really galling isn’t it. It would be one thing that he’s lying about lacking the mental capacity to agree to marriage but suggesting you didn’t either is offensive.

Don’t lie. As far as I know it’s up to him to prove he lacked the mental capacity to understand what the sacrament involved. If she’s that bothered about taking communion, she should have sorted this before she married or can get her own marriage annulled.

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

Otterseatpuffinsdontthey I honestly don’t know what your issue is but perhaps you should calm down?

[SansaryaAgain]

Did your SIL know WHY he was pursuing it?

Because his wife is Catholic and wants to be able to take communion and participate in "other church activities" (whatever those may be) and can't while she's married to him, who's still married to me "in the eyes of God". Apparently she's been asking for a while but he's only just got around to doing it.

[AtrociousCircumstance]

Don’t sign it. It’s full of lies and besides their life is nothing to do with yours. You have no responsibility to give one moments thought to anything to do with them. You are certainly not obligated to engage in this charade at all.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

Actually, she probably can’t get it annulled, since they haven’t received the sacrement. She could leave him though.

[IWannaSeeHowItEnds]

Hell would freeze over before I agreed to this!
Just because he wants it, you are under no obligation to indulge his whims. Rewriting your personal history together is insulting.
I'd get legal advice and I would fight tooth and nail to block this - outrageous that the church can okay it without your consent and without you having deceived him into entering the marriage. To me, fraud is the only legitimate grounds for annulment.

Anyway, I'd imagine that if you consent, you may leave yourself open to financial repercussions, but if you don't and he gets it anyway, it would have no bearing on uput settlement because as far as you have agreed, you are divorced!