Ex-wife wins £215,000 payout - 29yrs after separation
Ex-wife wins £215,000 payout - 29yrs after separation
Author
Discussion

Cotty

Original Poster:

42,244 posts

314 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
They were married for 14 years but he has to support his ex wife for the rest of her life.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/820068-ex-wife-wins-21...

Oakey

27,982 posts

246 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
I don't get it, why on earth was he ordered to pay £12,000 a year (which was raised to £20k+ ten years later) when they have no kids together?

Someone, please explain to me the rationale behind this ruling.

scorp

8,783 posts

259 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Oakey said:
I don't get it, why on earth was he ordered to pay £12,000 a year (which was raised to £20k+ ten years later) when they have no kids together?

Someone, please explain to me the rationale behind this ruling.
The justice system hates men ?

Soovy

35,829 posts

301 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all


Sick.



Cotty

Original Poster:

42,244 posts

314 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
I can't believe she has been getting 27,000 a year for doing nothing. She does not have to clean the house, cook or sleep with her husband.


Cotty

Original Poster:

42,244 posts

314 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Oakey said:
I don't get it, why on earth was he ordered to pay £12,000 a year (which was raised to £20k+ ten years later)
£12,000 a year in 1981, increased to £27,175 ten years later

Cotty

Original Poster:

42,244 posts

314 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Soovy said:
Sick.
Oh what was it you do again? Got a wife?

Soovy

35,829 posts

301 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Cotty said:
Soovy said:
Sick.
Oh what was it you do again? Got a wife?
I never did family work on general principle. And not yet.

Ayahuasca

27,584 posts

309 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Soovy said:
I never did family work on general principle.
The general principle: not enough money.





wink


Devil2575

13,400 posts

218 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
The moral of the story?

Don't get divorced.

I doubt the judge just decided to screw this guy for no reason. There's obviously more to it than the article lets on.

Mattt

16,664 posts

248 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Ayahuasca said:
Soovy said:
I never did family work on general principle.
The general principle: not enough money.
laugh

Swilly

9,699 posts

304 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
I can understand paying maintenance for a reasonable period of years until it is deemed both parties have had sufficient time to restructure their lives, put in place the means to support themselves independently etc etc but...

...even to be paying a penny 30 years after the event is avin a laugh !!

Child maintenance would have stopped after 18 years if the divorce occurred on the day of birth.

what on earth is the law doing?

Pesty

42,655 posts

286 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
I don't understand maintenance at all where children are not there.


Surley these independant, clever, multi tasking women would want to stand on their own two feet and support themselves?

Don't they find it patronising that they are considered that feeble that they need a man to pay them to survive?


Girl Power, you go girl

tangent police

3,097 posts

206 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Ignore all that ego driven crap. It is a woman's biological prerogative to actually find the best man to be a parasite upon.

Nothing wrong with it, it's human nature. It's in their operating system.




Cotty

Original Poster:

42,244 posts

314 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
The moral of the story?

Don't get divorced.
Don't get married

Sheets Tabuer

21,457 posts

245 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
He should have got a better lawyer, I got divorced without children and while I was waiting for the divorce to go through I bought a house to which she immediately put a claim in for. My lawyer suggested I delayed the divorce to get some document drawn up saying after the divorce that was it and final and if I won the lottery she couldn't claim.

I can't remember the name of the document but it cost about £150 at the time, he probably got divorced on the cheap.

Road Pest

3,123 posts

228 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Sheets Tabuer said:
He should have got a better lawyer, I got divorced without children and while I was waiting for the divorce to go through I bought a house to which she immediately put a claim in for. My lawyer suggested I delayed the divorce to get some document drawn up saying after the divorce that was it and final and if I won the lottery she couldn't claim.

I can't remember the name of the document but it cost about £150 at the time, he probably got divorced on the cheap.
Consent order to achieve a clean break.

Sheets Tabuer

21,457 posts

245 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Thats the one thumbup

Jasandjules

72,607 posts

259 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
Sheets Tabuer said:
Thats the one thumbup
Then your wife was poorly advised to sign it, as she could have stolen far more.. Instead she consented to a clean break? Good for you!


Sheets Tabuer

21,457 posts

245 months

Thursday 1st April 2010
quotequote all
As she put in a claim for half a house I bought after we split she probably thought she was getting a good deal 20k and signed the order. biggrin