Mediation or solicitor

[sailorJo]

Divorcing after my STBXH had yet another affair. This time one 20 years younger! I filled straight to the court. I gave up a good career and took a school based support roll to support him and look after the children. Married 20 years, I was the bead winner until 2012. He now earns 5x what I do.

He has been to see a mediator, who in turn has contacted me. Do I reply to the mediator or get a solicitor to sort out finances etc?

Bump

Probably both! A solicitor will encourage mediation, and you will need to do that before you can go to court, but hopefully it won't get to that. But, I would want advice from a solicitor so I knew whether what I was agreeing in mediation was fair.

Thank you. That makes sense. I'm worried about being left with nothing!

Makes sense to go to mediation but with the advice of a sensible solicitor behind you.
I recommend this one for very straight advice.
www.wilkes.co.uk/people/sian-kenkre/
I was in similar situation to you. We ended up splitting house 70/30 and pension 50/50. Then 85/15 on house in exchange for not touching pension (Tho again I considered very carefully the pros and cons of doing that)
I have kids with SEN tho so good reason why I'd never be able to get back to old earnings level.
You need to think about what your future earning potential might be.
And go see a counsellor cos the sheer rage you're going to feel at times about the sahm choice and it's affect on you (not just financially) might take you by surprise. You do come to terms with it. But you might also see a total lack of appreciation for what you did and its worth from your ex and that will sucker punch you.
Remember it's about putting the kids first. They deserve to have parents who have come to a fair split (that doesn't mean 50/50). So don't be bullied or accept less than your due. But do remember how much a fight in court costs (20k each) and factor that in to your thoughts.

Thank you.

Yes the rage is something else. I've done everything to support my husband and children and now I feel in such a mess.

.........right solicitor here I come😊

@PicaK

Makes sense to go to mediation but with the advice of a sensible solicitor behind you. I recommend this one for very straight advice. www.wilkes.co.uk/people/sian-kenkre/ I was in similar situation to you. We ended up splitting house 70/30 and pension 50/50. Then 85/15 on house in exchange for not touching pension (Tho again I considered very carefully the pros and cons of doing that) I have kids with SEN tho so good reason why I'd never be able to get back to old earnings level. You need to think about what your future earning potential might be. And go see a counsellor cos the sheer rage you're going to feel at times about the sahm choice and it's affect on you (not just financially) might take you by surprise. You do come to terms with it. But you might also see a total lack of appreciation for what you did and its worth from your ex and that will sucker punch you. Remember it's about putting the kids first. They deserve to have parents who have come to a fair split (that doesn't mean 50/50). So don't be bullied or accept less than your due. But do remember how much a fight in court costs (20k each) and factor that in to your thoughts.

A word of caution on the "sheer rage." The reality of divorces between a breadwinner and a SAHP is that even on one good salary these families have already had to be frugal relative to their peers and when a divorce happens, there is already a lot less money to go around. It's not uncommon for both parties in such a divorce to become very unreasonable about what they expect in terms of assets and future maintenance and I would advise divorcing couples to remember that they are angry at the past choices that they both made rather than at one another and aim to be reasonable.

The SAHP position isn't difficult to understand. They've not had to seek gainful employment for a long time, they are not going to immediately find well paid work and this keeps them dependent on someone they would probably rather have a clean break from. That is especially going to be the case if before children they had a career that was as good if not better than their spouse. They are going to need to maximise what they can get from the current assets and their spouse's future earners to make up for lost time.

On the other hand, from the breadwinner's perspective, whilst in law it is always assumed to be a joint decision, I know from personal experience in my case that sometimes people become SAHPs by bullying their partner into it. My STBXW simply waited for her contract to run out and refused to get another one and my "joint decision" in the matter was reluctantly putting up with the lack of money in our household for the past 9 years. "Breadwinners" tend to lose a lot in divorce too including most if not all the current assets, less time with their children and future earnings paid in maintenance for a former SAHP who might do very little to improve their earning capacity even if they are given the opportunity to do so. Breadwinners are essentially put into a position where they have to diminish the role of their ex as much as possible in order to be respected as a parent in their own right and not end up renting in a bedsit because of a decade long Mesher Order and handing over half of their earnings in maintenance and mortgage payments on a house that they cannot use.

I would recommend moral rather than legal fairness to avoid a route that will become messy, acrimonious and expensive. I can't say what is morally fair in terms of asset splits and maintenance in your case but I think there are outcomes you should aim for:

1. Both parents having a shared responsibility for children. This is not only so the breadwinner has enough access to maintain a relationship with their children, but also for the practical reason that the current SAHP has enough time to not only work but also build enough work experience to have more than a minimum wage job when the children are old enough to look after themselves;

2. Both parents having the opportunity for their own decent paid work in the near future, as per the above;

3. Either both parents or neither being homeowners in the future. If a couple currently owns their own home together, it is not a fair outcome for one person to have to rent forever whilst the other owns their own home especially if home ownership for one depends on maintenance from the life long renter;

4. A maintenance settlement that not only respects the needs of the weaker financial party for money but also the stronger financial party's needs for time. It is not a fair outcome for someone to rely on overtime to pay maintenance to an ex-spouse who doesn't work. The most likely fair outcome - after child maintenance - would be a term order of spousal maintenance of a duration that tapers off and then ends when all children are in secondary education (but only if the payer can reasonably afford it and it is worth paying, bearing in mind spousal maintenance reduces universal credit £ for £). Maintenance should only be based on basic salary with percentages of other incomes such as bonuses, commissions etc.

Thank you for your perspective. I'm not a SAHP. I took a school job to allow my husband to proceed in his career and not worry about child care.

I have now applied to go back into my profession, but I start back at the bottom as I've been out for 10 years.

I actually agree with you. Although cm is usually 20% not half the salary and courts like clean breaks so paying mortgages is not encouraged. Plus spousal doesn't really happen unless one partner is earning over 100k.
I agree with you on the choice thing. It was a decision we both made. It's the non appreciation for what I did that rankles. Your lack of choice sounds awful.

@PicaK

I actually agree with you. Although cm is usually 20% not half the salary and courts like clean breaks so paying mortgages is not encouraged. Plus spousal doesn't really happen unless one partner is earning over 100k. I agree with you on the choice thing. It was a decision we both made. It's the non appreciation for what I did that rankles. Your lack of choice sounds awful.

Spousal maintenance happens fairly frequently when one partner is earning under £100k but there will be certain circumstances to justify it for example:

1. It might be very short term, e.g. up to 3 years with a plan to transition to independence;

2. The couple might be near retirement and it's unrealistic for the weaker financial party to get a job (or get a better job);

3. The weaker financial party might be unable to work either through their own disability or disability of a child.

That said, most divorces where there is no six figure salary involved don't include spousal maintenance either because it's capitalised by the weaker financial party getting more than 50% of the assets or because the reduction in benefits mean it is not worth it. However, as an estimated 16% of divorces in the UK do include spousal maintenance it cannot only be the top 5% of earners paying it.

@sailorJo

Thank you for your perspective. I'm not a SAHP. I took a school job to allow my husband to proceed in his career and not worry about child care.

I have now applied to go back into my profession, but I start back at the bottom as I've been out for 10 years.

Depends on the profession. It's rare that people have to start at the bottom again these days. Most organisations see the value in bringing SAHPs back into the workforce. Or you might start at the bottom but climb quite quickly.

One thing you might want to do so you are fully in control of the facts is speak to a recruitment agent and get an idea of the kind of roles you can apply for (and what sort of money they offer). Chances are your ex will do it for you in order to impute your higher income if you don't.