Spousal maintenance - nominal amount

[Magmum75]

I keep hearing here that spousal maintenance is not really a thing anymore. A clean break seems like the best thing to me, but my solicitor has advised I put in for spousal maintenance at the nominal sum of £1 a year to keep the option open should my circumstances change. Anyone else been advised to do this?

Why do you think you should have spousal maintenance? Once a financial order has been signed, thats it.

Get a new solicitor.

Spousal support is few and far between.

If you are putting in for £1 you don't need it clearly. If it goes to court this approach will reflect badly on you.

I was advised to do this 10 years ago. Solicitor suggested it just in case my circumstances changed (say I got ill and was unable to work). ExH agreed, all was fine, both children now over 18 and never needed to think about it.

I was advised it to allow flexibility for the future.

My ex-husband gives me £1 a year. I'm not sure why or what I'm supposed to do with it!!

Yes. My ex-husband is supposed to pay me £1 every year for exactly this purpose!

Eh? It's not about the amount is it? I thought that was just a token amount.

@vocalfryspeppermintcream It is. The nominal amount is to keep the option open should the receiver's circumstances change.
I don't even qualify for my £1 now as I'm remarried!

Yes the idea is that it keeps the option open to change the amount should my circumstances change, ie I can't work and support myself.

So could I give up work and demand £30k from him instead?!

Is your exdh a high earner?

Yes, compared to me, I've just returned to full time job, statutory redundancy won't kick in for 2 years, struggled to get this position after a long career break and company isn't particularly stable either.

Out of interest, does anyone know why this doesn’t work the other way?

as in why doesn’t the ex husband get a nominal £1 in case his circumstances change?

or is it directly related to who is RP and children? But again, circumstance could change, dad could end up RP, so why isn’t that door left open?

dh’s ex got the nominal £1 but she remarried within the year.

I always did wonder- she got the house and maintenance because she was primary parent, but if anything happened to her, or she decided to fuck off with her new man, dh would have been left with two kids, living at his parents, no house or ability to afford a house…

perhaps there should be an order in these cases that the house is in trust to the children rather than going directly to one ex spouse. Then at least the children will be housed.

@Yogatoga1 In my case they looked at earnings and earning capacity; a massive difference between myself and my ex-husband.

Nominal spousal maintenance (NSM) clauses are the norm in contact orders with children under 18.

NSM orders are orders for spousal maintenance at a nominal amount (for example, 5p per year). It is an order in name only as the receiving party would not receive any actual payments from the paying party.

It’s there to keep financial claims open (until children of the family are 18) in case they are needed in the future.

However - the receiver would need to fall on extremely hard times to ever receive SM. For e.g - they were confined to a wheelchair after an accident and unable to work.

But why should your ex support you in this case?

I've just remembered I've got this in my financial settlement - I'd forgotten about it. Haven't invoked it in 8 years of being divorced and I'd imagine it would be difficult to.

It's there in case of some significant change in financial circumstances. Maybe if the resident parent was unable for some reason to provide. Also sometimes in case of significant difference in the earning capacity of 2 parties...especially if this has been partially a result of one person caring for joint children.
I have it in my divorce settlement as my ex earns significantly more money. Once child support ends he would have had to increase the nominal amount to effectively provide ongoing payments to me. This won't happen now as I have remarried.
The logic behind this is that I have taken a very significant reduction in financial and career opportunities due to caring for our children.

If I was an ex I’d fight tooth and nail to prevent this going in/ especially if the other party is also taking higher stare of capital to compensate loss of earnings’ as result of raising children.

so it’s ok for one isetybto be protected but not other. What if higher earner is made redundant/has an accident/ is signed off sick - it should be reciprocal so they can then claim of their ex too

Yep.

the more I think about it the more I think financial orders should include life and critical illness for both parties, and that any assets such as equity in a house should be placed in trust for the children once they turn 21.

then if anything should happen to the RP, whoever takes over guardianship will be able to afford a good standard of living.

it also prevents a remarriage and the house being left to a new spouse while the children are dependent.

dh and his ex were pretty equal financially, similar job level. She walked away with the house and the nominal maintenance, if anything had happened the house would have gone to her new dh, and kids and their dad would have had nowhere to go.

In these circumstances you would probably be expected to just get another job or claim benefits.

It’s not that an unusual thing to be included. But you will need to show a clean break isn’t feasible. If it is then a judge may not, indeed shouldn’t, award it.

It’s an unusual to the point of rare thing to be triggered and you still have to make a case that you are unable to provide for yourself in a circumstance related to your marriage and he can afford this payment.

A judge will always seek a clean break and so should you. This is not an insurance in the way you think it is. If you are working now you can work. It’s not meant to keep you dependent on him and you will be expected to strive for independence.

But surely either party could get sick in the future so shouldn't both parties pay the other £1 until the children are grown ?

Hoping someone could give me some advice as I'm at my wits end! So my 17 year old son who's still in full time education is staying with his dad most nights now. We were having big arguments and this was only a temporary situation to try and resolve things. In the meantime he's found a girlfriend close by and wants to stay in his dad's for most nights. Its been 6 weeks.
Now his dad, who's always paid bare minimum of maintenance and never ever on time is demanding some from me. I'm still sending my son money for this and that to his bank but feel so angry and annoyed he's asking me for this. Almost feel like he sees my son as a way for money!!! I can't afford to be sending him what he expects and over the years he's been an absolute nightmare with money. He's giving my son money left right and centre so he thinks he's the bees knees now too! Just feel like I've lost him to a money grabber 😭 no doubt ill be made to pay of they take action but why should I are it easy when I had to fight tooth and nail for what I had!

Ffs another one 🙄

You need to start your own thread. And yes you should be paying child support. You can pay the bare minimum like him.