adultery scenario

clearingout

rachelhen wrote: »

The main point of my post is that she was never notified which makes me suspect that something was not legal about it.

There are other issues, the multiple relationships that the man in question had, the fact that the marriage was in break up mode anyway which makes it unfair to 'blame' the other person which is the implication from naming her.

adultery in itself isn't illegal. Just immoral,although the way society is today, there's no shame or stigma attached to it, is there? I am inclined to agree that she had the paperwork and signed it all off at the time. She committed adultery and was named as a co-respondent in a divorce. That's about as fair as it gets if you ask me!

clearingout

jeez! what does it matter?!!!

Let's put it into some perspective, shall we?! My ex committed adultery and was living with said woman. He left me in the early stages of pregnancy. He left complete with foreign marriage certificate and therefore had me over a barrel - if I wanted a divorce, I had to agree to his terms. I therefore signed a divorce petition based on my so-called unreasonable behaviour at 8 months pregnant with his child whilst he lived with another woman. Do I care?! Hell no! I'm rid of the man. Priceless!

rachelhen

Hey clearing out you're right. let go and move on. That doesn't seem fair to you but I admire your pragmatism.

celyn90

In her situation I would write to the court.

It is possible - OH's ex wife tried this with me (and it wasn't true). I never recived the papers so never had the opportunity to respond and the court baliff who tried to serve seemed to have a habit of calling at 3pm in the afternoon. Of course I could have chased them up but quite frankly it wasn't my fight and having to deal with a petty and spiteful woman wasn't high on my to-do list.

OH had to go to court in the end to stop her messing about and the judge "deemed service" on me in order to move the process on - she added my name to the record as OH's ex refused to sign unless she did. OH's ex was then warned if she didn't stop messing about she would be liable for the costs of both sides unless she submitted the application for nisi within a a few weeks.

At the decree nisi hearing, my name removed from the decree by another judge under the slip rule before nisi was granted (without me even asking!) - so in the end it went through without me on it. :rotfl::D It took three years and 6K for him to get the nisi - longer than the active part of the marriage (no kids, no assets either)

Had it not been removed, I would have written to object; it doesn't matter what the circumstances or the morality or who did what, your friend has not been given a chance to defend herself and that isn't something that should happen.

Are you sure it is the nisi and not just the original papers?

peachyprice

rachelhen wrote: »

Caaalm down caaalm down Nikki ....my friend isn't a liar. Having delved further she was not named in court. to me this makes a difference.
She was named in correspondence. The man in question is an idiot as he had no need to name the person he was seeing at that time in my opinion.
The court document states the co respndent as an 'unnamed woman'.
The person was single at the time and was lead to believe that the relationship he had with his wife was in its dying embers. What annoys my friend is that the man's wife had relationships including ones of an adulterous nature when they were together and so in my opinion is a hypocrite. I think the man is a weak idiot because if he wanted an amicable divorce he could have agreed to unreasonable behaviour instead of scapegoating a 3rd party. These things do matter to people. Imagine a relationship between 2 married people both having affairs then one appears to be having a more serious relationship I am afraid I call it the kettle calling the pot ....

OK, so how has this effected her life?

rachelhen

Hi Peachyprice I think she feels scapegoated but in reality it has not afected her life as far as I know just a sense of unfairness.

On a side note.

Marriages usually break down for a complex number of reasons and to me it seems petty and vindictive to blame a third party. When I divorced I did cite unreasonable behaviour of my ex and it was justified but I don't want to wash my linen in detail in public as theres nothing to be gained.

I think its been an interesting debate nevertheless.

Nicki

She wasn't named as a co respondent then, so the papers didn't need to be served on her. If she had been, the divorce petition would have read, on the ground's of X's adultery with rachelhen's friend. It didn't. It said on the ground of X's adultery with an unnamed woman, which is the usual form of words when a co respondent is not being named but the man is being divorced for his infidelity. So am now struggling to see exactly what your friend's problem is. I would expect solicitors correspondence to refer to the current woman by name if it was relevant to any of the issues at the time, but as these documents are not public documents why does that matter?

clearingout

but why is it unfair? she committed adultery? if you don't want someone to 'judge' you on the basis that you've committed adultery, why commit adultery in the first place?!

I am really, really struggling to get this!

peachyprice

rachelhen wrote: »

Hi Peachyprice I think she feels scapegoated but in reality it has not afected her life as far as I know just a sense of unfairness.

.

She wasn't named on the court papers only solicitors letters which are not public record, she really needs to get over this feeling that she's been treated unfairly because the fact is she did commit adultery.

She can't change anything, so why is she brooding over it?

tea_lover

So she did commit adultery, and she wasn't named on the court papers - so what on earth is she bleating on about all these years later??

On a slightly different (but related!) note, when I got divorced I had to agree to unreasonable behaviour. All the things my exH had done, he claimed I'd done and I had to agree to it. At the time it annoyed me beyond words and I didn't think I could do it. But I realised that no one will see the papers, and that anyone that matters to me already knows what really happened.

I certainly wouldn't be whinging about having to admit to something I'd actually done!!