Basic concepts of child maintenance/contributions.

[FallenFigs]

DH and I are separating and aiming to do it in as amicable way as possible. Obviously I will be getting legal advice but we are trying to agree the outline structure of any settlement ourselves, to minimise legal costs.

I’d appreciate some advice on the general principles of child maintenance so I can get it straight in my head before talking with others.

Background is this:
Together 20 years, married 18
DC 14 and 12

Pensions are roughly equal
we have agreed the house is basically 50/50
I have a reasonable ISA (as part of retirement planning). DH using his ISA to put a deposit on a house.

We earn on approx 60/40 split with DH earning more. we currently split bills roughly along this ratio too.

DH is proposing that he continues to pay the mortgage on ‘our’ house and pays the mortgage on new house. We then effectively own these both jointly and split proceeds equally when sold. When DC leave home this would enable me to downsize etc.

What is next to be discussed is the split of bills on both houses. Ie whether I will then be responsible for all bills on the house I live in. Frankly this is not affordable for me, with other costs such as food etc.

Pensions stay as they are.

So, with this sort of arrangement on assets, what would be expected in terms of child maintenance, both ways?

DH currently is around mornings with DC to enable me to start work early. This would continue.

He is also also proposing one overnight in the week and every other weekend.

whilst we are trying to do this amicably, I also need to make sure it is fair. DH has fairly complex business arrangements so I do need to be alert to anything he might be doing to minimise salary (and therefore minimise payments towards DC ‘running costs’) and maximise his capital/savings.

I work 3.5 days currently and will increase to 4 days at end of year.

Any thoughts? Would I be expecting a contribution towards bills on the house the DC live in and towards their food and other living costs eg activities, clothing etc. This, I suspect, will be the tricky bit.

@LemonTT this is direct and helpful, thanks.

is there any ‘recompense’ for want of a better word for the fact that I am a lower earner due to time off work to raise children, be part-time etc?

You really need to see a solicitor.

FWIW, I didn’t have to give ExH half of the equity to buy him out as my solicitor argued (and he and the court agreed) that my borrowing potential was less than his, while my housing needs (resident parent) were greater. We basically worked out what the most I could borrow was and offered him that. He agreed, on the condition of reduced CM going forward. This worked for both of us as I feel financially secure and he (rightly, imo) feels that his future earnings are ‘his’.

It seems like you’re (understandably) stuck in a mindset of his earnings being available to you, whereas you really need to be aiming for financial independence - to satisfy the court, and to boost your own self-worth!

Not really, and almost certainly not when your post studies full time earnings are going to be 55k.

As other have said you will likely get 50-60% of the house equity and half of everything else (including your assets). You either need to buy your ex out and take on a mortgage solely in your name or sell and downsize to a property you can afford. You almost certainly will not get spousal maintenance.

No, this is the trap that catches lots of women, works fine until your DH dies or you get divorced. Essentially their full time higher income you supported them to achieve goes with them and you get CMS.

This is why you need good legal advice to make sure you get what's fair and not just what he's offering. I wouldn't discuss it any further with him until you've seen a solicitor. Take as much information as you can on earnings, savings, investments, pensions etc. with you to them appointment.

Go for a clean break. You could go back to work full time. Your children are not babies anymore. Your stbexh will have to pay maintenance for 4 nights each week as one night they will spend with him and weekends will Ballance out. You may get awarded slightly more than 50 percent of equity in house as children residing with you most of the time. Possibly 55/45 in your favour. You could ask your stbexh to pay towards children's clubs and activities after the divorce. Many Dad's do this. My nephew pays maintenance for his 2 DD's but also pays for their school meals and ballet and dance classes. Also more than half towards school trips and extras and often buys them a new coat or shoes. He does not want his DD to go without. Would your stbexh do that for your DC? You would need to be able to pay mortgage, bills for house and food and general living expenses. You might qualify for a UC top up. I don't think maintenance counts when assessing UC. Your stbexh sounds like he is trying to avoid equity in house being split and a judge awarding you more than half with his off offer of him paying mortgage until children leave home.

My overriding thought is that this case screams "clean break" and it would be rather foolish of both of you to get bogged down in financial entanglement for years to come when you don't have to:

1. The ratio of your earning capacities is not really 60/40. You only work 3.5 days a week and either now or in the near future you will be expected (if this went to court) to work full time.

If currently he earned "60" and you earned "40" (a neat short hand to get the 60/40 split) then we also need to divide your income by 3.5 and multiply it by 5. That's 57 so the difference between the two of you is negligible after tax.

2. There is enough money to house you both. It makes infinitely more sense for the FMH to be transferred to you with a "best endeavours" clause to release him from the mortgage whilst he purchases the new place. He can have a charge back on the FMH so when the youngest is 18 he gets his fair share of the equity.

3. Your pensions are worth about the same.

4. It would make a lot more sense to share childcare 50/50 if you can, so that you can work more. It will avoid you being dependent on your ex-husband for an income.

"You supported to achieve" is a highly contentious statement and contrary to popular opinion has absolutely no basis in English Law. First of all, the courts have absolutely no interest whatsoever in working out who contributed what during a marriage. They just assume contributions were equal, even though they rarely are in practice, because it would be too difficult, time consuming, impossible to prove and counter-productively expensive to calculate who contributed what. In very rare circumstances they might estimate compensation if one spouse gave up a lucrative career but this is exceedingly rare as most divorces are made based on needs and sharing rather than compensation.

Second, think about it logically. If one stay at home spouse did all the housework and child rearing and the breadwinner earned £30k and another stay at home spouse did all the housework and child rearing and the breadwinner earned £90k, did the latter spouse support their breadwinning partner three times as much? Of course they didn't. Every family is different and can range from a single income household where the stay at home parent is a useless drunk or drug dealer; another very wealthy single income household where the stay at home parent has nice lunches whilst the gardener and the nanny do all the graft to the most common household today where both parents work but one is more successful than the other. The basic fact of the matter is the court is going to look at needs in the future and will take none of this into account.

My own wife was lazy and self absorbed. She stayed at home but that didn't mean she contributed in the way other stay at home parents did. She didn't do loads of activities with the kids or cook them healthy meals or keep the house clean. She sat on her bottom playing games on her phone and encouraged the children to do the same before chucking a supermarket pizza in front of them. I find the idea that she supported me to achieve my income frankly insulted. She got the settlement she did because she needed it and she needed it because she was too lazy to do anything of value.

Yet you’re working PT while studying to increase your earning potential.

who is supporting you to do that? Oh yes, your stbx

honestly you’re coming across as out for everything you can take him for. You’ll be earning 55k in a year, after you’ve been supported to study to do that. No court would consider you unable to support yourself because you’ve completely sacrificed your career to support his.

stand on your own two feet and support yourself. Your ex’s only responsibility is to support the children.

I predict this getting less amicable pretty rapidly, as soon as he gets legal advice and realises he is not required to support you.

OP

if the house was sold (maybe in a year after you have finished study) , would your share of the equity plus your ISA money give you enough of a deposit to get a 3 bed place and mortgage on your new salary? With CM contributing to food, bills, activities etc?

You sound really grabby now. You had the benefit of being home with your children for many years - presumably it was a choice you both made. After at least age 9 being part time / stahm is very much a luxury - one with consequences financially you were seemingly happy to accept for many years - until you weren't and now you want compensating?! He's now supporting you whilst you retrain?!

The fact that you earn less than you could have done, had you not married, is best dealt with as part of the clean break. In other words you get more capital from the asset pot. How much more depends. You should not become fixated about %. 80% of £100k isn’t better than 60% of £200k.

IME, being in my 50’s I am very glad I have my own property, savings and my own pension. I’m not single but if he disappeared tomorrow I would be ok financially. I can make my own decisions if I want to and I’m not vulnerable to anyone’s whims.

Many people need to start again financially when they split, with kids. I did. You are lucky there is equity, pensions and savings. Make them work for you and your independence.

I’m slightly disappointed by the accusations of being ‘grabby’. I’m just trying to understand how it works, and clearly there are a few different lenses to view this through, as with most things in life. Calling someone anonymous on an internet forum ‘grabby’ for asking a question to increase understanding is a bit unnecessary.

I take the point that I don’t work full time currently. But there is a wider, societal, question about how good it is for kids for society to expect them to basically fend for themselves for 4 hours every day when they have potentially had a lot to deal with a school, need help with homework etc. But that’s another topic.

And the £55k was an aspiration, assuming I a) pass a qualification and B) get promoted, in a new job, on the middle of a divorce and family breakup. So, you know, lot on my plate.

@SheilaFentiman to answer your question, yes I could. That would wipe out my ISA (which was pension planning as much as the actual pension). I really am hoping to avoid moving tho for the DC and for the sunk costs of moving house. That would pay for one of the DC post-18 support if they wanted to continue in education, for example.

OP, please ignore those saying mean things. You have been married 18’years and this is all new. Perfectly fine to ask questions and test assumptions.

It’s fine to ask questions
its also wise to realise that divorce brings changes
and few separating couple can maintain precious lifestyles
you will need to make changes to yours by working full time.
he won’t be expected to pay 2 houses and bills
it’s best to sever finances as soon as realistically possible
if you have isa that’s in the pot along with everything else
irs not wise to keep close financial ties for many reasons
explore options, negotiate and compromise

If you're very amicable you don't have to agree a settlement based on what you might get in court. It could be more generous to you or less conventional in some ways.

But that said, my ex and I started down the path of a complicated arrangement where we owned two houses jointly and he stayed on the title for the family home and took a share of it later and it just got too complicated. (I was always going to pay mortgage and bills for the family home and I think there's zero chance that you'll get a legally binding agreement for him to pay your mortgage and bills long term). The tax implications of these sort of arrangements are horrible; it's very difficult to sort out the mortgages because if your ex remained on your mortgage he probably couldn't get another one and disentangling yourself from the arrangement later e.g. if one of you wanted to move in with a new partner would be difficult. We've ended up with me taking over half our assets but I am in a position to take over the mortgage on the family home and take a bit of equity out of it to partially buy him out (plus my ex is a very high earner and doesn't want to have the children to stay at all so different circumstances).

I think the one option which might be workable for you staying in the house is your ex retaining a percentage of your home by way of legal charge but only if you can take over mortgage and bills and probably get him off the mortgage at some point. The legal charge would give your ex the right to take a percentage of the equity or a fixed amount of it at some trigger point, like when your children are 18. (I found some banks willing to take my husband off the mortgage whilst he retained a legal charge over the property but it's probably not straightforward).

Your ex might alternatively be willing to delay finalising the finances for a while. You could just come up with an informal short term arrangement for now which might help while you complete your studies. Your ex probably won't be able to buy a new house until finances are finalised following divorce so it depends how keen he is to do this. However, any maintenance paid now is somewhat artificial because your assets are still essentially joint and will all be in the same pot on divorce.

One thing to bear in mind is that your children will soon be old enough to have a fair amount of choice in where they live. Things change a lot on divorce so even if they are very likely to stay with you the majority of the time at the moment that could change over the next few years. That could mean that your maintenance reduces or even that you owe maintenance yourself if your ex ended up having the children over half the time. So you really can't rely on child maintenance to pay essential bills.

I don’t think you’re being ‘grabby’; I think you’ve become used to benefiting from joint incomes and are trying to work out what a single income will look like.

Honestly, financial independence is brilliant. I have significantly less disposable income than I did when I was married, but the sense of freedom that comes with it is immense. I hope you find the same.

In the meantime: SOLICITOR!

OP only you can decide if what he is offering is the best option for you. I can see why it is tempting. Unless you have achieved independent financial security you won’t know how liberating it is. Achieving it is a hard work and you will have to make hard choices.

Your ex, a man you do not trust in financial matters, is offering you a cushion. But it clearly comes with strings. You will be living in his property which he pays for. Why do you think he wants you in that position? A man you think would short change his own children. My guess is intrusive control over you and his children. That stops you taking that job and being independent.

But what happens if he decides he doesn’t want that any more. He gets a new partner, has more children or he needs the money. Where will you be?

It’s a personal choice to be home for children after school. (Parents who aren’t home don’t just leave them to fend for themselves btw). And yes it will be up to you to fund that choice, not your ex. Unless he wants to.