Would you put up with this ?

Apple_2

Question for everyone. My O/H has debts. He's trying to get !!!!!!'s on them. Things have been really tough this year as he was not working - owed the taxman, owed these creditors. I kept us afloat. When he moved in we agreed he'd pay a monthly contribution to the household pot, but it was sporadic ( partly because of the debt servicing ) and for the past year it's been non-existent. Now he is negotiating !!!!!!'s it's basically with money he's earned, but because he's paying no rent/bills I'm effectively subsidising it.

That's ok, he has baggage, we love each other & we support each other. That's not the problem.

One of his creditors is a loan, a joint loan with his ex-wife. All the other debt was his name only. Today the joint loan creditor agreed a !!!!!! figure which is great BUT only for his liability, they won't release his ex. I'm worried he won't accept it. I know he doesn't want her dragged into it ( he was paying it himself after split) and I know he feels guilty about the marriage break-up. He was drinking a lot at the time and feels ashamed of his behaviour. BUT it was a joint loan, they both signed, they both got the benefit of the money. I understand him wanting to protect her ( she has a house, he doesn't ). But I feel that after supporting him while he had no money, supporting him so he can pay off creditors, expecting this to continue while he pays off the loan in full, to protect her, is taking the !!!!!!. I will be subsidising the ex - why should I ? If he wants to play lady bountiful let him do it after paying the monthly rent/bills etc he agreed to when he first moved in.

To be fair we only heard this today, I may be jumping to conclusions re what he decides to do, but I know what he'd like to do.

What do other people think ??

Stonk

I'm with you all the way. You'd be subsidising his ex, and why should you? Especially since she appears to be in better financial shape than he is, too!

I'd go a bit further and suggest that you have already been subsidising her. Although all the other debts are only in his name, they probably shared the money just like they did with the jointly-held debt.

helen21_2

Sorry to sound a little dense but does ff mean a final figure settlement?

Apple_2

Stonk wrote:

I'd go a bit further and suggest that you have already been subsidising her. Although all the other debts are only in his name, they probably shared the money just like they did with the jointly-held debt.

Maybe but that's history Stonk. All that matters is who's name & signature is on the agreement. I can live with all the others, it's just this joint loan that's the problem. I just know he doesn't want them going after her - but I'm not going to put up with it if he says he'll pay in full. It's not fair on me.

Apple_2

Helen Yes. Means a full & final settlement. They'll knock 'whatever' off to get their cash now. Account settled.

helen21_2

Apple wrote:

Yes Helen.

I can give you no advice, but on the bottom of a ff i did with a debt company several years ago was this -

Please note that if there are joint and several customers liable for payment of the account our client reserves its rights to pursue those joint and several customers for payment of the remaining balance!

Hope this is of some help

ceegee

I think you've done plenty already, even more than your fair share. If you subsidise him/her/them any more, where will it end? You have to put your foot down.