How did you agree finances with your ex?

[bananasplit07]

I’ve recently separated from dh after 19 years of marriage and want to apply for divorce this week.
I’m looking for advice/experiences from those of you who’ve been through/are going through the divorce process on how you agreed the Financial Order. Did you agree it between yourselves or online discuss through lawyers? How did it turn out?

More detail:
dh has moved out of our family home and we’re currently only communicating via text/email, albeit fairly neutrally at the moment. He is continuing to pay for all our living expenses incl. mortgage and bills although the resentment about this is building.

I was intending to suggest meeting up to discuss finances. However, my godmother thinks this is a terrible idea and has said under no circumstances should I discuss finances with dh in case he gets aggressive if I tell him that a ‘fair’ split under the law is more like 70:30 or 60:40 not the 50:50 he has always assumed. She says to leave it all for the lawyers. But I’m worried about the costs mounting up if I do this. He has access to plenty of money but I have very meagre savings. He has already suggested we should meet up to talk about finances - he’s much more financially astute than me as he works in finance. So maybe I should assume he actually already knows the implications.

I want my due and I need the majority of equity from the house in order to be able to afford a new place for me and my kids but I don’t want to antagonise dh or have things drag on longer than necessary.

Hi OP
Just to advise the outcome of my divorce 7 years ago. Ex left the FMH after 22 years of marriage, youngest child had just gone to Uni. He earned just over 100k (+ bonuses) I earned 27k. We settled at FDR 90% house equity to me (which allowed me to buy a smaller, lovely house mortgage free) and a pension share which gives us equality of income in retirement (actuary’s report was ordered as ex had 2 DC pensions and 3 valuable DB pensions, I had 2 smaller DC pensions.) I had to go to court as he wouldn’t budge from ‘50% house to you and that’s your lot’.

I think I will suggest mediation just for piece of mind.

Thank you this is useful.

Your financial situation was so similar to the way mine is - gives me hope that things will resolve themselves ok.

Thanks everyone for sharing your advice and experiences - it has been so useful and given me more clarity over how to proceed and what to expect. Just got to get on with it now!

You say you need higher equity and proportion if his income going forward - are you trying to claim spousal? Unlikely to get both higher share and spousal and cns

and you’ll have to accept that standards of living post divorce won’t be the sane as during marriage

I was in a similar position 15 months ago. Working part time looking after 4 children when we split. I asked for 60/40 so could rehouse the kids, now working nearly full time so can get some mortgage. He has quit job. This week demanding 50/50 shared custody so now no child maintenance and 50/50 split assets. Means house will be sold and me and the kids either renting, moving to a 2 bedroom place or leaving the area. Unfortunately, less than a 50/50 split doesn’t sit well with some ☹️

I wish people would understand that the 50/50 split is the starting point. This may well work after a shortish marriage where both parties earn similar salaries but once you add children into the mix everything changes. Usually, one partner has to step back from their career and it’s usually the woman. Why should she suffer in divorce? Yes, I got 90% equity in my divorce which allowed me to buy a lovely small house mortgage free. I then lived, quite happily, on 2k a month. My ex was taking home 6k a month. If he had to spend 4k a month on a mortgage and live on 2k a month that makes us ‘equal’, no? He chose to squander his six figure salary on expensive cars, stupidly expensive holidays and designer clothes for the girlfriend and continues to rent at the age of 60. Not my problem!

50:50 is the start point
it will then move up or down according to needs and circumstances and assets available and that’s important
if eg there are 2m of assets to share 59:50 may well be the outcome as both parties can meet needs. if there is only 100k assets then the primary resident/lower earner may get higher as their needs are greater

highly unlikely one party gets an overall 90:10 of total assets. Usually where higher given this us offset with assets elsewhere so eg might tshe 70% of equity but eg 20% pension and overall this works out to say total 60% of total asset

one party should not expect to receive all assets irrespective of their need and increasingly people are expected to increase their own earnings/return to work full time especially if children are older ( secondary age)

The issue with saying someone is high earner therefore they can rebuild assets assumes that they can. But people get made redundant, get ill, can’t work to the same stress as they get older eyc. Why should one party receive all assets while the other has to ( by no choice) work to maintain that income while the other ( often) does little to improve their own, eg refuse to work full time because they prefer part time etc

Hi
Our situations sound similar! And I’m just getting into the finance. I had to work part time so he could run his business which earns so much more than I can earn besides having a good profession. Bizarrely, our dog is a major factor because my husband would never leave her for long or send her to a doggy day care or pay for anything really. So I have been at home running around after the kids and bring a glorified dog sitter (and working 15hours and doing bits for the business)
So there seems of be conflicting advice. My husband thinks 50:50 is fair. My solicitor said 60:40 split of equity (i had told her I only wanted to be able to afford somewhere to live without a mortgage, for me and my girls so that we could also afford to live)
I then had advice that I was selling myself short and 70:30 would even be considered.

My husband has balked at anything more than 50:50 as he has never seen my contribution to the family as anywhere near his monetary worth. He has some odd ideas. He is complain that he had to pay for “family holidays out of his savings” So I can’t see us agreeing. He “doesn’t want” to have a mortgage, despite having a successful company and being younger than me and being able to easily afford one.
I digress:
My issue is that if I work full time, the amount I pay out in animal care negates a large portion of my income - so would this be taken into account?
I also have doubts that in the job I have at my age, I could actually cope physically with full
time. (I am a very fit and active person but the job is challenging). And it would mean me locuming out of area and leaving my daughter too much.
Leaving my profession or current position after 30years would also be crazy as I would loose all my rights to redundancy and job security.
Are these things taken into account ?

You’d be better to start a new thread @Finock

I, your dog and costs won’t be factored j to the settlement. Nor will the argument you can’t work full time because of the dog

you will be expected to maximise your income and a settlement will be based on that.

what will be considered are

you’re ages, eg you say you will find ft work hard but how old is your dh and you expect him the be able to carry on to the point that you receive higher share and he’s have to build back up or get much higher mortgage ….::
the length of marriage
ages of any children - how old is your daughter ?
what assets there are and if both parties needs can be met from them adequately

There may be a case for an unequal split but if you’re the same ages you can’t claim he can work ft but you can’t and your dog won’t factor

I’m new to this. Not sure how to start a new thread but thanks for your reply. It’s always been him that’s wanted me not to work because of the dog. I am happy to work more but the costs of our animal whilst I work will negate much of the financial benefit and if that won’t be taken into consideration it’s good for me to be aware of that. So I appreciate your comment.

I'm 54 he is 50. I have two daughters 16 and 18 who want to live with me. The house is the main asset

Re the ages of your children - the 18 yo will not be counted in the housing needs ( it’s harsh but that’s how it works) and as your younger daughter is 16 the fact you have to work out of the are will also not be considered.

as you are similar ages you cannot argue that he had to work full time but you can’t.

hell need to help with the dog or you’ll need to find a way to get neighbours, children, etc to pop in and let dog out or something else.

You wilp also only get child maintenance for your 16 yo

do you have a good view of the marital
assets? House equity:/pension / anything else? What do you both earn?

Ps if on of there is a purple button at the top saying start thread, or if in a phone there’s a +start thread box at the bottom.

You’ll get more responses I think if you start your own