Divorcing empty nesters...
Discussion
Good luck to you all - and I truly mean that.
Reading some of these horror stories reminds me just how lucky I was. 45 / 55 split which I was comfortable with after 21 years of marriage and main bread winner. On-going maintenance + spousal support. Still get on ok with the ex, have a wonderful new partner of 4.5 years.
It can be done and I hope those of you who are struggling will eventually get to a place where you are more content. I'm happier now than at any point in my life I think - counting my blessings.
Reading some of these horror stories reminds me just how lucky I was. 45 / 55 split which I was comfortable with after 21 years of marriage and main bread winner. On-going maintenance + spousal support. Still get on ok with the ex, have a wonderful new partner of 4.5 years.
It can be done and I hope those of you who are struggling will eventually get to a place where you are more content. I'm happier now than at any point in my life I think - counting my blessings.
Whilst Paul sounds emotionally bitter and jilted by the legal system, he is basically correct. Once you get in the court room the judge spends 10 minutes going through the headline figures and then makes quick decision. He (or she) is a stranger to you and your situation, he knows the barristers on both sides are spinning it their way, and the parent with custody of the kids gets a significantly better financial settlement.
I had a friend who recently went through this, his wife wouldn't even speak to him during their 5 year divorce (except through solicitors, ker-ching). He is very, very prudent and meticulous - even his teenage kids have healthy SIPPs, whereas she sounds like a bucket with no bottom when it comes to money (on the benefits cap, plus £1000 a month in maintenance, £50k+ debt on credit cards). She lied about her savings so that she qualified for legal aid for the divorce. He has proof of this, plus all sorts of other things missing or incorrect on her financial declaration.
He got pushed into such a corner with the negotiations that he was determined to have his day in court and present all his evidence. Luckily his barrister managed to talk him into coming to an agreement outside the court room (I suspect it would have gone badly for him, although I doubt it could get much worse as he'd already conceded to pretty much all of her financial demands).
The biggest problem in my eyes is that the legal system isn't setup to cope with separated parents having joint (as in 50/50) responsibility for the kids. It's assumed one parent has majority care and responsibility, and the other is penalised as though they're an absent parent. It's clear Tonker makes a lot of time for his son (as do many modern dad's), but the system works against this.
I had a friend who recently went through this, his wife wouldn't even speak to him during their 5 year divorce (except through solicitors, ker-ching). He is very, very prudent and meticulous - even his teenage kids have healthy SIPPs, whereas she sounds like a bucket with no bottom when it comes to money (on the benefits cap, plus £1000 a month in maintenance, £50k+ debt on credit cards). She lied about her savings so that she qualified for legal aid for the divorce. He has proof of this, plus all sorts of other things missing or incorrect on her financial declaration.
He got pushed into such a corner with the negotiations that he was determined to have his day in court and present all his evidence. Luckily his barrister managed to talk him into coming to an agreement outside the court room (I suspect it would have gone badly for him, although I doubt it could get much worse as he'd already conceded to pretty much all of her financial demands).
The biggest problem in my eyes is that the legal system isn't setup to cope with separated parents having joint (as in 50/50) responsibility for the kids. It's assumed one parent has majority care and responsibility, and the other is penalised as though they're an absent parent. It's clear Tonker makes a lot of time for his son (as do many modern dad's), but the system works against this.
olly22n said:
I have my daughter 50/50, and i'd say over the year probably a little more than that. She's not a burden to me and i enjoy our time together. If she needs something, I buy it. She needs moey for a school trip, its there. Savings? More than me!
However, if my ex were to unleash the CSA on me, I'd be coughing up £2/300pm to her. Not my daughter, but contributing towards mys ex's new family and household costs. Which is plain wrong.
The law needs to change.
If you have your child an actual 50% of the time, then you would not be paying anything. That's how it works.However, if my ex were to unleash the CSA on me, I'd be coughing up £2/300pm to her. Not my daughter, but contributing towards mys ex's new family and household costs. Which is plain wrong.
The law needs to change.
I get your point about the contribution to the ex's household, but some things are too complicated to legislate for, and that's one of them. For every snake with T!ts, there's a T!t with a snake
olly22n said:
randlemarcus said:
If you have your child an actual 50% of the time, then you would not be paying anything. That's how it works.
No, it doesn't. If you are not the primary carer/parent whatever it is called then even if you have 50% custody, you have to pay.
ETA - if they pursue you through the CSA that is. To clarify, I don't pay anything as she hasn't claimed.
My ex went to the CSA, which was fine, she got around the same as the original Court Order, but bitterly regretted that when I got made redundant, as a percentage of zero is less than a designated monthly amount.
PAUL500 said:
The outcome however will always be the same regardless when children are in the mix, that is sweeten the mother by giving her way more £££ than she needs, by dipping into the dads share, his kids can however just sleep on the camp bed in the one bed rented flat above the kebab shop whenever they visit.
It is not ALWAYS the same. It really isn't. I was left penniless in a rented house with a three week old baby (so on Maternity leave with almost zero income) whilst he disappears with the new woman, and he then ends up paying me £50 a week support. Seriously, how was any of that in my favour? Seriously? I get so f
ked off by comments like this. Yes, there are a lot of awful, spiteful women out there, but there are also a lot of men who are equally as bad. Tonker is doing amazingly well and being an incredible role model for his son.
supercommuter said:
I find this thread utterly amazing.
I fail to understand how women feel this much entitlement to assets that they have had no input to? I really don't understand how any court of law could see it as fair.
I am recently married and I truly hope that if, god forbid, anything happens in my relationship I don't get taken for a ride!
Liken a marriage to a partnership were everything is owned equally whoever's name it is in - that is the starting point.I fail to understand how women feel this much entitlement to assets that they have had no input to? I really don't understand how any court of law could see it as fair.
I am recently married and I truly hope that if, god forbid, anything happens in my relationship I don't get taken for a ride!
I'd have a quiet word with a lawyer about your assets if you aren't comfortable with transferring at least 50% should you get divorced. Forewarned is forearmed and all that.
singlecoil said:
johnwilliams77 said:
Or people need to stop putting them in these positions (getting married and taking on that risk)
People should be made to read these threads before either getting married and/or having children.
You are quite right when there is no money in the pot, and that is the failing in the system. Need is need but if the guy blows the lot then the wife gets half or more of nothing, ie nothing, but the guy that does not squander the family money gets heavily penalised as a result.
There was more than enough equity in my case that 50/50 or even 55/45 gave us both the option to provide a lovely home for our children. 72/28 did not with disastrous results for them now.
There is far more to my case than I can go into at this stage, hence my perceived bitterness with the family courts, as my ex after next week will no longer be providing a home for either of my daughters, yet she still gets to keep all the money she was given for such. The judge was made fully aware of this at the time but chose to ignore it, to the detriment of both my daughters futures.
There was more than enough equity in my case that 50/50 or even 55/45 gave us both the option to provide a lovely home for our children. 72/28 did not with disastrous results for them now.
There is far more to my case than I can go into at this stage, hence my perceived bitterness with the family courts, as my ex after next week will no longer be providing a home for either of my daughters, yet she still gets to keep all the money she was given for such. The judge was made fully aware of this at the time but chose to ignore it, to the detriment of both my daughters futures.
Kateg28 said:
t is not ALWAYS the same. It really isn't. I was left penniless in a rented house with a three week old baby (so on Maternity leave with almost zero income) whilst he disappears with the new woman, and he then ends up paying me £50 a week support. Seriously, how was any of that in my favour? Seriously?
I get so fked off by comments like this. Yes, there are a lot of awful, spiteful women out there, but there are also a lot of men who are equally as bad.
Tonker is doing amazingly well and being an incredible role model for his son.
I get so f
ked off by comments like this. Yes, there are a lot of awful, spiteful women out there, but there are also a lot of men who are equally as bad. Tonker is doing amazingly well and being an incredible role model for his son.
PAUL500 said:
There was more than enough equity in my case that 50/50 or even 55/45 gave us both the option to provide a lovely home for our children. 72/28 did not with disastrous results for them now.
There is far more to my case than I can go into at this stage, hence my perceived bitterness with the family courts, as my ex after next week will no longer be providing a home for either of my daughters, yet she still gets to keep all the money she was given for such. The judge was made fully aware of this at the time but chose to ignore it, to the detriment of both my daughters futures.
How do your daughters view the situation?There is far more to my case than I can go into at this stage, hence my perceived bitterness with the family courts, as my ex after next week will no longer be providing a home for either of my daughters, yet she still gets to keep all the money she was given for such. The judge was made fully aware of this at the time but chose to ignore it, to the detriment of both my daughters futures.
Bill said:
singlecoil said:
johnwilliams77 said:
Or people need to stop putting them in these positions (getting married and taking on that risk)
People should be made to read these threads before either getting married and/or having children.
PAUL500 said:
I should probably not really comment as further court action is ongoing next week, my eldest (13) wanted to live with me all along, my ex blocked that, she no longer lives with her mother now, the youngest (10) is probably heading the same way.
If your daughter is not living with her mother, surely you can get custody?PAUL500 said:
I should probably not really comment as further court action is ongoing next week, my eldest (13) wanted to live with me all along, my ex blocked that, she no longer lives with her mother now, the youngest (10) is probably heading the same way.
Sounds similar to a colleague - he ended up with his ex-wife's daughter from her previous marriage. desolate said:
Liken a marriage to a partnership were everything is owned equally whoever's name it is in - that is the starting point.
Rather liken it to directorship of a limited company, in Tonker's case wife, son and tonker, therefore three portions, two thirds to the ex wife and son, with one third to tonker.Ari said:
If your daughter is not living with her mother, surely you can get custody?
The authorities finally had to get involved due to issues between my ex and my daughter, they and the courts will now not release her to me, they then investigated the situation my youngest was also living in and are now recommending the same for her.Up to a senior judge to now make the decisions as to what happens to them next, its out of my hands legally. I warned a lower judge that reports to this one that it was going to happen, both in the divorce final hearing and in a subsequent appeal, that judge chose to believe my ex both times and refused to amend the order so that I could home them.
Oh and as a result he also made me pick up her legal bill on the second occasion, 6 weeks later my eldest was in care, exactly as I had predicted in the appeal.
The likelihood is that every tax payer reading this thread will be picking up the tab for their care from now on, and my ex will simply skip off into the sunset with the extra 22% she was given from my share of the assets to home the girls.
Edited by PAUL500 on Tuesday 11th April 21:29
PAUL500 said:
The authorities finally had to get involved due to issues between my ex and my daughter, they and the courts will now not release her to me, they then investigated the situation my youngest was also living in and are now recommending the same for her.
Up to a senior judge to now make the decisions as to what happens to them next, its out of my hands legally. I warned a lower judge that reports to this one that it was going to happen, both in the divorce final hearing and in a subsequent appeal, that judge chose to believe my ex both times and refused to amend the order so that I could home them.
Oh and as a result he also made me pick up her legal bill on the second occasion, 6 weeks later my eldest was in care, exactly as I had predicted in the appeal.
The likelihood is that every tax payer reading this thread will be picking up the tab for their care from now on, and my ex will simply skip off into the sunset with the extra 22% she was given from my share of the assets to home the girls.
shocking and annoying in equal measure, and I am sure there is no comeuppance/feedback for the judge who failed to listen to both sides of the argument (however hard a job they may have)Up to a senior judge to now make the decisions as to what happens to them next, its out of my hands legally. I warned a lower judge that reports to this one that it was going to happen, both in the divorce final hearing and in a subsequent appeal, that judge chose to believe my ex both times and refused to amend the order so that I could home them.
Oh and as a result he also made me pick up her legal bill on the second occasion, 6 weeks later my eldest was in care, exactly as I had predicted in the appeal.
The likelihood is that every tax payer reading this thread will be picking up the tab for their care from now on, and my ex will simply skip off into the sunset with the extra 22% she was given from my share of the assets to home the girls.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff