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 ··· 5 6 7 8 9 10

Original poster

What is seen as fair

239 replies

Nitotoo · 01/02/2022 11:24

Just that really what is deemed fair in the eyes of a judge. XH and I are heading to court soon for FDR he had previously made me an offer which he deemed fair but my solicitor said starting point of 50%.

To give brief details met in 2014 after my first marriage ended and I had been made redundant. My daughter from my first marriage and I were living in rented accommodation and in receipt of full benefits. XH was in the process of buying a home to renovate and get on the housing ladder. I stayed in rental accommodation. I fell pregnant with our DS in 2015 and XH then sold his first property and bought a family home for us all to live in in his name. We moved in in Jan 2016. I was still not working due to having a baby and had struggled to find anything since being made redundant. We married in 2017 after XH took a loan to fund a wedding and a new car for me. This loan is like the house in his name only. I was able to find a part time job around this time around XH working commitments working 16 to 20 hours a week to bring in a small income. In 2018 we seperated and I left with the children to private rented accommodation with benefit top up from UC. XH stayed in his house.

Were struggling to reach an agreement as he offered 16k I keep the car and have no liability to the loan. My solicitor said 50 50 which is more like 80k with the equity and current house prices.

XH has moved his new partner into this house. Due to financial disclosure they both have a healthy salary and seem to have a good life whilst me and the children have been served section 21 and forced to move and struggle on UC as I can only work 24hrs a week when children are in school. I don't feel very secure in rented accommodation and feel I should have stayed in the house.

Would I be likely to gain an order to get back in the house? Would I be likely to get 50% I realise at a 14 month marriage and whole cohabiting relationship of 34 months it could be deemed a short marriage but there is a huge difference in our circumstances which cannot be seen as fair. If I'm forced to work more hours who picks up the childcare bills, XH? I could possibly work more hours but I doubt I could get a mortgage more than enough to buy a place I would need. My solicitor is saying to hold out for the FDR and my XH is saying the original offer he made is now off the table. My mum could potentially gift me a 6 figure sum towards a house but I would need at least 50% of the equity to top this up to what is needed. Would I then get spousal maintenance to top up the loss of UC to live off he is quite a high earner on about 70k a year (I already get cms payments however the min cms amount) would I really be liable for half of the loan that XH took in his name only? His claiming I should be however I would think he has nearly paid this off by now.

OP posts:

BillMasen · 02/02/2022 12:58

@Unknown83 love the fact you’re being so disparaging of AAT (not a real accountant) when you say your own qualifications are paralegal equivalent…

I tss as is it you’re not a lawyer.

And you sound quite smug about being a high earner. You’re coming across like you know best, and if I were you I’d rein it in a bit

trunktoes · 02/02/2022 12:59

I don't know the law on this but if she is entitled to 50 percent I think that's pretty disgusting. She had no earning potential before the marriage she was on benefits. Her situation hasn't changed. Frankly I think she should start taking responsibility for herself and her children instead of being so granny. Alternatively find another poor sod to take to the cleaners, have a baby with him and then he will have to pay for all three kids. Quids in

Unknown83 · 02/02/2022 13:24

[quote BillMasen]@Unknown83 love the fact you’re being so disparaging of AAT (not a real accountant) when you say your own qualifications are paralegal equivalent…

I tss as is it you’re not a lawyer.

And you sound quite smug about being a high earner. You’re coming across like you know best, and if I were you I’d rein it in a bit[/quote]
Don't be a tit Bill :-)

Part of my qualification puts me on a level with a paralegal. I'm chartered in my profession.

Unknown83 · 02/02/2022 13:26

@trunktoes

Well, this sums up the side saying she shouldn't get anything quite neatly. It's based on personal opinions rather than how the law works. You're all perfectly entitled to an opinion but to question the OP's lawyer is bad advice.

AlDanvers · 02/02/2022 13:30

Questioning your solicitor when the tell you they know the exact outcome, is not bad advice.

'Don't dare question your legal professional' is awful advice....and, ironically, really unprofessional.

Pootlepoodle · 02/02/2022 13:30

@Unknown83

I think perhaps posters like your example are putting themselves in the position of the STBXH and his new partner.

If they were to actually put themselves in OPs position, taking all of her circumstances into consideration including qualifications, I’m pretty sure the thinking would change.

AlDanvers · 02/02/2022 13:33

Well, this sums up the side saying she shouldn't get anything quite neatly. It's based on personal opinions rather than how the law works

No it doesn't. One person's post does not represent anyone other than the person posting. It does not sum up anyone whose view oppose yours.

Surely, you know that?

Unknown83 · 02/02/2022 13:46

[quote Pootlepoodle]@Unknown83

I think perhaps posters like your example are putting themselves in the position of the STBXH and his new partner.

If they were to actually put themselves in OPs position, taking all of her circumstances into consideration including qualifications, I’m pretty sure the thinking would change.[/quote]
I wish you were right but there has been a noticeable hardening of attitudes towards vulnerable people in the UK in the past decade. We live in a country that is everyone for themselves now.

There seems to be a particular bitterness saved for ordinary people who have the audacity to have children; that people should only have them if they can self sustain the ridiculous cost of living in this country.

For me "only have them if you can afford them" ceased to have any moral meaning when the average house price exceeded 8 times the average salary and when the average rent of a modest 3 bed in a less desirable part of my town cost more than half the net income of the average full time worker.

YABVVU · 02/02/2022 13:47

The fact that op thinks she is both absolved of any responsibility and entitled to in excess of £70k due to 420 days of marriage is truly shocking.

This; it would be unfair and disgraceful if this were to happen. I was married for 12 years and contributed and ended up with Jack all. Solicitors made a fortune (60k) , I got some house equity (what I personally put in) but its not enough for me to buy a place.I'm renting and am £1500 in debt per month because my income is back to minimum wage. Wont change for another 3 years until my youngest is 12 and I can go back full time. Only then will I be able to get a small mortgage but it wont be enough because my housing capital is being eaten into each month.

Ex got the benefit of a nice 6 figure income (95% of childcare was done by me to 2 additional needs children) and has purchased a nice house.

He pays me no child maintenance because he took me to court for 50/50 and again, I couldn't afford to fight him.

Why should the OP be entitled to any of the house equity? It's his house that he purchased with his own money. I dont get it. . . .

Unknown83 · 02/02/2022 13:48

@AlDanvers

Questioning your solicitor when the tell you they know the exact outcome, is not bad advice.

'Don't dare question your legal professional' is awful advice....and, ironically, really unprofessional.

Her solicitor has said she has a case, not what the outcome will be. You're an accountant (apparently) encouraging people to listen to morally outraged folk on social media rather than a legal professional....

YABVVU · 02/02/2022 13:51

Offering you 16k is more than fair, I fail to see how your solicitor has provided you with such poor advice. The 50/50 equity wont happen (and shouldn't).

AlDanvers · 02/02/2022 13:53

Not really detail orientated, are you?

I didn't say she should listen to people on social media. I said she should get a second opinion. You said she shouldn't question her legal professional. Thats awful advice, to anyone.

Her solicitor (according to op) hasnt said she has a case. He has talked to her in absolutes. The judge will view the first child as a child of the marriage. The judge will deem rental accommodation as unsafe and unsecure.

Unknown83 · 02/02/2022 13:53

@YABVVU

The fact that op thinks she is both absolved of any responsibility and entitled to in excess of £70k due to 420 days of marriage is truly shocking.

Ex got the benefit of a nice 6 figure income (95% of childcare was done by me to 2 additional needs children) and has purchased a nice house.

He pays me no child maintenance because he took me to court for 50/50 and again, I couldn't afford to fight him.

Why should the OP be entitled to any of the house equity? It's his house that he purchased with his own money. I dont get it. . . .

Do you really think after the horrible way you were treated that the OP should be dealt with in the same way?

Sadly you lost a lot of money to the legal profession and undoubtedly the OP has that risk too.

However, I'm genuinely astonished at the position you have been placed in. It doesn't sit right with me. I don't even like my STBXW, I've refused to pay her any ongoing maintenance other than child maintenance (not for financial reasons but because I don't want to get tied to her indefinitely in a way that limits my freedom to choose what job I do, where I live etc) but there's absolutely no way I would let her burn her capital for more of the assets. She needs them and she'll get them and I'll make sure that until my youngest leaves home that she can manage.

Pootlepoodle · 02/02/2022 13:55

@Unknown83

Unknown83 · 02/02/2022 13:57

[quote Pootlepoodle]@Unknown83

That’s what I mean though. If people were truly able to put themselves in OPs shoes, they would understand why she is making the choices she is. The hardening attitude as you put it comes from a position of greater privilege, whether it is education, qualifications, better parenting etc.[/quote]
It certainly reeks of privilege. It's positively 19th century when a man would make a girl pregnant and then just leave for the next town. There's a word for a bastard and a slut but there's no word for the man who runs away....

Pootlepoodle · 02/02/2022 13:59

@Unknown83
To be fair though we don’t know the details of the split. It could be OP who had an affair or other unreasonable behaviour that caused the breakdown of marriage.

YABVVU · 02/02/2022 14:04

@Unknown83 - thats what I thought, any person with a basic morals would absolutely want their children to not live in abject poverty with the mum who bought them up so well whilst they afford to be the 'fun' parenting who can afford to give the children whatever they want. I couldn't even buy them anything for Christmas when he bought them new phones/laptops/took them out e.t.c

I hold on to the hope that I will afford a place by upping my income and being granted a mortgage. this is looking less likely every month.

I tried 3 different solicitors in the end and this is the shit position I end up in. I did all of the patenting to both my additional needs children 95% of the time. Had a very highly paid job prior to this but have to start over.

Threads like this make me so sad because what the OP is after is NOT fair by any stretch.

YABVVU · 02/02/2022 14:07

@ Pootlepoodle

^^
Could you please what you mean by this?? Yes, an idiots guide please.

Marchmount · 02/02/2022 14:08

So Unknown. You’re not actually a solicitor or a barrister who is dealing with these type of cases but have learned your law from a textbook (a paralegal equivalent is not exactly Mischon de Reya territory) and your own particular case. Now you think things will work exactly how you have done it? Irregardless of length of marriage, family setup or any other factors.

AlDanvers · 02/02/2022 14:10

[quote Pootlepoodle]@Unknown83

That’s what I mean though. If people were truly able to put themselves in OPs shoes, they would understand why she is making the choices she is. The hardening attitude as you put it comes from a position of greater privilege, whether it is education, qualifications, better parenting etc.[/quote]
Or....People are in or have been in similar positions to the op. And still don't agree with you.

YABVVU · 02/02/2022 14:10

'Do you really think after the horrible way you were treated that the OP should be dealt with in the same way?'

Nope, why would I when Ive been treated so horribly? The OP shouldn't have the right to take away so much that she didnt contribute to.

Waiting to be filmed big time.

LemonTT · 02/02/2022 14:16

Let’s acknowledge that many of us do understand what impact having children has on life earnings and career. And that many of us have been or are single parents. Most people on here are incredibly sympathetic and knowledgeable about these issues. We don’t need lectures from people who assume that only they understand the situation.

She is a single parent to young children and her wage earning potential is limited by those factors. But give us some credit. She has confirmed she receives £1000 per month CS for both children. She works part time and earns minimum wage. She receives UC support and child allowances. Her net income is reasonably high and would be in the region of at least £2k per month before housing costs.

Her aim is to live mortgage free. She intends to do this by taking money from her parents and from her share of the marital assets. This doesn’t make her whole as a consequence of the marriage and having a child. It makes her better off and leaves her ex with an increased mortgage of £80k. He has to work and parent as well.

There is no moral unfairness in the ex husbands response or the pps. The OP can quite easily buy a property with her £100k and a share of the equity accrued in the period they were together. She just has to get a mortgage. If she wants to own a home she needs to pay for it. Her ex’s will contribute towards it for a long time through CS. But she should pay for part of it as well.

Pootlepoodle · 02/02/2022 14:20

I meant that from OP’s posts, she is unable to get a FT job that takes her to a salary worthwhile bearing in mind the cut to benefits she is eligible for if she stays under the threshold.

To begrudge her for making that decision requires a level of inability to empathise with where exactly OP is in the employment sector. Generally speaking you can only get a higher paid job if you have the necessary qualifications and skill sets which means higher education and exams, and money to pay for it.

AlDanvers · 02/02/2022 14:25

@Pootlepoodle

I meant that from OP’s posts, she is unable to get a FT job that takes her to a salary worthwhile bearing in mind the cut to benefits she is eligible for if she stays under the threshold.

It would be worth while because she can get mortgage.

Or she could, like many single parents do, used any of the time in the last 4 years to improve her situation.

You do not need exams, qualifications or higher education to get a job thats above minimum wage.

BillMasen · 02/02/2022 14:29

@Unknown83 you’re the one coming across as a tit. Let’s leave the personal insults out of it eh…

So you’re not a lawyer, or a paralegal, you’re a different type of “professional” (who takes the piss out of qualifications like AAT and other posters with accounting qualifications).

Im also a professional and could well, like you, also claim equivalence with some junior levels in other professions. I don’t, because they’re not my area of expertise. I have opinions, but don’t claim them to be legal fact. I also don’t look down on junior levels like AAT or any other qualification someone has worked hard to gain.

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 8 9 10