Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Divorce/separation

Here you'll find divorce help and support from other Mners. For legal advice, you may find Advice Now guides useful.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Original poster

myth or truth? Continuing a similar lifestyle

111 replies

almostdivorcedeek · 04/02/2019 18:14

STBX has a very good lifestyle, he earns about £70 000 a year more than me, I was the stay at home parent to our DC who have now all reached over the age of 18. I do work now - 34 hours a week but obviously do not earn anywhere near as much as him. I am literally living hand to mouth each month. I am entitled to a very small amount of WTC but nothing else. I am constantly counting the pennies.

Obviously over the years while he was building his career I was there supporting him especially when he was frequently away, helped with his studying etc.... We had been together over 30 years - married for most of them.

I don't think I am after spousal maintenance but just wondered if I was entitled to anything extra to help make my life a little easier. I'm not expecting steak and champagne every night, but I am in no way living a the life I used to have. He does not want to use mediation or solicitors, mind you I couldn't afford a solicitor anyway!

OP posts:

ItMustBeBedtimeSurely · 04/02/2019 18:20

There's a reason he doesn't want to use solicitors...

You need to hire one asap. It will cost you a lot more in the long run if you don't.

TwitterQueen1 · 04/02/2019 18:20

You MUST see a solicitor. Yes it will cost a lot but believe me, you will get it back in spades from a properly negotiated settlement. Of course he doesn't want to use solicitors - because he will bamboozle you into an unfair settlement. Think about pensions for example. I'll be he was putting in hundreds of pounds each month for his, backed up by company contributions. Do you actually have a pension.

Seriously - USE A SOLICITOR!

Giraffey1 · 04/02/2019 18:26

No wonder he doesn’t want to try mediation or engage a solicitor. He wants to hang on to all the money. You seriously need a solicitor. If you’re in doubt, try and secure a free session with one. You mind find you change your mind about not bothering!

3luckystars · 04/02/2019 18:28

Are you divorced or separated for long?

Original poster

almostdivorcedeek · 04/02/2019 18:30

we have been separated for 3 years. He has told me what I am entitled to on his pension which is a fair bit but obviously not entitled to this for a good few years yet. Yes I do have a pension but TBH it's pretty rubbish especially compared to his.

OP posts:

TwitterQueen1 · 04/02/2019 18:34

I was allocated a % of my ex's pension. You don't have to wait until he retires. You transfer it into your fund asap. Otherwise you miss out on interest payments. My ex should have transferred the money years ago but he obstructed all correspondence and refused to comply, so the process took 4 years. By the time I got the money the amount had increased by over 20k in accumulated interest. So in the agreement, go for a % of his pension, not a fixed amount. Any further interest will be accumulated in your account and will benefit you - not him.

Bluntness100 · 04/02/2019 18:34

You do need to see a solicitor. Courts now prefer a clean break, as they are of the opinion both parties should be free to move on.

Spousal maintenance is rare, and it's no longer about maintaining a previous lifestyle, but ensuring the lower earning party does not suffer "undue " hardship. If they may, then thr court looks at what they would need to avoid that, and if the other party can bridge the gap.

How the marital assets are split is also important, and you may get more than him, as he needs less support to set up than you.

So I would strongly recommend seeing a solicitor, and you can make an application for costs, where he has to pay them, but that may be retrospective when it's settled, I'm not sure.

Original poster

almostdivorcedeek · 04/02/2019 18:43

Thanks for all the input. I do appreciate it.

OP posts:

FlagFish · 04/02/2019 18:44

When we had our first child, DH and I were earning almost exactly the same (as we're the same age and met at work doing the same job). We both had lots of potential for the future.

After several years at home looking after our three DC, followed by moving to a lower paid more child friendly job, during which time DH's salary has rocketed, I now earn a LOT less than him. If we split up (not on the cards I hope!), I believe that any settlement should reflect the fact that my support has allowed him to reach his current high salary.

See a solicitor. You won't be the first person in this position and they'll be able to advise you. It's not about taking your ex to the cleaners or anything like that, it's about a fair division of the assets that reflects your contribution to the marriage.

Original poster

almostdivorcedeek · 04/02/2019 18:47

That's just it Flags, I am not wanting to take him to the cleaners.

OP posts:

Original poster

almostdivorcedeek · 04/02/2019 19:01

Would the citizens advice bureau be beneficial?

OP posts:

WetWipesGoInTheBin · 04/02/2019 19:06

OP you are entitled to a share of joint assets which includes his pension. You need to go to sees solicitor asap. Citizens advice don't do divorce issues.

Ella1980 · 05/02/2019 22:10

Total myth. When I was married I lived in a huge five-bed exec family home with four bathrooms and a weekly cleaner. Since my divorce the two kids and I are in a small and damp two-bed rented and have been for five years 😠 Do I regret LTB? Not for one second!

supergrains · 06/02/2019 16:02

Op you won't be 'taking him to the cleaners'
That's a myth too.
You want to live in poverty in your old age?
If not get a solicitor.
I know the cost is horrendous, but you only get this chance to do it fair now.
When he's swanning around the med on cruises with a woman young enough to be his daughter and you can't afford the council tax you will regret not seeing a solicitor!

Ella1980 · 06/02/2019 16:18

I had a solicitor and a barrister. But also a complete liar of an ex-husband who is a Chartered Accountant so knew how to hide his money. As for cruising on the med with a girl young enough to be his daughter...he does now share his huge home with his unemployed 26 y/o gf (he's 44) 🙈

Bluntness100 · 06/02/2019 16:46

Op, divorce settlements are not punitive. The court doesn't say, well you were a bit of a shit, so you should pay more. That's not how it works.

As said it's now about ensuring you avoid undue hardship, which is not any hardship, and what amount you need to make sure that is the case, and then can he afford it.

Where it gets complicated is the fair split of assets. This is not necessarily fifty fifty and is why you need a solicitor. You may be entitled to more to help you get on your feet as he earns more. So it could be seventy thirty, who knows,

Spousal maintence is now normally on a long marriage where the less wealthy spouse is older, unable to retrain, or work for much longer, then it's important that person is supported for longer, ie through their retirement to ensure they don't suffer unde hardship.

When a spouse is younger and able to work, then the court focuses on a fair split of assets, to ensure a clean break. That could include a lump sum from his pension, but you need to seek legal advice, you can't do this alone.

MissedTheBoatAgain · 07/02/2019 00:56

He does not want to use mediation or solicitors, mind you I couldn't afford a solicitor anyway!

If you can demonstrate that you are unable to afford Legal advise then speak to a Solicitor about your husband paying your costs. A Legal Services Order I think it is called.

Might sound silly that one pays the other's cost, but logic is that if both have good representation it should speed up the process and hopefully avoid the Courts. Any help provided by your husband would be reflected in the Final Settlement.

If you are forced to self represent don't despair as Courts have the power to reject proposed settlements if they think it is unfair to either party.

Good luck.

MissedTheBoatAgain · 07/02/2019 01:04

I believe that any settlement should reflect the fact that my support has allowed him to reach his current high salary

I don't buy this argument. How could it be proved that reason husband advanced his career was that wife stayed at home?

My Ex tried this argument and it was rubbished in Court. I was a good earner before we married and children appeared. Earnings increased a lot after marriage, but that was due to fact that I was working in more dangerous locations as opposed to Ex being SAHM.

It also came out that Ex had not attempted to look for Work and as child's grandparents were both retired and lived close by and could look after child at any time there was no reason for her to be a SAHM.

dustyfan · 07/02/2019 01:10

Because she raised their kids that he was 50% responsible for, took time off and lost earnings power.

How nice for you to go work elsewhere and leave the task of childcare and finding work around that childcare to your ex.

madroid · 07/02/2019 01:16

Missed the boat - it doesn't have to be proved that a spouse staying at home has helped the working party's career to develop because it is self evident.

If you have a child and you do not need to shape your working life round your childcare because the other parent is doing that, then it has obviously benefited your career.

If you had not had a spouse to look after your children you would have to pay for childcare. That can be v v expensive. So expensive that it may not have been possible to even stay in work when children are pre-school.

MissedTheBoatAgain · 07/02/2019 01:26

took time off and lost earnings power

My mother was back at work as soon as possible after I was born as family needed the money. Having a child did not prevent her from advancing her career and earning a lot more than my father.

My grandparents looked after me whenever they could and my parents used to work opposite shifts to look after me.

My next door neighbour was back at work 6 weeks after she gave birth to second child. Reason is simple - the family needed the money. Husband works nights while wife works days so they can look after their two children.

So I don't buy the argument that having children makes it impossible for mothers to work.

it doesn't have to be proved that a spouse staying at home has helped the working party's career to develop because it is self evident

Absolute rubbish. If correct how do you explain husbands, whose wives were SAHM, are doing the same job for same money even after children have left home?

MissedTheBoatAgain · 07/02/2019 01:29

If you had not had a spouse to look after your children you would have to pay for childcare

Wrong. Child's grandparents are on the doorstep. A fact which came out in Court and the Judge dismissed Ex's claim for childcare costs.

dustyfan · 07/02/2019 04:53

Not everyone has grandparents around to raise their kids for them. Had the wife in the situation walked out and left the kids in sole care of the other parent, other parent would have had to change their lifestyle whether they wanted to or not. Either she was doing a job or the grandparents were doing a job that facilitated your career - but someone was doing it.

MissedTheBoatAgain · 07/02/2019 05:32

Either she was doing a job or the grandparents were doing a job that facilitated your career - but someone was doing it

What a load. I have worked outside UK since 1988. Child was born in 2007, 19 years later. So overseas career was well established before child and wife appeared.

dustyfan · 07/02/2019 06:41

So are you saying you didn't work after 2007?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5