Having The Talk re separation

[Carolofthebells2]

The current situation is simply untenable - living in the same home as someone you no longer speak with is excruciatingly appalling. Especially when both wfh. I Have spent a fortune on counselling, mediation and have seen a solicitor.

Lawyer and mediator both say that as I have been a sahm, primary care giver, have 16k income to his 90K+, pensions (me 30k to his 130k), have dla for one child (both early teens) that the split should be such that I buy a 3 bed home outright and he buys somewhere with a mortgage.

However, and I can see his point, he will be saddled with a v.large mortgage till retirement, have to pay maintenance to me etc when it was him that put the deposit for our first home down.

But I don’t actually see any other way of doing it. Sen child means that although they are at secondary, I can’t take on a full time position and I’ve been out of full time work for 15 years.

Every time I think of sitting down with him to discuss this I have a panic attack (am on medication from the doctor) as I know he will throw around words like ‘bleed me dry’, ‘take me to the cleaners’, and everything will become my fault, and this will be the narrative that he believes and shares from then onwards.

I feel completely stuck in a no mans land.

I'm not a solicitor but I'm going to assume that there are other factors to consider because I cannot see how it would be a fair outcome for you to get most of the assets and spousal maintenance even after taking into consideration the child for whom you receive DLA.

One way of looking at this is that either you get most of the assets and he has to pretty much start again from scratch in which case he needs to keep enough of his income to do so, or you have a more equal split of assets but you receive maintenance to meet your needs. Otherwise the outcome could be that he retires with significantly less money than you and in his position I would question why I would bother continuing with the stress of a £90k job when I could do something easier and lower paid and get spousal maintenance varied to zero. You'll effectively expose yourself to this risk if you seek a solution with any remaining ties other than child maintenance which the courts normally have limited jurisdiction over (although a SEN child could be a factor that gives the court more jurisdiction).

Also, no solicitor or mediator can really predict what will happen if things go to court. The court has very wide discretion. So two people agreeing doesn't matter an awful lot to me. I've spoken to four solicitors as the higher earner and been told four different things!

Now, I'm going to look at this as a financial planner rather than legally, as that is my profession. I would suggest your asset split is a fair one but the spousal maintenance isn't worth pursuing (he's probably going to fight you over it in court and that could harm your chances of there being enough assets left after legal fees to house you without a mortgage). Allow me to explain why.

I've assumed you would get the lowest DLAs for your child. On your income of £16k, you would receive around £600 a month in Universal Credit. Your combined monthly income of net salary (£1,200), UC (£600), Child Benefit (£150) and child maintenance (£900) would be £2,850.

His combined monthly income would be net salary (£5,000) minus child maintenance (£900) and minus the higher earner child benefit tax charge (£150) so £3,950. However, he would also have to replenish his pension and pay a mortgage (let's say for argument's sake a total cost of around £1,500 a month). So he would be left with around £2,450 after housing costs and already £400 worse off than you.

If you pursued spousal maintenance, the first £600 would reduce your UC to zero and you would be no better off. At that point he would have £1k a month less than you to live on (and another way to look at it would be £600 a month less to either spend on your children or leave in their inheritance, and I would assume an inheritance is going to be particularly useful for your disabled child).

I find it unlikely on his salary that you would benefit by more than about £200 from net spousal maintenance after losing UC, so around £2.4k a year. It might cost around £30k to pursue it in a court so you would need to receive it for about 13 years to break even. That's assuming he doesn't just take a lower paid job and get it varied, or simply avoids paying it at all and has to regularly be taken back to court.

I would suggest a completely different strategy. You need to make sure he does his fair share of the childcare so that you can take back control and have more time to work. He should have the DCs for at least 2 worknights and 2 morning school runs a week so that you can generate your own income rather than being dependent on spousal maintenance, a rug which could be pulled from under you with very little notice.

Remember you are only hearing it one sided - ie your legal advice. His will be telling him other things

Housing of dependent children dies take priority but it’s unlikely one party would walk away with all assets and the other nothing even with a high earner
What % share of assets are needed to provide you a 3 bed house ? What would that leave him ?

Thank you!

I am trying to see it from his perspective as well, I honestly am.

With this in mind, I filled in a form on London and Country mortgages to see if I could borrow a mortgage on my self employed income. If he gives me £1k pcm child maintenance, I can get a small mortgage. Based on this, I’ve worked out that, in order for us both to be able to afford the same priced small 3 bed terrace in our area (they are about 480k min. I have to stay here for the kid’s schools, he could theoretically move somewhere cheaper to get a bigger place) the split would be:

Me 67% of equity, plus max (x3) mortgage over 20 years. I keep 17 year old car.
Him - only 33% of equity but he keeps all our savings, keeps new land rover. Plus x2.3 salary mortgage over 20 years.

We each keep our pensions.

We would then buy a small 3 bed house of the same value each.

This would give us a split (me:him) of slightly more than 50:50 in his favour, a similar net monthly income (again slightly in his favour) after child maintenance and mortgage. After 6 years, when dla, child benefit, child maintenance etc stop, he’d be fine as he’d have all his money to himself. I’d have to save over the 6 years and increase my income during that time (which is totally fine).

I think these figures are feasible. But the question still stands - how did you broach the whole topic with your stbxdh? I know he thinks even 50/50 isn’t fair as he did put more into our first home (20+ year marriage). I can’t work out how even to suggest it to him, let alone follow through with it all :(

Forgot to add that he gets to keep all of his bonuses and share scheme profits as well.

I'm not sure what to comment on the finances, but please be aware that you still have a relationship with this man, and that the dynamic from your marriage may well be bleeding into now. If, for instance, you're used to bowing to what he wants, and that the scale of appreciation leans in his favour generally even though you work just as hard, be careful. The fact that you don't feel comfortable sitting with him because of the language and tone he uses is a sign.
Personally, I felt that every time I sat down to discuss things with XH, I'd give in to his demands, because he made me feel guilty and I hate any conflict. He knew what I was like and used it. It was very damaging to me and my DC- I basically let XH have everything, against the advice of my solicitor. It was a horrible mistake and it was just a continuation of the dynamic we'd had when we were together.

Recently, we've had to use solicitors again (access and financial issues re. the children) and I have point blank refused to discuss anything with him directly. It will all be done via solicitors. This will be more expensive but actually will serve me better financially in the long run. I have a solicitor I trust, and basically take her advice at every turn- I don't feel like I'm in a position to make the best decisions, because I'm so conflict-averse.

BTW my ex had a home before he met me, and earned more. I raised our children and made his working life easier. Please don't be coaxed into thinking you deserve less than him.

You need to consider pensions. I think you’d be looking more at 6040 or 70/30 type split if overall assets inc pensions
With dependent children, sen, limited working, restricted earnings and significant disparity in earnings ( now and potential) this won’t be. 50:50 outcome.

@Levithian that is a very good point indeed.

@millymolls this is what the mediator and solicitor said, but he is clear that this would be tantamount to fleecing him, taking him to the cleaners etc. And that would be his narrative for ever more.

@FutureExH

You say ‘
I would suggest a completely different strategy. You need to make sure he does his fair share of the childcare so that you can take back control and have more time to work. He should have the DCs for at least 2 worknights and 2 morning school runs a week so that you can generate your own income rather than being dependent on spousal maintenance, a rug which could be pulled from under you with very little notice.’

And I do agree with you. But, tbh, there is no way he could (would?) do that many school runs/pick ups during the week. He keeps threatening to leave his job anyway, this would give him the perfect excuse. But he’d not find another job in his area with flexibility for this much childcare. Were I to up my hours based around him doing this, it would be the rug pulled out from under my feet in just the same way, when he decides he cant (wont) do the school run as he has a meeting/overtime/social networking event. And it would be the children who’d take the brunt of that :(

@Carolofthebells2

Thank you!

I am trying to see it from his perspective as well, I honestly am.

With this in mind, I filled in a form on London and Country mortgages to see if I could borrow a mortgage on my self employed income. If he gives me £1k pcm child maintenance, I can get a small mortgage. Based on this, I’ve worked out that, in order for us both to be able to afford the same priced small 3 bed terrace in our area (they are about 480k min. I have to stay here for the kid’s schools, he could theoretically move somewhere cheaper to get a bigger place) the split would be:

Me 67% of equity, plus max (x3) mortgage over 20 years. I keep 17 year old car.
Him - only 33% of equity but he keeps all our savings, keeps new land rover. Plus x2.3 salary mortgage over 20 years.

We each keep our pensions.

We would then buy a small 3 bed house of the same value each.

This would give us a split (me:him) of slightly more than 50:50 in his favour, a similar net monthly income (again slightly in his favour) after child maintenance and mortgage. After 6 years, when dla, child benefit, child maintenance etc stop, he’d be fine as he’d have all his money to himself. I’d have to save over the 6 years and increase my income during that time (which is totally fine).

I think these figures are feasible. But the question still stands - how did you broach the whole topic with your stbxdh? I know he thinks even 50/50 isn’t fair as he did put more into our first home (20+ year marriage). I can’t work out how even to suggest it to him, let alone follow through with it all :(

This is very different to your original post. You've gone from 100:0 to 50:50! Neither outcome seems fair to me. I think you should basically aim to meet two key principles:

1. Try and ensure the needs of both of you are met. He does have a higher income, he can meet his needs from income more than you can. So an asset split (including pensions) in your favour (but perhaps not 100%) is fair. A 70:30 split seems to be a common outcome from mediation in cases like yours (from the facts I know here, bear in mind I'm not a solicitor and I don't know every facet of your case).

2. You were equals in the marriage. That means the starting point is 50:50 and then moves from that to meet needs. The work you did as primary carer will be considered equal to his earning contribution (whilst this is not always a fair assumption, it is the assumption that will be made).

Another way of looking at it is to step back and ask what is the best outcome for your children? In most cases it would be a good relationship with both parents and two comfortable homes to go to. Frame it as that and hopefully you can work towards something amicable.

[quote Carolofthebells2]@FutureExH

You say ‘
I would suggest a completely different strategy. You need to make sure he does his fair share of the childcare so that you can take back control and have more time to work. He should have the DCs for at least 2 worknights and 2 morning school runs a week so that you can generate your own income rather than being dependent on spousal maintenance, a rug which could be pulled from under you with very little notice.’

And I do agree with you. But, tbh, there is no way he could (would?) do that many school runs/pick ups during the week. He keeps threatening to leave his job anyway, this would give him the perfect excuse. But he’d not find another job in his area with flexibility for this much childcare. Were I to up my hours based around him doing this, it would be the rug pulled out from under my feet in just the same way, when he decides he cant (wont) do the school run as he has a meeting/overtime/social networking event. And it would be the children who’d take the brunt of that :([/quote]
Well it sounds to me as though he needs to make a choice. Either he can step up and do his share of childcare or he's going to have to compensate you to do his share. Let's say for example he says sure, I'll do two weekday nights and two weekday mornings (although it sounds like he won't). As he is not currently the primary carer, if it got to court then they wouldn't just go "okay, sure, shared custody then." He'd have to prove how he can achieve it (for example in my case I can prove it because I started doing 3 afternoon pick ups and 2 morning school runs during the pandemic, which I've now done since the end of the last lockdown).

If he can't prove it, he'll probably get a night a week (assuming he wants it) and you'll get the child maintenance. Also, he'll be expected to actually have the children on those days. If he can't, it will be his responsibility to arrange childcare, not yours. A solicitor might be able to explain in more detail what would happen subsequently (e.g. maybe it would be considered a violation of a court order if he dumped the children on you during one of his days).

@FutureExH

‘ This is very different to your original post. You've gone from 100:0 to 50:50! Neither outcome seems fair to me. I think you should basically aim to meet two key principles:’

I’ve just read my first post back and realised how it could have read. When i said that he would buy somewhere with a mortgage, I didn’t mean a 100% mortgage. He’d have a bare minimum of 25% equity if I went with what the solicitor advised me - in my plan above he’d have well over 50% equity.

Your second post is interesting, actually. I know he saw a solicitor of his own a few months ago which, I now realise, tallies with him starting to do some morning school runs when he is working from home. He never, ever did any school runs - not one Covid, not during the lockdowns when Sen child was at keyworker/vulnerable school provision. But all of a sudden, he started stepping up and insisting on doing some. But, only when it suits him, mind, and I still get the children up, breakfasted and ready to go out the door.

[quote Carolofthebells2]@FutureExH

‘ This is very different to your original post. You've gone from 100:0 to 50:50! Neither outcome seems fair to me. I think you should basically aim to meet two key principles:’

I’ve just read my first post back and realised how it could have read. When i said that he would buy somewhere with a mortgage, I didn’t mean a 100% mortgage. He’d have a bare minimum of 25% equity if I went with what the solicitor advised me - in my plan above he’d have well over 50% equity.

Your second post is interesting, actually. I know he saw a solicitor of his own a few months ago which, I now realise, tallies with him starting to do some morning school runs when he is working from home. He never, ever did any school runs - not one Covid, not during the lockdowns when Sen child was at keyworker/vulnerable school provision. But all of a sudden, he started stepping up and insisting on doing some. But, only when it suits him, mind, and I still get the children up, breakfasted and ready to go out the door.[/quote]
Well, in that case, perhaps he wants to be more involved with the children than one day a week? I don't know the guy but hopefully that's a good thing. I would take his threat to quit his job seriously too. A "breadwinner" can be treated quite badly in a divorce, essentially losing most of what the family has worked for and having future income subject to maintenance that puts pressure on them to keep performing a stressful job but barely being allowed to see the children and therefore the fruits of their labour. A good way to protect themselves is to take a lower paid job closer to home with flexibility to step up as a parent.

You'll need to speak to a solicitor to get the ins and outs of what happens if he doesn't stick to what's agreed, but there could be some significant benefits to you if he has the children a couple of weekdays. It means you can work more and therefore puts you in better control of your income. Whether he takes a pay cut can become less relevant to you for example (although it would still affect child maintenance).

On the asset split, your solicitor probably knows best as long as they are in possession of all of the facts. A 75:25 split of your home equity or thereabouts but where he keeps more of his pension sounds about right.