Would I be a fool to go from nisi to absolute?

[ValentineBombshell]

Don't know what to do for the best

Am still between decree nisi and absolute. I've held off as
a) solicitor's fees have increased significantly re sorting financial matters and may need to instruct another/ bite the bullet and pay the 2K/sort it out, somehow, myself and
b)STBExH ballsed up his job, which is actually pretty hard to do, so has no income apart from sporadic temp work but am so, so hacked off with his behaviour towards me and the children my patience has run out, but I don't know if I would be foolish to proceed to absolute - financially I mean. Am I better to wait 'til he has a job, however long that will be, before proceeding?

If you have not sorted out the ancillary relief (finances) which is the impression I get from your post, then yes, you would be a fool to apply for DA. No matter what it may cost, you really would be sensible to sort finances before finalising your divorce.

He has a payoff which is sitting in my bank account that will tide him and us through the next few months (including a few months of missing maintenance and also the divorce fees he owes me, so not as much as he thinks). All income comes into my account as it used to be the joint one, and H a) has not bothered to change this as long as I pay him how much he's owed, although that was always going to change when (and now if) he got a new job and handed over his bank account details and b) is useless at managing money so is content for me to do this.

He was offered another job, better paid than the last in a new location, starting afresh. The job offer was then withdrawn as StBExH misled them about the circumstances of his leaving. So he applying again being more honest, but that means any future employer taking a risk and there are far fewer posts around. So currently no job.

That's what I thought, Mosagain, but do I hang on til he has found another job?

Unfortunately I am financially dependent on him, although I'd love to be free - he paid the mortgage and a chunk of the bills in the past - basically what my salary doesn't cover. My childcare (10.5k per annum) is largely covered by tax credits and if I went full time I'd lose that which would rule out any financial benefit of being full time - it might also, with the associate workload attached, bring me to my knees! Once childcare is no long such a factor and the children are a little less dependent (especially dc3 who is not yet 2) I will go full time.

When the house sells, I and the dcs will be downsizing and reducing mortgage cost/term - there is a fair amount of equity in the house but not enough to buy something outright. Solicitor indicated that because of the disparity in income (as I had gone p/t for the dcs - otherwise throughout my 20s was earning the same as H) that I could make a claim against his pension, which would in reality mean the bulk or all of the house coming to me so I can house the dcs. The intention, even when he was earning, was to find something smaller but in the catchment of the school I wanted the dcs to eventually go to, near my work too, so commuting costs decrease as well (which is quite a chunk) with H servicing the mortgage over a much shorter term.

But without his input am not sure a mortgage company would go with it.

So would I be sensible to ride this time out assuming that H will eventually find another job? And once employed go to absolute?

The only reasons you'd delay applying for DA are:

1. You'd cease to be his widow on his death so ineligible for widows pension.

1. You don't own your home, and so the only reason you've a right to live there is that you're still married to him.

Other than that, there's no reason to delay.

So I can go ahead and sort out the finances, even though at this point he earns sporadically/cant pay maintenance? [puzzled]

And sorting out the finances always means using a solicitor? Have no complaints about mine at all, just that for the financial part the fees have increased from about 1-1.5k to about 2-2.5k.

You don't have to use a solicitor to sort out the finances you can do it between yourselves, but if you do use a solicitor you are negotiating from an informed position. That can actually save money if it prevents you from agreeing something not in your interests and/or changing you mind inflaming the situation and resulting in costly court proceedings.

If your husband has a large pension fund you could be disadvantaged by the absolute because, as Collaborate said, you would lose certain rights to his pension. Also if your husband owns the former matrimonial home and you have registered your rights to live there those rights will end when you are no longer married. That means the property could be sold and your ex (if he was so inclined) could spend the proceeds.

I'm not a solicitor so have no vested interest but your solicitor is in the best position to advise about your particular circumstances.

Forgot, child maintenance can be arranged any time by private agreement or through the CSA.

The aim of a divorce settlement is to separate finances and to end the financial claims between spouse if possible. Spouse maintenance is only a factor if there is a discrepancy in incomes and your husband has the ability to pay. If this is applicable his potential income can be considered and a nominal amount of SM may be ordered so the amount can be varied at a later date when he finds employment again.

Thank you STIDW and everyone for their advice.

House is owned jointly, although H does not reside here anymore but rents in a shared house - think he had/has plans to share with OW. He doesn't have a whacking pension but a decentish public sector one. We were together 21 years, married for 8, I went p/t when the children came along (8, 6 and nearly 2 now) - hence the advice to offset his pension against the house, which sounds like I'd need the services of a solicitor to do for me. And he was paying spousal maintenance (the mortgage essentially). But I don't understand how finances can be agreed if he is barely earning at present?

Would be much happier to have it tied up legally as H would more likely observe it/think there was less wriggle-room. And although slightly daunting, 2k to do this with a solicitor sounds within the right kind of ballpark to you?

Sorry, xposted.

Spousal was being paid as he earned more than twice my income and costs of childcare make up a significant proportion from my salary.

He can no longer pay spousal, or any maintenance, but has lump sum payoff from work and I am eking out the child tax credit back payment. Fingers crossed he finds work soon - he is very good at what he does but left under less than ideal circumstances, so who knows?

Have reread your last paragraph and understood (brain functioning on slow today). Even if he got a more lowly paid position than his last (very likely) he would still earn significantly more than I do as a p/timer. So finances can be sorted on potential income, that I didn't realise.

The dreaded form E awaits then!