Separated, how much should I provide?

Mojisola

Caroline_a wrote: »

She 'wants' to move south. Well, I want a nice shiny 4 x 4, a holiday home in the sun, 10 years knocking off my age and the figure I had 20 years ago. None are likely to happen, but if they do it would be down to me (ok, not the 10 years off my age, that would just be lying).

Tell her that your calculations are not to be based on what she wants - or indeed, develop your own 'want' list.

Like Caroline, I don't see why she should get extra because she wants to move south.

Either work out the distribution of money with you both staying in the area or with you also moving south.

JackRS

We have a mediation appointment set up for next Friday. She looked into legal aid but because of what she receives from me she is not eligible, so I get the joy of paying her and for the mediation. I will however insist she pays her half.

I’ve a form to complete with basic details.

I should create a proposal for the meeting so would like to get peoples ideas as to what I should propose. We know she wants at least 80% of house so I expect she’ll start with that.

I’m thinking along the lines of:

1. House sale price less costs and our current debt (mine £16k, hers £10) 60/40 in her favor, adjusted accordingly considering content allocation at current value.
2. Pension 60/40 (exact split to ensure total pot is 50/50 including house) of total pot in my favor.
3. spousal maintenance 30% of my take home pay for 3 more months, reverting to 15% until our sons 20th birthday Feb 2016.
4. Provide a new car on company ownership scheme at cost of £185/m to me for one year.

Caroline_a

Jack you seem like a really nice guy, but why are you starting from a viewpoint of weakness? Think about bartering. You don't start with what you are prepared to pay - you start with a really low amount. You then let them barter you up to what you are prepared to pay.

You should start off with 50/50 for the house, together with maintenance for your son until you are no longer legally liable. Full stop. Then see how her negotiations go. She will start at 100% of everything for her....

Edit - why do you think you need to provide her with a car?????

bellevie

as pp said, she will push her shares up, so start lower, so she feels she has succeeded when she does eventually push you up to your preferred figures.

I really hope this is over for you very soon, it must be physically and mentally exhausting constantly battling things out. I think your body and brain will go into shock when it is finally all over!!

justme111

Don't forget to point out your mortgage offer if it does not allow you to buy similar house to what your ex would get mortgage free.
Glad to hear you controlled your anger , glad to hear you managed to talk , fingers crossed for you on friday.

duchy

You don't work in sales do you Jack lol
She starts impossibly high, you start ridiculously low and you meet somewhere in the middle.
Your first offer is never your best offer as the other party needs to feel you haven given up something to their favour before agreeing.

JackRS

Caroline_a wrote: »

Jack you seem like a really nice guy, but why are you starting from a viewpoint of weakness? Think about bartering. You don't start with what you are prepared to pay - you start with a really low amount. You then let them barter you up to what you are prepared to pay.

You should start off with 50/50 for the house, together with maintenance for your son until you are no longer legally liable. Full stop. Then see how her negotiations go. She will start at 100% of everything for her....

Edit - why do you think you need to provide her with a car?????

Thanks I do understand what you're saying.

The car is a practical item that I can provide as a way to soften the blow about the maintenance. After this year she could continue to get one through me on the scheme but will need to pay for it. If I didn't provide as car the purchase price and running costs would be identified in her needs and therefore increase the spousal maintenance claim.

Don't forget she wants enough to buy a house without a mortgage and have enough to live on so at the most she has to do a part time job. The law wants to ensure neither one is better off than the other, so obviously that means she should work full time like I do. It'll also ensure that my income is shared to the point that both our needs are covered. I want a clean break that is date determined not circumstances.

Ames

JackRS wrote: »

Thanks I do understand what you're saying.

The car is a practical item that I can provide as a way to soften the blow about the maintenance. After this year she could continue to get one through me on the scheme but will need to pay for it. If I didn't provide as car the purchase price and running costs would be identified in her needs and therefore increase the spousal maintenance claim.

Don't forget she wants enough to buy a house without a mortgage and have enough to live on so at the most she has to do a part time job. The law wants to ensure neither one is better off than the other, so obviously that means she should work full time like I do. It'll also ensure that my income is shared to the point that both our needs are covered. I want a clean break that is date determined not circumstances.

'I want never gets'.

There's plenty of places in the country where she could buy outright for less than £100k, and work as little as she wants.

Or, she can move to an expensive area where £200k is barely a deposit, and work long hours to pay for it.

She can't have both.

Same with the car. Why does she need a car, especially one paid for by you? I'm sure she could run an old banger for less than you're paying for a lease.

And I'm gobsmacked by her reaction to mediation. If she claimed the benefits she's entitled to it would be paid for. She's so entrenched in her 'Jack pays for everything' mindset that she'd rather run up even more bills for you to deal with. It doesn't even seem to occur to her that she should be paying half!

Seriously Jack, we've been telling you to man up for a year now. It seems that everytime you do that you somehow end up sliding even further back than you were before.

In all your thoughts about 'the law says I have to be fair', you have to remember that the law also says she has to be fair. Pratting about for a year wailing about how you/the world/anyone but her owes her a living, and at a standard that a hell of a lot of working people can only dream of, isn't being fair.

I'm sorry for being so blunt. I've recently spent a couple of years sleepwalking into a serious legal situation because I listened to the other party rather than people who were advising me. I hate watching you do the same.

mighty_hammers

I do not understand you paying her spousal maintenance. I was divorced in 1998 and my solicitor then said it was a thing of the past. Our son was 2yrs old, i kept the house, which I bought before we were together (10yrs), he kept his total pension. we were together 5yrs, I was not working after he was born, having worked all my life, i had to get on with it.. My husband now, was with his wife for 20yrs, she is 10yrs older and this was taken into account, her available working yrs. Her solicitor offered him 6k a 94/6 % split of the house in her favour, his solicitor said he should accept. I knew alittle after my divorce, went to the library read everything i could, and we went and saw his solicitor together. I gave her a right telling off, my husband very passive and said she needed to get her act together and earn her money, we also complained to the solicitors practice. He got 26k, all his pension 30k plus, all the joint debts were paid off from house equity and no spousal maintenance, even though their son was 17. she had money to provide a home and he was of an age to work. My point i guess is, as other have said this is 2014, 16yrs after i was told SM was a thing of the past.

kelpie35

This is something I have been thinking about Jack but not too sure if it will be relevant to your situation but might be useful information you might be able to bring up during the mediation.

Have you worked out how much she has lost in JSA during your time apart.

I can see no reason why she has not claimed this for at least the past year. Your children are of an age that they don't require a SAHM.

I hope, for your sake, that this mediation can bring a swift end to your situation.

Take care and remember to look after yourself.