How do you cope financially

[Mr77]

I'm not fully through the divorce process and I'm looking at what is going to be a, very bleak future.

It seems like the ex wife will get the house as she works from home three out of five days a week, and we have two children with special needs.

I'm told I'll still be on the mortgage, yet not living there and still liable for it.

I'll be renting somewhere and no doubt paying more than I was for the mortgage.
Also I'll be paying CM.

The thing I find hard to comprehend is that EW will keep the house, continue to receive DLA and CB (total £950pcm) and a chunk of child maintenance from me.

She does earn more than me, but not by a huge margin, but she does have the ability to earn more in her job.

Will the court take into account my earnings, rent and all other associated bills when going over Form E's and look at what is fair?

Is child maintenance means tested, because the rent around here is huge, and I'd need to be in relative close proximity to my children's schools.
It could be that I'm left with absolutely nothing financially once all payments go out.

There are no mechanisms in place to force a parent to have the children more than they are able to, so that part of mediation will be interesting.

There are actually and men deploy those mechanisms all the time. You just have to say "I work/need a life/can't cope" and the other parent is forced to do all the parenting.

You do realise that if you have the children "three nights" that you will be responsible for pick ups, drop offs, all childcare on your days? With regard to the 65 days that is all the school holidays- is your ex not intending to have them a single day of the holidays?

WHat the fuck is wrong with you?!

There are no mechanisms in place to force a parent to have the children more than they are able to.

Allow me to put this into context as it was said to me.

When I received the letter from her solicitor outlining the 65+ days of childcare, I reiterated to my advisor that I didn't have the ability to or the annual leave to accommodate such a request, but would work towards figuring out a way to do as much as I could.
What concerned me was that I wasn't sure if I would be forced to take 65 days off.
I didn't understand at the time how it worked.

Apologies if the statement has been misconstrued, wasn't my intention.

Your username is appropriate

@Mr77 you say you can't afford legal advice, I would say you can't afford not to.

Both parties divorcing need to have a home. This might mean selling the family is necessary. In the interim I think if a house and a flat is needed you should both contribute to both. If your ex is doing all of the childcare you do need to pay maintenance. You can ask for 50/50 custody if you want.

But you could put the kids into a holiday play scheme while you're working you don't need to take days off when you have them

If it's your home you still have the right to a key and to come and go

There are no mechanisms in place to force a parent to have the children more than they are able to, so that part of mediation will be interesting.

There are actually and men deploy those mechanisms all the time. You just have to say "I work/need a life/can't cope" and the other parent is forced to do all the parenting.

Quite. Have you seen the update. The poor man merely making sure he's not forced to have his own kids to interfere with his very important man job. Whilst simultaneously expecting that his ex stop her much better paid work, and look after his children for free for those 65 days for him.

Oh and he's after her pension too.

No wonder she's not interested in his nonsense.

Of course he could. Like everyone else.

But for some reason, he can't...

When I received the letter from her solicitor outlining the 65+ days of childcare, I reiterated to my advisor that I didn't have the ability to or the annual leave to accommodate such a request,

Hang on. There are 365 days in a year. That means your wife is doing 300 days of childcare to your 65 and you are saying 65 are impossible to do??? Is that what you are seriously trying to say?

As she has greater earning potential and you're looking at changing jobs would it be more sensible for you stay in the house, become the primary carer for the children and she pays you support? Many solicitors will wait until after a settlement has been reached and take their pay out of that. Ask around.

The OP’s ex solicitors will have calculated this prior to sending the letter

the OP seems to think his position of working and having children is unique

If they have SEN then it is very likely that there isn't a playscheme suitable. It is very common for parents of children with additional needs to reduce working hours or quit because of this.

I think your reading of the case is a bit off to be honest. This is not the standard case of the higher earner buggering off to go and have a ball. The facts of this case are that the OP is the lower earner and in fact earns below the national average but will also be expected to leave the family home. Normally where this happens to the woman in these cases, they will get more than 50% custody; their housing needs will be prioritised and as the resident parent they will be entitled to a range of benefits including help with paying for childcare. The OP as the NRP is going to get none of this.

The conundrum for the OP is how on only £29k they are able to adequately house themselves to have the children to stay overnights, probably pay some amount of CM to their higher earning ex as they have slightly more nights and then on top of that work out how to pay for childcare for 65 days. The OP is coming here to ask how they are able to do that and it's a reasonable question and you really have no business attacking him for that.

My advice to the OP is to get legal advice to explore whether in fact as the lower earner it might make more sense for them to reduce their hours and become the RP. It's clearly impractical for the mother to be both the main earner and the primary carer in this situation.

I don't think my reading is off at all.

the OP seems to think his position of working and having children is unique

Yeah, this basically. Poor man, "forced" to have his children, so he's refusing. Funnily enough he doesn't seem to think his ex wife should have that option. If his ex behaved like he did and also just shrugged off being a parent because of their job, their children would be in care. Yet he seems to think it's entirely reasonable that everyone should work round his £29k a year.

Oh, and how is the poor little chap supposed to provide childcare (which you don't seem to be asking where his ex wife is concerned) well, he gets a better or second job. Tax free childcare. I literally shouldn't be having to explain the methods to another "poor me" man who bins off his children for a job, whilst also expecting all his childcare paid for by someone else.

This sounds more like lashing out about your own situation rather than adding anything relevant to the case before us. This man wants to be there for his children and is trying to work out how in a situation that is going to be financially very difficult and needs working out.

You obviously have a lot of prejudices that are affecting your judgment, not least the belief that men abandon their children. My experience in practice is that it is just as common that their ex-partner makes it difficult for them whether it's through demanding sole use of a shared family home for a long time leaving them unable to provide a suitable home themselves; demanding maintenance that prevents reducing their hours to take on more childcare responsibilities or simply refusing access altogether. I strongly recommend you take a step back to see the whole picture and stop the unhelpful, unsubstantiated sniping.

I have neither the time nor inclination to comment further than this.

I'm not fully through the divorce process and I'm looking at what is going to be a, very bleak future.

• Yes well £29k salary, divorced and 2 kids with special needs, isnt a rosy picture.

It seems like the ex wife will get the house as she works from home three out of five days a week, and we have two children with special needs.

• The resident parent could end up staying in the house under the circumstances. Sounds like your ex has set her life and work up around caring for the kids. Is there are reason you have not done this and therefore are not being considered for this role?

I'm told I'll still be on the mortgage, yet not living there and still liable for it.

• You wont be paying the mortgage, your only financial obligation will be for child maintenance, with for 2 kids that have you have 2 nights a week on average would be about £300/month

I'll be renting somewhere and no doubt paying more than I was for the mortgage. Also I'll be paying CM.

• Yes people have to pay rent or mortgage usually, and as your ex is no longer willing to live with you now you both have to pay this on your own.

The thing I find hard to comprehend is that EW will keep the house, continue to receive DLA and CB (total £950pcm) and a chunk of child maintenance from me.

• Yes the parent with the majority of the caring responsibility would receive support benefits for the children. Hopefully you didnt think that money was for your benefit. Your obligation of £300/month is not really very much to provide for 2 children, would probably just cover their food, let alone childcare, clothes, school clubs or the cost of running the house. Its also much more challenging to work when you are solely responsible for children mon-fri as you are aware.

She does earn more than me, but not by a huge margin, but she does have the ability to earn more in her job.

• Is this extra work you think she can take on top of being sole carer for 2 children with SEN?

Will the court take into account my earnings, rent and all other associated bills when going over Form E's and look at what is fair?

• Yes the court will do, but it doesnt sound like you have much in the way of assets, so Im not sure what the point of going to court is. You have whatever equity there is in the house, savings, a car maybe and your ex's pension. The split of this will range between 50/50 to 70/50 at most. Closer to the middle I would say given there is not a lot to go around. You can trade off house equity for more pension, or agree to leave your equity in the house until the children reach a certain age. All this can be negotiated and I suggest you decide what you want and find a compromise. Having a judge decide it for you will guarantee neither of you is particularly happy.

Is child maintenance means tested, because the rent around here is huge, and I'd need to be in relative close proximity to my children's schools.

• Yes there is an online government calculator you can use to do this, google it, it depends on how many children there are and how often they stay with you.

It could be that I'm left with absolutely nothing financially once all payments go out.

• Many people are in this situation right now, there is a cost of living crisis. Single person household are obviously more expensive too. Best thing to do would be think about how you can improve your income.

The financial settlement will depend on your exact circumstances and, if it goes to court, the decision of the judge but in general:

• Mesher orders, where you would keep a share in the family home and your ex would live there, are now quite rare and not the preferred option of the courts, particularly where you have few other assets and are not a particularly high earner. It is very rare for the non resident party to have to stay on the mortgage and cover half the costs of that. Having children with special needs may be a factor which supports a mesher order but still unlikely particularly if you will have the children 3 nights per week.
• An outcome where you walk away with nothing but a deferred share in the family home while your ex keeps the house and her pension is highly unlikely unless possibly there is minimal equity.
• Pension and any savings should be factored in when dividing assets.
• It may help you in the financial settlement if you are actually looking after the children three days per week even if you’re still living together. If your ex is doing the vast majority of the parenting she will have a stronger case for getting a higher share of the assets. Of course this should be based on a genuine intention to have the children 3 nights per week long term.
• Child maintenance should be considered separately to the division of assets. Basically you can’t contract out of paying the CMS amount, though you can pay more by private agreement. If you are having the children 3/7 nights the amount shouldn’t be that high.
• You don’t need to move out of the family home at this stage. A solicitor would probably advise you not to.

@Circe7 Your post is very helpful and I will add some extra context to it if I may.

On the point about Mesher Orders and SEN, the likelihood of one parent staying in the family home might depend on the extent of the additional needs of the child (and therefore the extent to which the RP cannot work). If the wife in this situation is able to work from home for three full days a week it does not suggest that the children need round the clock attention.

In terms of whether wife can earn more, that will again depend on the extent of the additional needs of the children and also the extent to which @Mr77 is responsible for their care, as you highlight. If the wife is to have 3 days per week without childcare responsibilities and already provides childcare whilst working 3 days a week, it might be argued that she has a much higher earning potential than the OP. It might also support either an immediate sale of the family home or at the very least a hard deadline to remove him from the mortgage without watering down the undertaking by adding "best endeavours."

In terms of child maintenance, I would strongly advise the OP not to agree to pay more than the statutory amount. This will only cause arguments later on if this is no longer affordable and the recipient has grown accustomed to the extra money and struggles to adjust (it also causes no end of aggravation when new partners enter the scene, on either side). It is a much better idea to have a reserve of money to help the children out in emergencies, to save for their future or to buy things directly for them such as new clothes and shoes as and when this is affordable.

Except in a situation where there is insufficient funds to meet basic needs of both parties, the % share in a coparenting situation won’t mean a bigger share of the assets.

The OPs housing needs and his ex’s housing needs are the same whether it is 50:50 or 40:60. As pointed out a lot rides on what the children’s needs are and how that impacts on housing.

The OPs ex is on rocky ground demanding the OP provides childcare in holidays. She is in receipt of all the financial and social service support as the resident parent. Rightly or wrongly these expenses will fall to her and her case demanding this won’t succeed in court and she will either have to fund and find child care or take leave herself. If the OP gives up all or part of his leave to reduce that burden then it is the best she could hope for in court.

I do think this is one of those cases where a party has told a solicitor to put all the demands onto a letter regardless of advice or credibility.

The best thing the OP can do is get legal advice. But falling short of that go back with an offer, subject to disclose, that is realistic in terms of an equity share, pension share and Co parenting. Offer mediation again and then wait for a reply. Judges don’t like people bouncing into court with high handed demands having refused mediation. She will very quickly get steered into realism by the judge.

I spoke with him by DM this morning. I don't think there is much worth reading in this thread. It turned into a pile on with no basis in fact. The OP was treated as a punchbag for other people's lousy exes and I don't blame him if he gave up.

There’s been a few lately, considering how many dodgy incels we’ve been getting on here I wish people would be more wary.

we are literally giving the wolves tools to eat us! Men shouldn’t be able to come on mumsnet to figure out how to shaft their wives , wtf is going on

Nope, not given up.
Just been dealing with a broken down car, sending emails/questions to various solicitors and baking muffins with my kids.
And to those with the narky and sarky comments... I'm sorry that whatever you went through has maybe tainted and tinted your vision of men.
We're not all assholes, we're really not.
Whatever you think of me... Well that's your opinion.
I'd like to come out the other side of this in a reasonable position that allows me as much time with my mini monsters as possible, but isn't financially catastrophic and detrimental to the housing and care I can give them.
I don't fully understand how the system works, and I've tried to do this without legal help and maybe my expectations are unrealistic.

I do appreciate all the kind words and suggestions.

Thank you.

If you see divorce as a way to shaft the other spouse rather than as a complex process to carefully separate a household whilst cognisant of the needs of both parties.... Well, that's your problem.

As for MumsNet becoming solely for women... I think the site is already pushing its luck with what it gets away with to be honest. Some of the views expressed that are not moderated are abhorrent and would not be permitted on most websites (although I guess Elon Musk is throwing standards out of the window now so who knows!)