Worst decision a woman could make

[Notbeingrobbed]

As a working mother with two children to support, my divorce has made me see that getting married was the worst financial decision I ever made.

I have been the higher earner so will lose a big chunk of the money that I have made throughout my life. I also have the kids to support (happy to).

My ex will get a big payout having benefitted from my income as well as his own for years.

Why would any modern woman marry? Oh, because we are all influenced by society (and hormones) to think it’s a good thing.

People say I am arguing like a man. But the law was surely designed to protect a stay-at-home mother with children from a husband who leaves. Not to protect a layabout-at-home father?

Xenia - my kids have no need for the uni debt - the x earns enough to fund this it’s just he doesn’t want to - why should he be working to make his kids lives easier at the expense of his own lifestyle and enjoyment. And the ow,s not going to encourage this as her kids benefit at the expense of mine. Sadly the x has no balls to stand up for his own kids needs or plans he had for them from the start. Well actually he still likes to take credit for their achievement just wants none of the hassle!

Given my time again I’m not sure I would have done the motherhood any different - who knows - there is a known link between emotional abuse and depression so maybe the support was never there all along
but with MH issues in my family I thought it was just me. Now I think it was trying to live up to someone else’s expectations that I could never achieve because the x wanted it all ways.

Notbeingrobbed - don’t write me off!! - I’m not out the other side yet when I’m done I’ll be able to tell you! I wanted it done long ago but each day is a part of a lesson I’m having to learn.

Whatever I have a clear conscience - you can’t buy this - my kids have had to endure some difficulties but I’m hoping in the long run this too will have done them some good! The uncertainty is a killer especially when you have done your best to do the right thing - another life lesson!

Xenia - I had all this financial info had joint accounts knew state of play of business etc but Before the affair was outed he tried to convince me marriage was just over - no one else involved - mainly because he was trying to “protect” the kids - wanted it all sorted amicably I think and then reveal OW - as it didn’t quite go like this he then got very very nasty and manipulated every bloody aspect and still is!

He didn’t need a form e from me as knew it all but I needed the company and pensions valued and in the meantime he got the house sold under our feet!

Karma is all I say!

@MissedTheBoatAgain

Yes, he works, but also does a lot of cash jobs so has a fair amount of hidden money. Yes, I have claimed everything I am entitled to but it doesn't amount to a lot in the grand scheme of things because I work too, and have done since my youngest was four otherwise I would have had no money of my own.

My XH is also making this into a competition and I have spent wasted a lot of money refuting his spurious allegations. He will be happy to drag this out and end up with nothing, to make sure that I get nothing too. He is narcissistic and is currently doing everything he can to punish me for daring to divorce him.

I'm not bitter, just very very sad, that everything I have done for the good of my family will count for nothing. And I also feel very guilty that my children will now suffer financially because I was not able to put up with his disgusting behaviour any more.

I’ve dipped in and out of this thread as it’s progressed and all I can conclude is that divorce law needs reform (and that marriage may be the worse decision a high earner - regardless of gender- can make)

I’m unmarried, childless and a (relatively) low earner. DP is a high earner and divorced. His ex has a general joint lives order and receives 50% of everything DP earns despite cohabiting with an extremely high earner. When they divorced DPs ex had been a SAHM for under 3 years and prior to that their salaries were largely equal. She has not worked for 15 years and has no incentive to ever work again. This is crazy and I have no idea how it got through (it was all done through mediation). DP has no recourse really because the outcome of going to court is a lottery.
Not surprisingly he won’t ever marry again.

Contrast to my mum who married at 18, became a trailing spouse, divorced at 35 with three kids and not a single qualification or any experience of work. Despite my dad being a high earner she got sporadic child maintenance, half the proceeds from the sale of a property and our school fees paid (that was a company perk). She used this lack of maintenance (and the geographical distance) to prevent any contact between my siblings and our dad. But she did finally get back into work (at 43) and is now financially comfortable in retirement because of hard work and saving. I worked all through uni (I had to). It impaired my overall student experience but didn’t impact on my grades and I actually learnt some valuable skills for the workplace.

Meanwhile my DSDs are growing up with an archaic view of what it means to be a woman today.
I agree entirely with Xenia when she says:
I would like a 50/50 presumption of care and residence of children unless the court or parents agree otherwise which would help all those fathers denied any contact and would help those full time wokring mothers who would like 50% or even in my case 10% would have been very helpful.

This has got to be the best solution for most parents but most importantly their children.

The thread shows how many different situations there are and how hard it is go have one set of rules or even amend the existing rules to make them fairer on everyone.

heidi, he could probably have a joint lives order amended now his ex is living with another high earner perhaps but I agree a lot of money goes on judges and also if she has less money his children with her might suffer which is perfectly good reason not to change even if you are over paying someone.

green, I see - yes it is hard to value companies and we instead just worked for ourselves etc so all very easy to know about what profits we were making and we decided with 20+ y ears contributions each our pensions were about the same within 20 or more years of contributions to go so just left them alone unvalued and each kept our own. Those who don't work it may be worth having your husbands paying into a pension for you. My mother had her teacher's pension but then when she stopped work my father put some of his earnings into a pension for her in her name (they were still married when she died but it is the sort of thing the working spouse will often do for the other one).

(Side issue, but on student debt I don't think we can blame the divorcing husband for not paying student fees. I would say 99% of people think I am an utter fool to pay them because most students never have to pay all the debt back anyway and it is a perfectly rational choice to think if a student is taking the loan they might make a wiser decision about courses than someone like my lost who get funded)

Yes, he works, but also does a lot of cash jobs so has a fair amount of hidden money

Guess he is Self Employed then? That makes it more difficult to trace. Seems to be a big issue for CMS too.

My XH is also making this into a competition and I have spent wasted a lot of money refuting his spurious allegations. He will be happy to drag this out and end up with nothing, to make sure that I get nothing too. He is narcissistic and is currently doing everything he can to punish me for daring to divorce him

Identical to my divorce. I was the applicant for the Divorce, but Ex wife was applicant for Financial Settlement as she did not like any of the offers I made. He logic was that I must hand over everything as I was one that started the Divorce against her wishes. She even hid the Marriage Certificate to try and block the Divorce. All that did was to delay the inevitable and increase the costs.

She bounced from one Solicitor to another as Judges kept awarding cost orders in my favour. However, the FDR is where it all went wrong. Judge in a hurry to get rid of of stated that Ex Wife should receive Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance. That's all she wanted to hear and was happy to let things go all the way to a Final Hearing on the assumption that Judge at Final Hearing would say same.

Get the feeling that her last Solicitor (number 4) also egged her on and told her that Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance was in the bag. They even had the cheek to include the FDR Judges comments in the Open Offer that was presented on the day in contradiction to the FPR rules that FDR is a without prejudice hearing.

Outcome at Final Hearing was very different. I was awarded my legal costs and Judge dismissed the application for Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance on basis that Ex Wife was under 50, in good health and already had a Job and asset split I had offered reflected that she would never be able to earn same as myself.

Overall Legal cost was around 35K. Most of that was deducted from my proposed Capital settlement so Ex is much worse off than had she not involved the Courts. Made me laugh at the time, but I would still rather have seen the money go into her pocket than Legal.

Good luck, but sounds like you could be in for a long bumpy ride.

I would never get married again, it's madness. I lost half my house to my first (idle) husband and luckily nothing to second as we did it all online and agreed a not too horrific settlement.
I;d never get married again. I have my own home, pensions and savings and I'm not about to lose any of them to another man.
Live out boyfriend with his own home would be ok.

Missed the more you give away about your case the more it becomes apparent the it was the professionals in your case solicitor and judge that did your Xw a disservice.

The judge in a hurry and solicitors working off your wife’s emotions. I can’t recall whether you’ve said but I hope you are supporting your Sd in some way even though she is over 18 and that she hasn’t lost out as a result of divorce.

You were lucky you also had a good barristers at your court hearing!

Missed the more you give away about your case the more it becomes apparent the it was the professionals in your case solicitor and judge that did your Xw a disservice

Ex did herself no favours and jumped from one solicitor to another. On to No. 4 by time Final Hearing took place and her Barrister had only been appointed a few days earlier so did not know the case backwards like my Barrister. She was the applicant for the Financial Order, but had no evidence to support what she said and what she thought she was entitled to.

Three failed MPS due to lack of documentation resulting in 3 Cost Orders in my favour.

Ex never provided the bank statements she was told to do so at FDA. You don't need a Degree in Law to work out why someone does not want to show their bank statements. It's obvious that they are hiding money.

At last minute tried to claim a back problem that she had had for 9 years prevented her from working. Garbage. Not mentioned on Form E and she was working at the time and attending the local Gym! How can someone attend the Gym with a 9 year back problem.

It was obvious to Judge at the outset who the liar was - the ex wife applicant. Think Judge (female) had already made their mind up after my Barrister's opening remarks that highlighted; Ex had 3 Cost Orders against her, had not complied with FDA order to provide bank statements and was onto solicitor No. 4. The killer statement from my Barrister was:

"Although my client is the Respondent and under no obligation to disprove what the Applicant has stated the fact that he has documents that disprove all of the Applicants statements demonstrates clearly the most credible Party in these proceedings"

Ex received a settlement that was substantially less than what I had offered when I filed for Divorce as Judge subtracted my legal costs and the cost orders from my suggested figure. Judge also took my word for what wife had not disclosed based on my bank statements showing the transfers to her accounts.

Made me laugh at the time. However, upon reflection I would have rather seen the money go into Ex's pocket as opposed to Legal, but she made into a contest and lost.

SD got through her University. I paid between 2013 and 2015 and half of 2016. Half I did not pay was due to unemployment. However, my parents helped and I have subsequently repaid them. Paid in 2017 till end of her studies.

Ex wife and SD's biological mother did not pay anything towards her daughters Uni costs, but could find money to send to her family overseas? That came out in the Final Hearing too.

I've been reading this thread with interest. (Not read the entire thing).
For me getting married was a financial mistake. I simply didn't think through, or consider the financial and legal implication. I was naive and got swept up in the idea of marriage and family.

Briefly, got married to ex-DH, a mistake as our relationship wasn't good by that point.

He started sleeping with someone else soon after. During this time we bought a house. Bought entirely from the sale of my flat and with help from my parents. My ex-DH didn't put anything into the house. I put his name on the deeds.

A short time after moving in, his affair all came out and we separated and eventually divorced.

I have been the sahp. He has walked away with tens of thousands of pounds from a property he put nothing into. He came into the marriage with no assets.

I have overall financial and parental responsibility for the children and I do basically everything. Since we divorced he has also inherited a large amount of money .
I definitely now would think very carefully before getting married and will caution my children (if/when the time comes). I've lost a lot of money (For myself and children) and have more debt because of ex-H financial claims.

I had no idea that the cost of divorcing would be so much. Also that ex-DH would be so ruthless about putting his needs above those of his children. On top of that he has for years placed the entire blame for the breakdown of relationship on me.

Is it true that even if we hadn't been married he could still have made financial claims.

I’m not really sure it’s marriage that’s the issue it’s that some people are blinded by greed and ego and lack a shred of decency even when their own children are involved.

If they are this callous all I can say is that they must have some very deep issues that they cannot deal with even for the sake of their children.

Missed your xw was dishonest but the solicitor representing her must have been aware of this but chose to put the fee above her own integrity (assuming it’s a female here). The judge who also you said dismissed the case too quickly was also at fault. Had they spent more time and assessed the facts correctly your case may have been over more quickly and without court.

Lucky for you you didn’t lose out financially but in another situation this judge and solicitor may have cost someone their family home!

Missed your xw was dishonest but the solicitor representing her must have been aware of this but chose to put the fee above her own integrity (assuming it’s a female here)

Ex did not help herself by no giving her Solicitors the full and correct story. My solicitor would never put anything thing in writing without proof that what I was saying was correct.

Ex's solicitors (all 4 of them) seemed to type whatever she told them even though I had documents to prove her statements were wrong? Either she ignored their advice and Solicitors just went along with what she said for easy money?

After I was all over it came out that my ex was one of the most difficult clients the Solicitors had ever dealt with.

Still a waste of money and I would have rather seen the money go to Ex than legal fees.

Deadsouls, you ask if you had not been married would it have differed. If you had not married and had still put the property in joint names without setting out you had a bigger share then I am afraid it would have been the same. Whether you were married orn ot if your parents had made a loan to you not a gift (if the mortgage company allowed that) then the loans are deducted (all loans) before working out what is divided but fundamentally if you had not married but had put the only asset into joint names that is a gift to him that you cannot take back later so yes you would be in a similar position but without rights to claim spousal maintenance.

Whereas had you say £100k in savings solely in your own name but not in a joint names house and then split up and were unmarried (under English law - am assuming England not Scotland here) then unmarried you keep the £100k and married in most cases you do.

For many women int he UK marrying remains a financially sensible thing to do as most earn less than their husband, have fewer assets, marry someone older and often go part time or stop work when a baby comes. Anyone in that category is better off married than living together. However more and more women are earning more than their husbands, buying a property sooner, more women than men go to university these days and women under 30 on average earn more than men now in the UK (women sometimes settle down and are a bit more sensible at a younger age than young men although I know that sounds a bit sexist and it probably evens out over the years).

more women than men go to university these days and women under 30 on average earn more than men now in the UK

Wow. Maybe I was born too soon. So today's generation of young men can look forward to being house husbands? Guess over time everything balances out.

You just can’t believe it, can you? Yet this is the emerging picture. I even worked part time at stages for the kids and earned more than hubby. Not so difficult.

@Notbeingrobbed I would march with you!! I tell any young woman that asks for advice NOT to get married if they're already independent and expecting to earn a decent amount.

The only thing stopping me from getting a divorce is that I'd lose the house that I l'd found AND put the deposit down only to not be able to afford another.

If you work with our fucking socks off and your partner isn't ambitious nor doesn't care enough to earn a salary that would feed his family WHY THE FUCK should I compensate that.

Can I ask what settlement was awarded on your split. I have more than a vested interest...

I'ts been a gradual change. Back in the 1940s they had to give a higher pass mark to girls at 11 in the 11+ grammar school exam my parents did as otherwise you would get far many girls than boys. In those days by O levels/GCSE the boys caught up as girls were socially pressured to give up work and just marry. Then girls started doing better than boys at GCSE and then A level (although the issue of course work is slightly relevant there as some boys are last minute merchants doing better on a final exam only) and now in terms of getting into university too. Also once there girls tend to work a bit harder and boys get drunk.

2018 - 100,000 more women than men applying to university for example www.independent.co.uk/news/education/gender-gap-university-students-men-women-applications-uk-a8442941.html

In the 1890s my great aunt had to be a nurse. She could not be a solicitor like her brother as because she was a woman she was not allowed to be a solicitor - it was against the law. We have come along way but even so women still only have 20% of positions of power so I don't think men need to worry too much as yet and if we get equality then that's fine too - doesn't mean anyone has to be a house husband. I earned ultimately 10x what my husband earned but we both worked full time.

Also once there girls tend to work a bit harder and boys get drunk

I can buy that.

I attended University twice. First time was Engineering Degree. Highest marks were awarded to two girls. Second time was MBA. Again highest mark was awarded to one of the girls. In both cases the girls were massively outnumbered by boys.

Can I ask what settlement was awarded on your split. I have more than a vested interest

Unlikely that two divorced will ever be identical circumstances. So listening to what others received might not be much help?

There’s still a massive gender pay gap later but that’s because of the whole picture of women giving up work to raise kids, or more likely cutting back. Then they are discriminated against for doing that by the (usually) male hierarchy.

I wouldn’t advise a daughter to quit her work ever but to always keep a hand in at least. I wouldn’t advise a son to be a house husband either. You need to stand on your own two feet.

@namechange0983 the longer you hang on the worse it gets - a longer marriage is treated more harshly in law than a short one! No time off for “good” behaviour. Get out when you can!

Here’s what I’m looking to lose after a 20-year stretch (no settlement yet): The £200k plus deposit I put on the family house (apparently equal to £0k from hubby), £50k plus savings, £35k gift from parents, £200k plus of pension pot (to be decided). I’ve worked throughout marriage and support the kids who live with me 100% of the time.

At least I have a job and can support us all. We should be marching! This should change. Nobody should be getting a lump sum just for marrying and yet people don’t realise this is happening.

I wouldn’t advise a daughter to quit her work ever but to always keep a hand in at least. I wouldn’t advise a son to be a house husband either. You need to stand on your own two feet

If a couple decides not to have children that would work. If not who is meant to look after the Children? In the previous generations it seemed to be the Grandparents helping out until children were at Nursery age.

Nobody should be getting a lump sum just for marrying and yet people don’t realise this is happening

It always will happen. When is this myth that asset split is based solely on who paid for what going to disappear from this Website?

Wish I could remember the ruling that was made which made it clear there can be no distinction between Bread Winner and Home Maker

The ruling was Wright vs Wright but that doesn’t make it right! That’s my point.

Who looks after the children? You share, you juggle days and shifts etc - as I think you mentioned your parents doing - and you pay for childcare when you need it. I took two stints of maternity leave, funded by my savings as well as pay.

School hours and holidays make it difficult but there are always options. The Wright vs Wright ruling also stated correctly that nobody with a child over seven has an excuse for not working some of the time!

Nobody has really mentioned something that struck me long ago - that many men do not step up and do their share of childrearing. Or rather, that’s all meant to be Ok because the wife will be given a chunk of divorce cash for doing it! But it’s not OK as it holds back women in the workplace.

Xenia makes a really valid observation about generational shifts in workplace and career opportunities.

We are moving towards a situation were young couples earn the same amount, work the same amount, have portfolio careers and have broadly the same amount of capital (usually not a lot for generation rent). I just don’t see how or why it is sensible for either party to sacrifice their career because you will just end up fighting over x% of not a lot. The IHT issue seems only to be pertinent to older couples with big pensions and lots of equity. Most millennials don’t see this as an attainable future for them. Plus let’s face it, most people will have more than one significant relationship in their life.

Hitching your wagon to somebody in the expectation that it is for life, he/she will be able to keep you in clover on a single income, he/she will never be unemployed, that one person can save a half decent pension for 2 etc is reckless. As is letting somebody hitch their wagon to you in these circumstances.

So I don’t know why we continue to uphold the legal basis for this arrangement. It encourages feckless and reckless decision making and is out of step with the attitudes of people who value financial independence and believe in planning for the future. Why are we encouraging people to do this?

The very fact that nobody can get straight forward advice on what to expect on divorce without going to a solicitor is telling. Nobody knows what they are letting themselves in for when they marry. So my view that prenups should be allowed still stands. Marriage involves potentially signing away a lot of money for some people and the risk of acquiring a workshy/ parentingshy adult dependent hell bent on doing as little as possible (as a breadwinner or homemaker). I can’t imagine another scenario where you are making such a big financial commitment comes with so little comprehension by both parties and no requirement to clarify it.

Hear hear.

@user1492863869
Whilst I agree with you that I think that prenuptial agreements would be useful to at the very least make sure that anybody considering marriage is able to make an informed decision.

I fundamentally disagree with this though:
Hitching your wagon to somebody in the expectation that it is for life, he/she will be able to keep you in clover on a single income, he/she will never be unemployed, that one person can save a half decent pension for 2 etc is reckless. As is letting somebody hitch their wagon to you in these circumstances.
I think it is incredibly naive to assume that people won't want to "hitch their wagon" to their partner to some extent as even if both have high paying careers, most families will choose to pool their assets to afford a standard of life that they otherwise wouldn't be able to afford individually. This isn't "reckless" but a key element of partnership, marriage and family that many would recognise and endorse.

The extent to which we depend on another person and combine our financial lives is important for each individual to carefully consider alongside what could happen in the event of divorce. It is not automatically "reckless" for someone to choose to be a SAHP or sacrifice their career for their family as in some cases there are enough assets to go round in the event of divorce, protection in place regarding unemployment/illness and life insurance etc. As a SAHM I have done all of the above and more in order to secure my financial position so I would love to hear how I'm "reckless" or haven't planned for the future. The law as it stands has allowed me to adopt a role that suited me and my family's ideology.

I would argue that actually the most reckless on this thread have been those who have entered blindly into marriage and then been shocked and disappointed when divorce has meant that they have had to split the marital assets.