When the ex wants to change the deal

XChrome · 2024-09-15T23:04:22+00:00

So my ex tried to get me to agree to change the financial division so he gets 55%. He based it on the fact that I own a house but he has to rent. Laughable. Having a house means tons of expenses in upkeep. Not only that, I support our disabled adult daughter. Naturally, I turned him down flat and of course he got pissy, which I laughed at. Entitled prick. I'm assuming there are lots of others who have had an ex come to them after the deal has been made and try to change it in their favour. Tell me your stories.

millymollymoomoo · 16/09/2024 06:53

55% might be a fair split for him
we can’t tell

its oerfectly normal for divorcing couples to look at the proposal and then decide it’s not “fair’ and put in request for a different outcome
one party owning a house while the other has to rent is not ideal but may be mitigating circumstances ( eg you mention disabled daughter)

so he might be being reasonable
or he could be a complete arse.
impossible to tell

Theunamedcat · 16/09/2024 06:56

Just an adult child? Long or short marriage?

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 02:52

Theunamedcat · 16/09/2024 06:56

Just an adult child? Long or short marriage?

More than thirty years. Two adult kids.

OP posts:

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 02:54

millymollymoomoo · 16/09/2024 06:53

55% might be a fair split for him
we can’t tell

its oerfectly normal for divorcing couples to look at the proposal and then decide it’s not “fair’ and put in request for a different outcome
one party owning a house while the other has to rent is not ideal but may be mitigating circumstances ( eg you mention disabled daughter)

so he might be being reasonable
or he could be a complete arse.
impossible to tell

It's certainly not impossible for me to tell. I was actually looking for other people's stories about exes doing this, not opinions on whether he's an arse. I already know he is.

OP posts:

millymollymoomoo · 17/09/2024 06:46

well you have your view then.
people go through all sorts of things in a divorce. Wanting to come out with as much £ and protect your own financial position doesn’t t necessarily make you one. You dud the same it seems. And so do all the women on here.

changing position and asking g for more during the process is usual.

but yes let’s all come along and say what a bunch of twats are exes are. 🙌

LemonTT · 17/09/2024 08:29

It’s not that unusual for people to renegotiate after mediation when they seek legal advice. Mediation is useful for many people but mediators aren’t legally qualified or experienced enough to give solid advice on many aspects of divorce law. Any complications won’t compute. A lawyer however may see a flaw in a settlement that can be addressed.

One party being able to afford a home, which is a financial advantage, whilst the other can’t is a potential disparity in outcome. He has given a good reason to reopen the negotiation. You haven’t and you should.

The obvious complications in your post is the mention of your daughter. She is an adult with disabilities. That’s doesn’t necessarily make her a dependent but it might. You will need to make that case to a standard accepted in court.

As it stands the “deal” seems unfair as home ownership is hugely advantageous over renting for most people. This implies his capital share is too low. A lawyer would caution him not to settle for that.

In my own experience, my brother was able to renegotiate the capital share from 70% to 60% after mediation on the advice of a solicitor. This was because the mediation process hadn’t assessed the income of both parties properly. His ex had capacity to improve her income.

Ariela · 17/09/2024 09:04

I presume he has decent pension contributions whereas yours were compromised by less hours childcare and so on?

Next time he says 55% , suggest a revisit of the pension split !

LemonTT · 17/09/2024 10:17

Ariela · 17/09/2024 09:04

I presume he has decent pension contributions whereas yours were compromised by less hours childcare and so on?

Next time he says 55% , suggest a revisit of the pension split !

If they haven’t even looked at pensions then of course neither of them should proceed with the deal. Which would obviously be flawed.

The OP needs to take his position seriously otherwise it is going to cost them both a lot of money. It is not a deal if only one party is signed up to it and unless the deal was court ordered it isn’t binding.

The way to respond to this is to objectively address the concern and to reassert the legal basis for the deal. That might be enough to convince her ex and whoever is advising him that he got the best deal he can without using the courts.

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 21:31

Ariela · 17/09/2024 09:04

I presume he has decent pension contributions whereas yours were compromised by less hours childcare and so on?

Next time he says 55% , suggest a revisit of the pension split !

Correct. I suspect he has also socked some money away for retirement since we split up. So when I told him changing the agreement would mean full financial disclosure, he suddenly went silent. 😄

OP posts:

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 21:36

LemonTT · 17/09/2024 10:17

If they haven’t even looked at pensions then of course neither of them should proceed with the deal. Which would obviously be flawed.

The OP needs to take his position seriously otherwise it is going to cost them both a lot of money. It is not a deal if only one party is signed up to it and unless the deal was court ordered it isn’t binding.

The way to respond to this is to objectively address the concern and to reassert the legal basis for the deal. That might be enough to convince her ex and whoever is advising him that he got the best deal he can without using the courts.

Show quote history

He is not taking it to court. He knows he'd lose. His lawyer actually told him I would probably get 60% or more if it went to court.
So you see, I do not need to take his position seriously at all. He has backed off since I said that changing the deal would call for financial disclosure. That pretty much says it all.

OP posts:

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 21:36

LemonTT · 17/09/2024 10:17

If they haven’t even looked at pensions then of course neither of them should proceed with the deal. Which would obviously be flawed.

The OP needs to take his position seriously otherwise it is going to cost them both a lot of money. It is not a deal if only one party is signed up to it and unless the deal was court ordered it isn’t binding.

The way to respond to this is to objectively address the concern and to reassert the legal basis for the deal. That might be enough to convince her ex and whoever is advising him that he got the best deal he can without using the courts.

Show quote history

He is not taking it to court. He knows he'd lose. His lawyer actually told him I would probably get 60% or more if it went to court.
So you see, I do not need to take his position seriously at all. He has backed off since I said that changing the deal would call for financial disclosure. That pretty much says it all.

OP posts:

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 21:40

LemonTT · 17/09/2024 08:29

It’s not that unusual for people to renegotiate after mediation when they seek legal advice. Mediation is useful for many people but mediators aren’t legally qualified or experienced enough to give solid advice on many aspects of divorce law. Any complications won’t compute. A lawyer however may see a flaw in a settlement that can be addressed.

One party being able to afford a home, which is a financial advantage, whilst the other can’t is a potential disparity in outcome. He has given a good reason to reopen the negotiation. You haven’t and you should.

The obvious complications in your post is the mention of your daughter. She is an adult with disabilities. That’s doesn’t necessarily make her a dependent but it might. You will need to make that case to a standard accepted in court.

As it stands the “deal” seems unfair as home ownership is hugely advantageous over renting for most people. This implies his capital share is too low. A lawyer would caution him not to settle for that.

In my own experience, my brother was able to renegotiate the capital share from 70% to 60% after mediation on the advice of a solicitor. This was because the mediation process hadn’t assessed the income of both parties properly. His ex had capacity to improve her income.

It was agreed that I should have a home for the sake of our daughter. So no, it is not reasonable to reopen the issue. He has already been advised by his lawyer that going to court would give me more.

OP posts:

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 21:45

millymollymoomoo · 17/09/2024 06:46

well you have your view then.
people go through all sorts of things in a divorce. Wanting to come out with as much £ and protect your own financial position doesn’t t necessarily make you one. You dud the same it seems. And so do all the women on here.

changing position and asking g for more during the process is usual.

but yes let’s all come along and say what a bunch of twats are exes are. 🙌

That's not why I think he's a twat. I think he's a dreadful person for many reasons, but that isn't one of them.
It is, however, typical of him to go back on a deal. He never made a promise he wouldn't be happy to break.
I don't know how "usual" it is to break your word, but if it is as you say, God help us all.

OP posts:

Original poster

XChrome · 17/09/2024 21:47

Sorry for the double post, Lemon. I don't know how that happened.

OP posts:

MissHemsworth · 17/09/2024 21:51

Im currently in the process of negotiating finances with my STBXH. He's on six figures and has been for some time. I do nearly 100% of the childcare. I have done low paid jobs that revolve around childcare/school runs etc, before he left he was away more than he was home. I started a MSc two years ago, a few months in he cheated, upped and left. Disappeared for a month and since has had the kids sporadically and only on his terms.

He is spending thousands on solicitors trying to prove that I have a much higher income than I'm saying. I'm on UC, work a pt job earning minimum wage, I'm a student and I do nearly all of the childcare. If it wasn't my life it would be laughable. He's trying to take me for 50/50 and pay a pittance in CM.

Fortunately I'm incredibly stubborn, have an amazing support system and a strong sense of justice. Sadly though I do think this is going to end up in court

Original poster

XChrome · 18/09/2024 00:41

MissHemsworth · 17/09/2024 21:51

Im currently in the process of negotiating finances with my STBXH. He's on six figures and has been for some time. I do nearly 100% of the childcare. I have done low paid jobs that revolve around childcare/school runs etc, before he left he was away more than he was home. I started a MSc two years ago, a few months in he cheated, upped and left. Disappeared for a month and since has had the kids sporadically and only on his terms.

He is spending thousands on solicitors trying to prove that I have a much higher income than I'm saying. I'm on UC, work a pt job earning minimum wage, I'm a student and I do nearly all of the childcare. If it wasn't my life it would be laughable. He's trying to take me for 50/50 and pay a pittance in CM.

Fortunately I'm incredibly stubborn, have an amazing support system and a strong sense of justice. Sadly though I do think this is going to end up in court

How awful! This kind of story is all too common and it makes my blood boil what these selfish pigs get away with.
Mine was a cheater too. They will invariably screw you over you financially as well.
I'm so sorry you have to go to court because that bastard has to win and be in control. That's what it's really about. Make sure your lawyer gets a forensic accountant involved, because he's probably hidden money away. I hope you prevail in court. It would be an outrage if he got away with this.

OP posts: