Financial Settlement - Reasonable?

[Bub1765]

I went into my divorce thinking I was being quite reasonable with my offer for settlement but 6 months on I seem to be getting nowhere. I've had legal advice and got the impression that I'm being reasonable, in line with a court outcome but not excessively generous but my STBXW seems to be expecting a lot more and ongoing financial ties for a long time. I would be most grateful if those who have settled or been subject to a final hearing think this is within the right ball park:

H: 41, earning £102k gross per annum. Net income per month of £3,635 after commuting costs, child maintenance and taking sole responsibility for shared debts.

W: 39, earning £14k part time. Net income per month of £3,183 when benefits and child maintenance added to total. Universal credit element is £671 of this. Was retraining to earn more and recently graduated, has now chosen not to pursue this during divorce.

Children: 3 (ages 12, 9 and 7)

Assets: House £110k equity (£385k minus mortgage and cost of sales); Pensions £190k, Cars around £10k.

Liabilities ex mortgage: Debt of around £8k.

Proposal:

Children: 4 nights with me per fortnight, 10 nights with her. 50/50 split in school holidays. This part has been agreed and is not contentious although I am more than willing to do more to enable her career (but this balance would pay her a decent amount of child maintenance).

Assets: 90% equity to her, 10% to me. I will agree to stay on mortgage for 4 years when youngest is at secondary school, at which point she must either remove me from the mortgage and pay my 10% or sell. Pensions 70/30 split in my favour. Each keep own cars.

Income: Clean break on income. Child maintenance paid.

For context, my STBXW is earning beneath her earning capacity and is unwilling to do anything about it. Childcare would largely be covered by additional UC and I would happily pay the rest but I am much less willing to pay this amount without a clear goal of improving her earning capacity and ceasing to be dependent. I would estimate - conservatively - that her immediate earning capacity is £25k and this could rise to £40k. It could go rather higher with a bit of effort but I won't crystal ball gaze.

Points of contention are that:

1. She wants to stay in the house for 14 years when youngest is 21, me remain named on and contribute to the mortgage albeit not 100% and then to sell and split in her favour. I think this is a bad idea because she won't do anything to improve her earnings now and both of us will probably find ourselves with insufficient capital to buy again in our mid-fifties (unless she got the lion's share of the equity at that point, in which case only I would end up unable to buy but obviously I don't think that would be at all fair).

2. She wants spousal maintenance but because she has universal credit of £671 I would have to pay a lot to make any difference to her income, to the point that I would have a materially lower income than she does. I don't think this is fair on our children either as it would leave me barely able to cover my own costs and much less able to provide for them on an ad hoc basis. My counter position is that I could agree to cover certain expenses (e.g. hobbies, uniforms, school trips) outside of the CMS arrangement.

Would welcome thoughts?

@Inthedeep Realistically my STBXW would get a lot of SM if I didn't have to pay CM. I would prefer to pay CM because it can be stopped immediately if I ever lose my job and definitely ends when the children are 18 or thereabouts. I don't think she is using custody to try and get more money though.

I'm not entirely convinced she's legally savvy enough to play games in divorce either. Or maybe she is but she's playing a dumb game that will backfire 😂

Joking aside, I think it is more that she feels entitled to take a very easy very part time job to balance with childcare whereas my view is if I'm going to be busting a gut for the next 11 years, she should too. The law seems to be on my side in this respect and will expect her to maximise her earning capacity.

Why do you think she would get spousal maintenance? It’s very rare now, and whilst you are a high earner by most people’s standards, you’re not earning millions.

I got/get spousal maintenance, similar figures to op. People on here always say 'it doesn't happen any more' but I'm never sure where they get that info from. It was talked about as if it were obvious I would get it from mediator/solicitor mine/solicitor his. Of course as a % it is given out less than the 70s but that's obviously going to happen given women didn't work then. Ime it's totally normal on the relative salaries detailed here.

Anyway. You talk a lot, only, about finances op, and nothing about what's best for your children. You once made a decision as a family that you wanted your children to not be in after school clubs etc. it's a choice many people would agree with, although many don't have the financial luxury of choice. Even split, your 'family' still can afford this option.

Also, and I know many people on here disagree, but myself and my ex, morally were against getting UC as opposed to spousal maintenance. UC is essentially other people's taxes. We have a large 'family' pot, and it would have felt wrong.

It's not that uncommon on my salary if childcare is 50/50, at least not payable for a term of say 3-4 years until children are secondary age.

@arethereanyleftatall My wife wouldn't need universal credit if she made a proper effort to maximise her earning capacity. That's between her and the state and I don't see it as my role to intervene in that arrangement.

In your case, I sense a moral tone in your response but I don't really see why. It doesn't seem to be any different morally to me if you are living off the state or living off an ex. In the eyes of many of us you're still unreasonably depending on someone else to pay for your life and you should be doing more to improve your earning capacity. I think your ex is a bit of an idiot to put up with it to be honest and should stop enabling you to shirk your responsibilities.

You've twisted that and you know it. 'Living off an ex' aka 'father paying for his children'.

An idiot for wanting what his best for his children? No. No, he's not an idiot.

@arethereanyleftatall You're quite mistaken, you are thinking of child maintenance. Spousal maintenance is a payment to you because you are choosing not to earn enough to live on. He is enabling that and he's not even providing for the children. He's just saving your blushes having to go to turn to the state, your children are no better off from this arrangement. In fact, for you to save face, they're worse off because dad has less money 😂I think bringing your children into the conversation about your inability to stand on your own two feet is quite shameless really.

My view is that if my STBXW wants to earn £15-20k less than she is capable of, she can take it up with the state to cover the shortfall.

You couldn't be further off the mark. But you know nothing about me, so that's understandable. Have a good day.

The OP has said that he's happy to have the children more, so perhaps he could propose a 50/50 split to ease the mental burden on his ex wife. That would be fairer.

Of course, she'd have to manage with less child maintenance but she could focus more on building her career I suppose.

Child maintenance is designed to pay for cost of living of the children. So, the basic clothing, food, gas, leccy, water.
It is NOT designed to pay for the children’s clubs, haircuts, toys, teen items like phones, Nike, make up etc.

You cant argue that she should get a better job AND use your commuting costs as an argument. I don’t know what she does, but most £25k jobs do not allow hybrid working so she would have commuting costs daily and, unless she works in education, significant childcare costs.

The sad truth is that for many single parents who have the children the bulk of the time, it becomes a delicate balance of working just enough to not lose benefits.

I feel like so often, the main earner in a marriage is happy for the other parent, normally mum, to have a “little job” so they can care for the children and run the house but then when divorce rolls around there is suddenly a demand for that parent to go out and do a full time job. Where are the kids in this? You’ve so far been happy to bust your ass to care for the family so why has that changed? You will still be a family even after you divorce.

Although you currently work hybrid yourself, are you genuinely able to work fully remote every second week to accommodate not only school runs, but also 100% of the cooking, shopping, running to clubs, washing, ironing, homework, etc AND do a full day of work from home? Can you stop work at 3pm for a few hours and then jump on again after dinner, homework, bath and bedtime and do 2-3 hours work? Do you even want to?
What happens if your place of work decide that everyone needs to come back to the office (don’t even get me started).
At this point in divorce many dads push for 50/50 without actually either wanting to or be able to offer this. And assume that if they have an important meeting, mum will be flexible to have the kids that day.

As a high earner, I also assume you have a strong career path and may change jobs in the future where your situation can drastically change for the better or the worse. Your next pay rise is likely her entire annual income. Read that again.

The court will take the view of what’s best for the children and they are not super keen on 50/50 because whereas that might suit the parents and is convenient for dividing money, the kids in general HATE 50/50.

This is why there is often a strong favouring of the main carer as this forms a stable base for the children while they are this young.

Ultimately, a financial settlement is not about “who gets what” - it is about how do you and her split assets now and design a life for your children that provides stability and nurtures them.

I would say you are nearly there but if you find a way to get the overall pension/equity split to roughly 60(her)/40 you by increasing the pension division this is more likely to be what a court would order.

I doubt there would be spousal maintenance or there may be some small order for a short period of time precisely for the reason you state that she is choosing not to maximise her earning capacity. It is also unlikely she would get a mesher order until the youngest is 21 when you are prepared to give up 90% equity.

If you get the offer closer to to 60/40 I suspect any lawyer she sees would suggest that she wouldn't better that in court.

You are right. There is clearly an anti man issue going on in some posts. Courts will generally look for clean breaks where possible and won't be impressed that having supported a partner through education to pursue a career that in a divorce situation they choose not to. There is also more of a move to 50/50 where logistics allow this despite some others saying otherwise.

I don’t think there is an anti man issue per se. I think there are mixed realities and a system designed to monetise the time each parent has with the kids. I totally disagree with the way CM is calculated and all families, whether they’re still together or not, are crippled by a flawed society. In other European countries, means testing for child assistance and better conditions allow for both parents and the children to thrive. There is this less conflict and ultimately the children benefit.

OP could you have the DC more than 4 nights out of 14 during term time?

@arethereanyleftatall On the contrary, I know you well enough to know you've posted feeling all morally superior because you don't claim universal credit. I also know you are on very shaky ground morally in doing so because in the process you have made your children poorer, you are still a dependent and setting a bad example as a result and worst of all by being enabled to work less than you could the pair of you have an arrangement that is not contributing your fair share of tax towards schools, roads, hospitals etc.

So get off your high horse.

I don't think you will get good answers from MN as all kinds of different people post. you offer sounds generous to me (I am a lawyer, but not a divorce one, and I divorced a much lower earner teacher husband so completely different situation - like you I wanted a clean break and my husband wanted maintenance for life despite both of us working full time (and he does work very hard as do I). We negotiated but both had solicitors (I paid for both sides) and had no court hearings as did not want to waste money. We ended up at about 59% of assets to him and I to support the children entirely alone as I was the higher earner and I was able to get a massive new mortgage on the house to buy out his share. We each kept our pensions as they were similar - I have since cashed mine at age 55 to help the children with buying a property but that is a different issue and entirely my choice and I will work until I die anyway. In our case our agreed consent order said I would also pay all university costs too - and my husband would not).

If I were in charge of the state I would force people to work for their universal credit etc but that is not what this thread is about.

The offer sounds reasonable. Maintenance to the spouse is getting less common but the much older court orders were often wife kept house until youngest child was 18 or 21 and got spousal maintenance in the mean time.

Have you tried mediation to try to reach agreement? My husband and I just negotiated at home and through lawyers' letters which was not fun but better than court hearings and cheaper than going to court. Neither of us wanted to waste £200k on 2 y ears of court litigation when that money might instead have gone to one or the other of us.

@NosyJosie Suggest you read the whole thread before posting. A lot of what you said is wrong.

1. Child maintenance is a percentage of income and a lot of us pay enough to cover an awful lot more than the basics.

2. I've already explained we live in a large town close to the kind of jobs she wants to do. They are walking distance from affordable housing here.

3. I've never been happy about her career path. It was a bone of contention throughout our marriage. Men who want their wives to have little jobs are a fiction invented by MumsNet.

4. I've done schools runs etc etc for 6 years when she was a student so yep, I can do that.

5. My next pay rise could be a quarter of what she earns max and is going to be so heavily taxed that I won't see more than 40% of it net. A lot of it will be spent on child maintenance. Read that again.

6. If I had to go back to the office every day I would have to quit and find another job. Another good reason to not get tied into spousal maintenance.

7. I'm not asking for 50/50.

8. Your views on financial settlement are at odds with the legal view and rather self serving.

what are you basing this on? No court would agree to this.

@Spirallingdownwards Many thanks, I can tweak the offer when I get the pension report.

@YorkNew I could but it would affect the amount of CM she got. Whilst I would be happy to fix the CM on the existing split of nights, a solicitor would never let her sign off on it because technically I could amend it after a year by going to CMS. At the same time, I'm not willing to agree global maintenance because this would not terminate if I lost my job.

@xenia Thanks, that's very helpful and actually most of the people posting have been helpful. Obviously the usual suspects have turned up but I knew they would having read other posts! Blinkered doesn't even begin to describe... Anyway! I also wish you luck in continuing to work. I nearly had a second stab at becoming a solicitor but was warned it was horribly ageist and I would be forced out in my 50s. I sincerely hope that is not the case.

I agree. This post wasn't worth acknowledging, it's completely wrong.

You're assuming she's willing to be reasonable rather than feeling desperate or scared or angry and her actions being driven by the emotions she's feeling. You chose this so you're probably well ahead of her in adjusting to the idea of divorce and the cost of doing so. You may be relieved it's over and she might still be reeling.

Tweak offer her the extra £200 as child maintenance for a defined period say those 4 years before you want the house sold. There's nothing to stop you having a private child maintenance agreement, extra given to her doesn't have to be as spousal maintenance. Work out for you what is worth going to court over. I'm guessing if she holds firm on staying in the house till youngest is 21 and/or the spousal maintenance that could be worth fighting in court. Work out what you can give on and what is actually financially worth fighting for. Maybe £200 more child maintenance plus going 65/35 or 60/40 on the pension. At your income you should still be able to achieve a good pension outcome giving her a bit more.

@EliflurtleAndTheInfiniteMadness I won't go into details, but I wasn't the one who caused the marriage to end. I was just the one who filed for divorce in order to get on with it.

Your CM suggestion is generally sound but not trusted by the legal profession because it can be overturned with CMS after 1 year.

I am speaking from experience, mine and others, but ultimately you still earn four times her earnings potential.

Here’s my own split so you have a basis of comparison which is ultimately why you came here to ask and I’ll drop a few notes where there have been problems.

According to the court, I did not ask for enough in my proposal and they adjusted it slightly in my favour.

Divorce, both in 40s, DCs x 2 in primary school. At the point of civorce I earned circa 75k and he earned circa 55k. We both work full time and had wraparound childcare which was paid for.
Pensions: actuary report to achieve equality in pension at the point of divorce as we had some complex mixes of DC and DB schemes.
Children 75/25 - dad has slightly more than half of holidays, every second weekend.
Marital home equity: split 65/35 in my favour. This was where the court said I didn’t ask for enough and that they would have given me the house or let me remain in situ until the kids were 18. I declined this as first and foremost he’d not have had the funds to accommodate himself in owned property and this would have meant renting a place that would be too small for kids to have own rooms or him moving to a cheaper part of the country and had less opportunity to see the kids. There was some back and forth about this and the courts point was that although I had not named his new partner in the case, so her income was unaccounted for, it was likely there was additional funds in his economy overall.
Secondly, he was and remains unpleasant and I did not want to remain in the MH and effectively be a custodian of his future assets.

The reality of this settlement ten years later is that he pays the only child maintenance, nothing else. That child maintenance amount covers the gas, leccy, water and half the food, so arguable the children’s basic needs as is intended.

He refuses to contribute to anything else like clubs and this has had a direct impact on the girls, not me. If there are additional costs like prom dresses, iPhones, Taylor Swift concerts or other luxury items, he does not want to contribute because “it’s on your time”.

I go back to my original point. Take a step back and reflect on a) what would life look like FOR YOUR KIDS if you were still together b) how do you as their dad make this as possible as you can.
She needs to do the same and realise that she won’t have the lifestyle she enjoyed as your spouse and what does she need to do to create a life for herself.

I dated a great dad for awhile who had similar income to you and your stbxw but minus the pensions as there were none and no equity in play. So that made the split less convoluted.
She worked 12 hours a week as a hair stylist and was on universal credits etc. He took the stance that if she didn’t struggle then his kids wouldn’t struggle. Did little things like when her washing machine broke he got her a new one, made sure his kid had a PlayStation at her house, he covered all the luxuries I mentioned above, he carried on with doing club runs on weekends because he wanted to spend time with the kids, regardless of where they were overnight.
The resulting impact was no parental conflict, no stress on the kids. Everyone is happy.

I don’t think you should pay spousal maintenance but I do think you need to think more “”dad” here.

Sloppy language, I wasn't saying you caused the marriage to end, but that you might be further along in the process of acceptance because you were willing to call it quits. There's s psychological difference between acting from a place of acceptance and rationality to acting from a place of strong emotion. You feel she should agree as it is rationally a good offer. People often aren't very rational in divorce proceedings. The answer to what can get her to agree may only be a judge. Hence my suggestion to consider what is worth fighting over and what isn't.

Could you front load it, offer much higher CM for 12 months, she could save it....

eta: You could also agree to pay certainl things, like school excursions, camps, books, devices for school and home. You vould get £200 per month of extras agreed that way.