Divorce settlement - opinions wanted.

lovecrafting

yes i did read your post and i wasnt trying to slate her or anything, but reasonably expecting more than half of what someone has, in my eyes is taking them to the cleaners.

i understand what you are saying about the earnings, but look at this example. if i stay at home and look after my kids, i do it because i love them and i want to. unless there is something we dont know about she wasnt made to stay home with the kids.

my dad earned alot, wile i was a kid i had a good lifestyle (ha i wish but its an example) now that i have left home should he keep me in that lifestyle because he kept me for 18 years, or should i stand on my own two feet.

i know it seems harshe and im not trying to be, i just think that if he works hard, and his kids are grown up then he shouldnt have to keep a woman he is no longer married to. he is already going to loose half the house, half the savings half his pention, at what point does he become worse off than her, he would potentially be working every hour under the sun for nothing.


i agree with you that they have made a life together, and i sympathise with her, divorce is hard especially after so many years. but as soon as that divorce is signed, they no longer have a together life and she will have to stand on her own two feet.

again just my opinion im sorry it dosent fit in with most peoples, but it wouldnt be mine if it was the same.

779

Emmzi wrote: »

how rude!

Why not google spousal maintenance yourself? Or actually listen to the advice from the lawyer - it's what they are getting paid for!

I also presume you're posting from America?

To clarify, i'm only interested in UK law.

lovecrafting

truthhurts wrote: »

Be more controversial, how about take out what you put in......and I'm including housekeeping, childcare costs, loss of potential career, etc. Hey, but that may be too sensible.

ok well if were going to go there then we have to include hours worked, so 24 hrs a day for 30 yrs @ min wage

then loss of earnings..

soon adds up. i think 50% is more than fair.

truthhurts_3

779 wrote: »

For the record, my friend is anything BUT lazy, and has worked and still does. They have been through hard times and she has supported him thick and thin. They have come out of some very hard situations smelling of roses, and now, he is earning a very good wage. She works, but her earnings are about 15% of his.

Anyway - i didnt come on here to discuss whether the law is correct or not, - i'm just interested in people who have experience if possible :beer:

No one every mentioned lazy, just fair. If your friend can hand on heart say she's been a significant contributing factor to her ex's very good wage, over and above his ability, then that is worth consideration. This is a very rare situation.

if she's worked for a long time and only earns 15% of her ex then there is a living within yours means adjustment your friend needs to make.

Emmzi

779 wrote: »

I also presume you're posting from America?

To clarify, i'm only interested in UK law.

No, I am in the UK.

It is called spousal maintenance in the UK.

But, despite assisting my friend through the big D recently... I'm out, I may phrase my responses in a way you do not like again and get another telling off for not posting exactly what you need!

Maybe you would be better on the wikivorce forums?

PS I am not your "love." How patronising!

truthhurts_3

lovecrafting wrote: »

ok well if were going to go there then we have to include hours worked, so 24 hrs a day for 30 yrs @ min wage

then loss of earnings..

soon adds up. i think 50% is more than fair.

I've had 4 children and although being the majority financial contributor do not leave 24hrs a day for house and children to my partner. Don't know any of my friends who do either.
24hrs a day is a massive exaggeration, and quoting that is very strange, you think an individual should be recognised for contributing whilst sleeping with the rest of your family???

dirtysexymonkey

779 wrote: »

Appealing to anyone who has some experience of this.

A friend of mine has been married for around 30 years, towards the end, she found out that her husband has been cheating on her for the last seven.

They have two kids which have both left home.

For the past three months they have been negotiating divorce settlement. On the table offered by her husband at the moment is the following:

50% of savings
50% of the house (whatever it sells for)
50% of his pension.
20% of his current wage as ongoing maintainence.


My friend gave up her career to raise the children, meanwhile, he has climed up the career ladder. Considering they were married for 30 years, I would thought that she should be entitled to more than this, - I thought 50% of everything, plus a little more to compensate for ongoing earnings?

Another point is that my friend doesn't want to keep a big tie with him and rely on a lot of future maintenaince as settlement, - as she fears that his financial situation may change and he won't stick to it.


I am worried for my friend, as she is very easy going, she is not bitter or callous, - if left on her own, for an easy life, she would probably accept very little. I worry that she may accept much less than she is entitled too.

What are your thoughts on what she should accept?

just what is this to do with you? another 'friend' who crawls out of the woodwork with your big wooden spoon to try and manipulate your 'friend' when shes vulnerable? you sound like you want your 'friend' to get as much as possible because you want to get your hands on it.

if your friend is happy with what is offered then that is her business. you dont know what goes on behind closed doors, so your bitterness (which is painfully obvious) has no place here.

shes lucky to be offered 50% of everything and spousal maintenance! shes not entitled to it at all. if she wants a particular lifestyle then she has to work for it like everyone else. and you cant sponge off of your friends divorce settlement. you seem like the type to put your nose in where its not wanted, people like you tend to get bitten sooner or later. focus on your own life instead of broadcasting your friends to thousands of people.

peachyprice

779 wrote: »

I also presume you're posting from America?

To clarify, i'm only interested in UK law.

Oh deary me.

lovecrafting

actually truthhurts your right there i apologise, i hadnt taken into consideration the way others live, with us someone must be awake at all times with dd2 because of her meds, i think there is about 40 mins a day she is unattended.

in your opinion what do you think is reasonable?

dirtysexymonkey

779 wrote: »

I think it's rude to derail someone else's thread.

I asked if anyone had experience in the matter.

Calm down love

no you didnt. you asked people for their thoughts. dont complain because they arent agreeing with you. not everyones a moneygrabbing busy body.;)