Spousal Maintenance?

[Unknown83]

I've begun discussing a financial settlement with my STBXW and we've come to a sticking point on spousal maintenance. Fairly normal disagreement I guess, she thinks she should get 62% of the assets (around £170k) and spousal maintenance for life whereas I think after the 62/38 split we should have an immediate clean break. I'd be grateful for other people's experiences and what a likely settlement would look like:

Me: Husband, age 40, earn £90k approx
Her: Wife, age 39, SAHM retraining, earning capacity of around £20k and potential to earn more over time (with the right incentive!)
Marriage: 11 years
Assets: Equity £100k, Pensions £150k. Other than mortgage, only outstanding debts on cars with net asset value of around +£24k.
Children: 3 (all boys aged 6, 8 and 12). Split will be 8 nights her and 6 me.

We're generally agreed on an asset split. She'll get £80k equity, her car and loan with net £15k value and £75k pension and I'll get £20k equity, my car worth £9k net and £75k pension.

The sticking point is on spousal maintenance. I'm of the opinion that once she's got her income (around £1,400 net), universal credit (around £500 net) and child maintenance from me (around £750 a month) then the total of £2,650 should be more than enough to live on without "undue hardship." I'd also have to pay her well over £500 a month for spousal maintenance to be worthwhile because universal credit drops £ for £.

I should also explain that to get my good salary I have to spend around £6k a year commuting to London. So after taxes, commuting, continuing to pay for things like private medical insurance for the children and child maintenance my monthly income is only going to be £800 more than hers a month and as she's getting something like £70k more in assets from me and my mortgage interest is going to be a lot higher than hers for years I think that is fair enough. I've worked out it will be at least 9 years before I catch her up and that's assuming she doesn't progress in her career (she did not have a career to compensate prior to children either, she was doing a minimum wage job before the children were born).

Her opinion though is that she shouldn't have to work until DCs are in secondary school, that she should have a higher income than me to be "fair" and that when child maintenance stops I should carry on paying her to make it "fair" because she's had to "stay at home to look after the children and sacrifice her career." My counter argument is that I want the children 6 nights in every 14 including week nights so she can go and get a job like everyone else.

One other thing to add is that I won't see much of the last £15k of my salary already. £6.5k will be tax, £6k will be commuting costs and about £2.25k will be child maintenance so I'll get about £250 of it! Not a lot for the 4 hours of commuting on office days (and I'm not sure where I'll find the time to run a household on my own even though I can WFH for my days with the kids). I've warned my wife that if she pursues the spousal maintenance issue then the logical thing for me to do will be to quit my London job and take something locally where my earning capacity would be closer to £60k per annum and her child maintenance would drop substantially. Presumably a court would consider that a reasonable adjustment so that I can spend more time with the children rather than slaving away to fund a lazy ex who refuses to get a job?

Your wife would be expected to get a job and the settlement would be based on her earning potential. At her age there is no reason not to return to work asap even if means fixed term tapered maintenance to cover any shortfall.

Would she have any viable arguments why you couldn't split the childcare as you have indicated? Do your hours/job allow you to achieve this without paying for additional childcare?

Just seen that you are doing school pick ups three days a week. Can't see any reason why she would be awarded EOW for you.

I hope for your sake she doesn't pursue lifetime maintenance. Is mediation a possibility?

Careful there, one of my friends got 80% of the assets and spousal maintenance from someone with half your salary after it was defined that the wife was not lazy, but the marriage and the expectations of her husband damaged her income potential and put her in a position where it was unlikely she would be able to earn a good salary for years to come.

Another one got the above plus half of his pension and a Mesher order with exH having to pay half of the mortgage.

Your STBXW doesn’t even have a job yet, retraining doesn’t equate having a job no matter what the potential earnings could be. She may get maintenance on a needs basis, which means it can decrease if her salary goes up but she can also ask for it to be increased if her income goes down or your salary increase.

A lot of women don’t get spousal maintenance but you seem to have enough assets and a big enough income for her to get it if she fights for it.

Can you, on your assets and income as it currently is run 2 homes with enough room for the boys? If you can't is there an argument for finances to be split differently and one parent taking a much greater share of the assets in order to house the kids? As you fear a mesher order or just an asset split which allowes her to house the kids - leaving you with insufficient to do so?

@Dacquoise

Your wife would be expected to get a job and the settlement would be based on her earning potential. At her age there is no reason not to return to work asap even if means fixed term tapered maintenance to cover any shortfall.

Would she have any viable arguments why you couldn't split the childcare as you have indicated? Do your hours/job allow you to achieve this without paying for additional childcare?

No, she wouldn't be able to claim I couldn't do the childcare because I've already been doing most of the school runs and most of the weekend care for the past year whilst she has been retraining. Not only a case of can do, but I can prove I've been doing it and have started keeping a diary just in case. If she tried to pull a stunt like that (which to be fair is unlikely) I could make a much bigger dent in her claims to be available for the kids than me based on recent experience.

@GrandmasCat

Careful there, one of my friends got 80% of the assets and spousal maintenance from someone with half your salary after it was defined that the wife was not lazy, but the marriage and the expectations of her husband damaged her income potential and put her in a position where it was unlikely she would be able to earn a good salary for years to come.

Another one got the above plus half of his pension and a Mesher order with exH having to pay half of the mortgage.

Your STBXW doesn’t even have a job yet, retraining doesn’t equate having a job no matter what the potential earnings could be. She may get maintenance on a needs basis, which means it can decrease if her salary goes up but she can also ask for it to be increased if her income goes down or your salary increase.

A lot of women don’t get spousal maintenance but you seem to have enough assets and a big enough income for her to get it if she fights for it.

That sounds like an outrageously unfair settlement. Can I clarify how long ago that was and how long they had been married?

@GrandmasCat

Careful there, one of my friends got 80% of the assets and spousal maintenance from someone with half your salary after it was defined that the wife was not lazy, but the marriage and the expectations of her husband damaged her income potential and put her in a position where it was unlikely she would be able to earn a good salary for years to come.

Another one got the above plus half of his pension and a Mesher order with exH having to pay half of the mortgage.

Your STBXW doesn’t even have a job yet, retraining doesn’t equate having a job no matter what the potential earnings could be. She may get maintenance on a needs basis, which means it can decrease if her salary goes up but she can also ask for it to be increased if her income goes down or your salary increase.

A lot of women don’t get spousal maintenance but you seem to have enough assets and a big enough income for her to get it if she fights for it.

Sorry, another question. How was her income potential damaged? I could understand if two people both had careers with similar prospects and one stopped work to bring up the children and then after divorce the SAHP was still expected to do most of the child rearing through mutual consent of the parties that there might be a compensation principle involved. However, that's quite different to divorcing someone who didn't have a career in the first place to whom the compensation principle wouldn't apply.

@Antiqueanniesmagiclanternshow

You sound horrible to be honest, the way you are speaking about the mother of your children. If she gets a full time job are you going to share all the school holidays and all their days off for sickness?

He’s already said he will be having them almost 50/50. Are all mothers of children perfect? OP, I doubt very much that a court would award your ex spousal maintenance at all.

@LittleOwl153

Can you, on your assets and income as it currently is run 2 homes with enough room for the boys? If you can't is there an argument for finances to be split differently and one parent taking a much greater share of the assets in order to house the kids? As you fear a mesher order or just an asset split which allowes her to house the kids - leaving you with insufficient to do so?

I don't fear an asset split in her favour so she can house the boys provided that I don't have to spend my income paying her to not work rather than paying a mortgage for myself to catch up and reach a point of equality when the children are all over 18.

My STBXW seems to expect a majority of the assets and income from me for life. I think what really upsets me about that isn't just the money but the very idea that a court could order me to do my very stressful job that I don't enjoy for the next 28 years not for my own benefit but to provide her with an income. I had planned to do something less stressful once the boys were older and when she could do some of the earning. Now we're divorcing she's trying to set in stone her role as a SAHP which is not what we ever agreed.

@LittleOwl153

Can you, on your assets and income as it currently is run 2 homes with enough room for the boys? If you can't is there an argument for finances to be split differently and one parent taking a much greater share of the assets in order to house the kids? As you fear a mesher order or just an asset split which allowes her to house the kids - leaving you with insufficient to do so?

Sorry, I didn't fully answer your question above. I would actually prefer to give her 100% of the equity in the house (offset against getting more of the pension obviously) than have a Mesher Order. The Mesher Order would be much more crippling because although in theory I would get some of the equity later on - probably 40% - the mortgage is so large on the FMH that I couldn't get another one and I would be forced to rent. Also, Critchell vs Critchell makes me shudder at the unfairness of the outcome and puts me right off agreeing to a Mesher Order.

That's very positive then regarding childcare, also your wife retraining for a job. You have a precedent. I think you will save yourself a lot of angst by not comparing your situation to other divorces. No two are alike and factors like age, earning potential etc make a difference. That is why going to court is a bit of a gamble. It depends on the preferences of the judge on the day and making sure you have a sound and sensible argument.

I went through court twice. Once for the initial divorce which resulted, by consent, in joint lives spousal maintenance. The income level was a lot higher than yours and there were not enough assets for a clean break. Second time was to try to get rid of the maintenance resulting in a final settlement. On both occasions it came down to how much each party needed to live, what each earned and topping up the shortfall me. Arguments about compensation for loss of career, not having a career and behaviours didn't really come into it. The numbers were crunched and the final judgment reflected that.

@FanGirlX

Honestly, people like @Antiqueanniesmagiclanternshow make all the same crappy excuses as my wife. The whole "school holidays" thing is a classic from the "Workshy Bible" for a number of reasons:

1. It ignores the vast majority of parents who do work and are able to manage;

2. It ignores all the employers that hire term time only employees;

3. But most of all, it ignores the simple fact that I don't have to be on holiday at the same time as her anymore! On average, kids get about 62 working days off school excluding bank holidays. I get 28 days annual leave a year. Most jobs that my STBXW could get have 25 days. So we're actually talking about just 9 days a year where we might need help from our parents (mine would happily have them for two weeks in the year) or we might have to sign them up to a club. I tell you what, paying a babysitter for 9 days a year is a damn sight cheaper than paying my wife spousal maintenance for life for swallowing this crap excuse!

4. Also, another solution is that we both work four days a week. Although our holidays would fall to 22.5 and 20 respectively we'd also have two days in every single week of the year when one of us isn't working. That would mean just 42 days in holiday time at most to cover and probably less with bank holidays.

Op if she doesn’t get a job I would seriously consider keeping the family home, getting her to move out and looking after the kids. She sounds a bit like a woman in my family who cheated on her dh and expected him to bankroll her life even after divorce. No matter how much money he gave her, it was never enough. She got evicted several times as he eventually couldn’t afford to bail her out as she hadn’t paid her rent for months and months in an expensive London property. It was so unsettling for the kids. They’ve all moved out now just to get some stability. It really would have been much better for the kids if their dad had just looked after them.

I wrote a long message with all the details you asked for but I lost it, so in a nutshell, the bottom line was that the earning potential of the ex wives was considered low after years at home and still being the main carers of the kids. While the court thought both husbands’ salaries were very likely to increase as they had well established careers. So, on the basis of need, the court decided not to do clean breaks to allow the ex wives to come back for more if their income reduced or the husbands’ increased to ensure there was not much disparity between the standard of living the children had at mums’ and dads’ homes.

The bottom line is that family courts do not have a set of written rules to follow, everything is decided on a case by case basis and the outcome of the process can be completely different for families in exactly the same circumstances, so I would suggest you both stop discussing the things directly and go to mediation before you get so entrenched on your views involving court is unavoidable.

I'm not saying what you're proposing isn't fair - as I said this morning I think it is.

I am however looking at what others are saying about the ability to provide for the kids. As has been said a judge will look at it on the basis of housing everyone. If you can afford to walk away from all the equity in the house and still afford a place of your own which will house the kids, and she can afford the mortgage on the current house (or another house again big enough to house the kids) then that should work.

What I am questioning is whether your assets/income can afford to house the kids twice effectively as a 50/50 split would require. OR could a judge look at it and think your income/assets can only adequately provide 1 house for 3 and 1 flat for 1, and thus split the assets and the kids accordingly...

I asked earlier whether she could house the kids on the equity she would have and the mortgage she could get based on the £20k salary - but if she doesn't have that salary then can she house the kids on the equity alone as she will not be able to get a mortgage.... or the mortgage company will not release YOU from the fmh mortgage independently of what a court order says about asset splits. You cannot force her to get a job in order to be able to take a mortgage to house the kids unfortunately.

But if you cannot have the kids 100% or at least 75% then the financial split will need to ensure that she can house the kids even if that means that you can't if she can then house them 100% of the time.

Hence I was suggesting you think carefully about the precise split of time...

@Dacquoise

That's very positive then regarding childcare, also your wife retraining for a job. You have a precedent. I think you will save yourself a lot of angst by not comparing your situation to other divorces. No two are alike and factors like age, earning potential etc make a difference. That is why going to court is a bit of a gamble. It depends on the preferences of the judge on the day and making sure you have a sound and sensible argument.

I went through court twice. Once for the initial divorce which resulted, by consent, in joint lives spousal maintenance. The income level was a lot higher than yours and there were not enough assets for a clean break. Second time was to try to get rid of the maintenance resulting in a final settlement. On both occasions it came down to how much each party needed to live, what each earned and topping up the shortfall me. Arguments about compensation for loss of career, not having a career and behaviours didn't really come into it. The numbers were crunched and the final judgment reflected that.

Ours would be a needs case and I agree loss of career and behaviour wouldn't come into it. They'll simply look at needs and how they can be met.

What matters I think is that I can't really meet her needs and I have no intention of increasing my income in order to do so. After child maintenance, a commute, pension savings and a mortgage which would have to be around £1,400 a month I'll have less disposable income than she will because she will have a much bigger deposit to buy with all the reductions in capital and interest payments that come with it. In fact, her mortgage will probably be £600 less than mine so there's the difference right there!

Plus if she pushes for more money in spousal maintenance I'll respond by taking a less stressful lower paying job without a commute and she can deal with the cut in child maintenance. I mentioned above that whereas she enjoys over £2k from my last £15k, I only see about £250 of it. The bulk of it is swallowed up in essential commuting costs and child maintenance. I'd happily drop to £70k to work locally and she can deal with a cut in my earnings that I wouldn't even notice. That's my nuclear option although I'd rather not do it for the sake of the children.

@CayrolBaaaskin

Op if she doesn’t get a job I would seriously consider keeping the family home, getting her to move out and looking after the kids. She sounds a bit like a woman in my family who cheated on her dh and expected him to bankroll her life even after divorce. No matter how much money he gave her, it was never enough. She got evicted several times as he eventually couldn’t afford to bail her out as she hadn’t paid her rent for months and months in an expensive London property. It was so unsettling for the kids. They’ve all moved out now just to get some stability. It really would have been much better for the kids if their dad had just looked after them.

Actually I don't think my wife is quite that bad, but duly noted.

@LittleOwl153, I totally agree. The housing issue would be decided on what's affordable. Is exW able to house herself and the children for the level of income you are suggesting ie without maintenance. She would be expected to contribute to her own expenses but £20k will not raise a lot of mortgage. It depends whether the equity plus her income is enough to house her and three children. Do you have any idea what she would be able to buy in your area?

@GrandmasCat

I wrote a long message with all the details you asked for but I lost it, so in a nutshell, the bottom line was that the earning potential of the ex wives was considered low after years at home and still being the main carers of the kids. While the court thought both husbands’ salaries were very likely to increase as they had well established careers. So, on the basis of need, the court decided not to do clean breaks to allow the ex wives to come back for more if their income reduced or the husbands’ increased to ensure there was not much disparity between the standard of living the children had at mums’ and dads’ homes.

The bottom line is that family courts do not have a set of written rules to follow, everything is decided on a case by case basis and the outcome of the process can be completely different for families in exactly the same circumstances, so I would suggest you both stop discussing the things directly and go to mediation before you get so entrenched on your views involving court is unavoidable.

Given that my wife's earning capacity each month would be £2,850 and mine would be about £3,450 the disparity is already not huge. Factor in her larger share of equity (£60k more than mine) and her mortgage will be smaller than mine (£60k at 2% over 25 years is around £250 a month so the difference between us will only be about £350 a month). It will only become huge when the youngest turns 18 and I stop paying her child maintenance and UC runs out when she would be on something more like £1,400 and I'd be on £4,500. However, I think at that point Waggott would come in to play and she would struggle to justify why she deserved a share of my future income.

Also, I can only understand the efforts to make the standard of living similar to a point. If mummy can't be bothered to work, why should mummy have the same standard of living as daddy? Not sure I like the example that sets to the children to be honest.

Can I just say one thing. She will be the mother of your children for life. The relationship you have with her will shape them and their lives forever. You are being horribly disrespectful in the language you use to describe a woman you loved enough once to marry and have two children with. I think you should reflect on this and see whether you can switch to a more respectful approach for all your sakes.

It is perfectly possible to negotiate the finances without being so rude about her.

I'm not sure intentionally reducing your earnings would be looked on favourably in court in the same way as her avoiding getting a job to contribute to her own expenses. I can understand your bitterness but you need to find a solution to this issue. You can literally waste tens of thousands of pounds arguing like this. Like I said my DPs exW lost £50k arguing a principle.

Agree that it is the ability of housing herself that is the important thing, the fact she doesn’t have an income yet makes me think that it may be a good idea for you not to take this to court until she does.

Also note that if she is in receipt of universal credit, the amount she gets will be taken in consideration when the asset split is decided so, if you wait until she is working and getting UC you all may end up better off as she could get a lower percentage of the assets while also having a higher likelihood to be able to afford a mortgage.

@Unknown83 - lots of people say that about my family member too. Excuses all the time about how it’s all not her fault and it’s just so hard on her looking after kids on her own (even though she doesn’t). One boyfriend after another, moving all the time. Constantly getting fired or walking out of jobs. Even when the dc were old enough to get their own jobs, cars, etc she was constantly expecting them to run around after her.

Your ex wife cheated, never managed to get any sort of career or even well paid job (in fact seems to have quit asap) and according to you pays no attention to her own children and doesn’t even seem to have done much childcare. Is she really the best parent to provide a home base for your kids?

Are you sure the universal credit payment is correct? It seems a lot considering her wage and kids ages, compared to what we get (similar wage, less universal credit, DC are younger). They will also expect her to work as the DC are over 3.
Other than that, considering the spilt it on 50:50, it seems more than fair to me, I would certainly not expect spousal maintenance and certainly not for more than once the youngest is out of primary school at the absolute maximum!

@WorkingItOutAsIGo - I don’t think the way he describes her is that bad as long as he is not saying it in front of the kids. I complain anonymously about my ex but it hardly makes a difference as I am always respectful to his face and in front of my dds.