Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Original poster

taking a man 'to the cleaners' why???

174 replies

Ouchbloodyouch · 30/05/2015 15:06

Surely they must have done something to 'deserve' it?
I'm in a fairly new relationship. Divorce going through (his). If the ex is the one who instigated the split why would you then try and take everything away from them that they owned prior to meeting former wife.
I'd like to think if I was ending a marriage then obviously I would want enough to give the children stability but this is beyond the pale. I appreciate I am only getting one version of events. He has either seriously done something bad or are there people who are out for every penny they can get?
No other red flags whatsoever btw.

OP posts:

fortunately · 30/05/2015 15:08

If the ex is entitled to it and the kids are entitled to it, then why shouldn't she/they have it? Presumably the assets are "marital assets" so why should he get to walk away with it all?

PushingThru · 30/05/2015 15:10

I don't understand the first sentence "surely they must've done something to deserve it". Who?

CalleighDoodle · 30/05/2015 15:11

Also, maybe look at your new partner and question why she feels the need

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2015 15:11

A man's "being taken to the cleaners" is often a woman's "fair distributon of marital assets and proper provision for children"

Pagwatch · 30/05/2015 15:11

This is the split he is describing to you.

I would be really wary of thinking you understand the history of a relationship on the basis of one party. That shows fairly poor judgement.

I know a few couples who have split. By and large the woman has ended up the most financially fucked, especially if she was a sahm.

Original poster

Ouchbloodyouch · 30/05/2015 15:13

Of course there is an entitlement. But why be hell bent on getting everything.? As in much much better off than the other party? Surely it should be equal..

OP posts:

ALaughAMinute · 30/05/2015 15:13

Was he unfaithful to his wife?

fortunately · 30/05/2015 15:14

It's for the courts to decide what's fair.

I think it's fair that the person with the kids gets greater consideration when it comes to assets.

Original poster

Ouchbloodyouch · 30/05/2015 15:16

I did say I am only getting one version of events! ! I can't post too much as very identifying. In fact the whole point of my post is asking is this a red flag or are there people who are happy to leave someone financially worse off?

OP posts:

fortunately · 30/05/2015 15:17

There are people happy to apply through the courts for what they are legally entitled to, of course.

If he's not happy to provide for his kids and his ex then yes, that's a red flag.

Pagwatch · 30/05/2015 15:19

But, my point is, only you can judge whether she is some hell bent harridan or he is trying to fuck her over.

You can only bear in mind which version best suits his purposes and make an assessment.

Personally I would be really really wary of a man who happily caricatured the mother of his children.

viridus · 30/05/2015 15:20

In a ."fairly new relationship" ? I would advise you to get to know all the details before you commit to this man.
Many men have done something seriously bad and are extremely good at hiding it.
Is he going to live on his own, for awhile now after the divorce, or go from one woman to another as many do, I wonder.

SoupDragon · 30/05/2015 15:21

In fact the whole point of my post is asking is this a red flag or are there people who are happy to leave someone financially worse off?

Or is the XW just wanting what she is entitled to?

Of course there is an entitlement. But why be hell bent on getting everything.? As in much much better off than the other party? Surely it should be equal..

No, it shouldn't be equal it should be fair. Which isn't always the same thing.

Stinkersmum · 30/05/2015 15:22

Good grief OP, fences asking such a reasonable question on misandrists r us mumsnet!

Stinkersmum · 30/05/2015 15:22

Fancy, not fences!

Hessen · 30/05/2015 15:24

I think there's a bit of a society problem with people taking what they are entitled to, rather than what they feel is fair themselves.

Blanket rules are put in place to protect the children as a priority, as they should be. But people on both sides can become very selfish and entitled because of the emotion of the situation.

My ex has once in anger (then retracted it) said that she could have "taken me to the cleaners" and that I should be grateful that she didn't. Going by legal advice she could have taken overtime money I earn, % of bonuses, part of my pension and so on.

Thankfully for all involved it never turned nasty and we worked out an arrangement away from courts that puts the interests of our daughter first, but still allows us both to continue to have our own lives without severe disadvantage.

Original poster

Ouchbloodyouch · 30/05/2015 15:24

He doesn't. He's very respectful. I am fully aware that someone talking badly of an ex will be talking about you in the same way. I'm very wary. I only know what I know factually not in any ranty disrespectful way. Some of the posts here are way off the mark but I can't really contradict any as too identifying sadly!
Thank you though!

OP posts:

PushingThru · 30/05/2015 15:25

Whether he hasn't done 'something bad' & isn't deserving of 'punishment' isn't the point. If he, say, bought a flat that's 'his', then made some kids a few years later, he doesn't get to compartmentalise assets when they need a roof over their heads.

lunar1 · 30/05/2015 15:25

I think I'd wait for them to finish all aspects of their separation before getting yourself involved to the point of their finances. And remember that how he treats his ex now could be how he treats you in the future. I think I'd take a step back.

PushingThru · 30/05/2015 15:26

This is why the law on this is vast...! There are many versions of fair.

goddessofsmallthings · 30/05/2015 15:28

O dear. Is it looking as if he might not be as wealthy as you thought he was able to support you in the style you were hoping to become accustomed to?

Is the ex is the one who instigated the split a euphemism for her being the one who filed for divorce? If so, I suggest you ask Daddy Bigbucks your new paramour to show you a copy of her petition.

Original poster

Ouchbloodyouch · 30/05/2015 15:28

Thanks hessen its the fact that one party would be severely disadvantaged by the other applying for what they are 'entitled' to rather than needed.

OP posts:

Original poster

Ouchbloodyouch · 30/05/2015 15:29

goddess aren't you a peach? I didn't deserve that!

OP posts:

pco · 30/05/2015 15:29

Have you met many of his friends OP? I have a male friend who is going through a divorce at the moment and his soon to be ex is behaving atrociously re money and access to the children - I knew her the whole time he was married to her (10 years) and if you were a new partner of my friend in this situation I would be able to reassure you that she is, indeed, a very sad and angry person who displayed a lot of "red flags" herself during the time they were together. Some (a lot of) people use money on divorce as a means of playing out their anger and hurt. The assumption seems to be that it is always the men trying to walk away with as much as they can get away with but in my experience (both in general terms and previously as a divorce lawyer) is that woman do not actually want what is fair - they want to cause the other person pain and suffering. It is very often not really about the money at all.

Cancookdontcook · 30/05/2015 15:30

My exh gives me £7 a week for his two dc and still thinks I took him to the cleaners.

He only paid that because I went to the CMS.

He tells everyone we know that I took his money.

The courts decided in the end because his proposal was laughable.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Swipe left for the next trending thread