Going Solo after 25 years

GoingSolo

edeneve wrote: »

raising your child if she did themajority of childcare/homemaking.

I worked a shift patteren during the childs younger years which was 4 shifts on followed by 6 days off with 18 day breaks every 10 weeks so was around a lot of the time doing child care also along with keeping the property up to date and tidy.

mustmakealist wrote: »

What it might come down to in the end is how much are you prepared to share?Are you civilised enough to try to reach an agreement that is 'fair' to both ofyou given that for 25 years you were prepared to share or are you selfishenough to want as much as you can get? These are very difficult questions andonly you can work that out.

Would look for an agreement that is fair but maximises my return at the sametime.

NewKittenHelp wrote: »

If you live off of someone for 25 yearswithout the benefit of marriage and the protections it brings then that's arisk you take.

We set out in 1988 but at the time agreed that marriage wasn’t for us and toput both monies in the ‘house’ account to go on the journey together. We hadthe money to marry but thought it just a waste of time and effort for a pieceof paper when we could do the same without.

I don’t think she set out to live off me in the beginning. Over the years she has saved most of what we have in the accounts without me knowing. I onlyf ound out about 3 to 4 years back. Can’t remember how though.

Tish_P

NewKittenHelp wrote: »

The lady in question here has had a quarter of a century without having to support herself, the gentleman hasn't had that luxury. So really, who got the better deal?

We haven't actually been told the couple's entire financial history, but even if this were a very traditional arrangement, he has had the luxury of a live-in housekeeper, cook, nanny and childminder. To suggest that working for 25 years and getting nothing out of it at the end is a sweet deal for a stay-at-home partner is laughable.

GoingSolo

Tish_P wrote: »

We haven't actually been told the couple's entire financial history,

what more should I add?

All our money goes into the house account then bills and 'pocket' money is paid from there. I don't keep any of my wages back.

We have no debt other than the mortgage which ends April 2012

Joint credit card is paid in full each month.

Tish_P

Sorry, I didnt mean you ought to tell us more - just that your current income and savings might not reflect what the situation was throughout your relationship, so the other poster's assumption that your partner had lazed about eating bonbons for 25 years was a shaky one.

rpc

Tish_P wrote: »

so the other poster's assumption that your partner had lazed about eating bonbons for 25 years was a shaky one.

As is your assumption that he did no cleaning, cooking, childminding, etc...

The option was there to get married, to hold more in joint names, to draw up a deed of trust, etc etc and none of those were exercised - by choice. None of those options would have cost more than a couple of hundred quid, so there is not really an excuse. They chose to exist on a "what's mine is mine" basis and it is not reasonable to change that just because they have split up. If she wanted the benefits of being married, she should have pushed for marriage (and dumped him if he refused)

What's his is his, what's hers is hers and what's joint is split. He could choose to be more generous, but that is his choice alone. I would be inclined (assuming no bad faith e.g. affairs) to give her a little more, perhaps the house, but that is entirely optional.

NewKittenHelp

Tish_P wrote: »

Sorry, I didnt mean you ought to tell us more - just that your current income and savings might not reflect what the situation was throughout your relationship, so the other poster's assumption that your partner had lazed about eating bonbons for 25 years was a shaky one.

No more lazy than your assumption that he did nothing in the home or with his son.

Tish_P

I assume that they both made contributions to the household, whether by a traditional "he earns, she keeps house" arrangement or otherwise, and that neither of them should be left with nothing to show for the majority of their working life.

NewKittenHelp

GoingSolo wrote: »

I don’t think she set out to live off me in the beginning. Over the years she has saved most of what we have in the accounts without me knowing. I onlyf ound out about 3 to 4 years back. Can’t remember how though.

This is ringing alarm bells for me. It suggests that she's been planning this for some time and has been trying to hide the 'family's' money from you and your son. I really do feel that you need to look after your own interests as you never know what's around the corner and if you're not careful you could be left with nothing if you allow this person to manipulate you.

Trying to be fair is a very noble thing to do, but being fair to someone who has shown that she has no intention of being fair to you (and has no problems hiding money from you) at the risk of your own financial security is not wise, nor can it be advised.

NewKittenHelp

Tish_P wrote: »

I assume that they both made contributions to the household, whether by a traditional "he earns, she keeps house" arrangement or otherwise, and that neither of them should be left with nothing to show for pretty much their entire working life.

Plenty of people are left with nothing to show despite working their entire lives. This lady has siphoned off the family money for herself for many years, and decided against marriage so she has no right to any of the funds that are not in her name. She will just have to grow up and support herself for a change.

Tish_P

You're the one maintaining, without a shred of evidence, that she has been doing nothing to support herself until this point.

If you're going to claim all's fair in love and war, why isn't she entitled to the money she worked to save while finances were shared? Why is that "siphoning off" rather than clever financial management?

I'd argue they were a partnership and both have a moral right to shares of the assets of that partnership, including her savings and his pension.