husband not playing fair in divorce - help needed pls

clearing_out_my_pockets

Randy_Trouserman wrote: »

my cousin has been lied to and messed around over the last two years, her husband left the family home to move into a flat and live his 'single life' again.

He's paid £1000pm for the last two years, but rarely helps out with any extra costs (football boots, school trips etc). 'It's not my problem' is the usual reply.

As a settlement he's suggested £1000pm, plus 60% of the house equity when sold (which he's said will be when the last child hits 17).

he's bought a new car recently and also a few expensive 'boys toys'.

purplepardalis wrote: »

Whilst everyone is feeling sorry for the single parent, have a think abou the non resident parent who wants to maintain contact with his/her children.

They may have to

1. Maintain a house big enough for their children to stay. One extra bedroom can cost £300 extra in rent per month

2. Spend money on travel costs to collect the children. Return train journeys of over 100 miles twice per month = £250

3. Maintain a seperate wardrobe for the children at their house. Approx £100 per child, per year.

So, another £6800 per year.

All I'm trying to illustrate is that as usual there are 2 sides to every story and 1 person's circumstances are missing from this discussion

OP says that non-resident parent has moved into a flat. Ok, so they don't specify how big, but doubtful it's a 3-bed.

He can drive 100 mile each way on less than a tank of petrol ~ say £30 per trip ~ £60 per month.

Separate wardrobe is a little bit impractical for two growing teenage boys - more likely they'd chuck some bags into a holdall for the weekend. After all, buying clothes for them is 'not his problem'

emma12345

Fang wrote: »

I agree, in principle. But it depends very much on a variety of factors.

For instance what if a woman was a multi-millionaire through hard work, and then she meets a penniless man, who she marries. Over the course of the marriage she continues to be wealthy and he continues to be poor. Should he be entitled to half of the money that she earned before she met him? Or just half of the money made by both of them during the term of the marriage? Or even what he put into the marriage?

My personal opinion is that if they are both able to work and there are no children involved, why should the poor person (man or woman) be entitled to their spouse's riches earned before marriage, or even during marriage maybe (I agree with you in other words :eek: ).

However if there are children involved or one of the couple is supporting the other due to disabilities say, then things are not equal, the person with responsibilities or a disability is not able to go out to work and support themselves so easily.

The absent parent should continue their responsibilities to the children, and if they refuse to do it through parental time and care, things should be equaled up financially at least, as it's not so easy to work full-time with 24/7 responsibilities.