Separated, how much should I provide?

quidsy

Most couples have debt, yet you imply that the debt was on account of the ex wife alone.

It is this kind of totally biased posts against his ex which cause me to comment at all today.

The debt has grown becuase jackrs is paying 2 lots of outgoings. A choice he made by moving out. Many couples still share a home whilst a settlemet & divorce is being agreed, it is jackrs right to return tot he family home, that would mitigate many of the additional financial burdern he is under.

HurdyGurdy

No. I am saying that the lifestyle they had before the separation was not within the family's financial means, or they wouldn't have accrued debts.

Don't put words into my mouth.

I did suggest in an earlier post that as the four bedroomed marital home is now occupied by only two people, there was potential for JackRS to move back in and use one of the no-longer-used rooms. I don't know the legalities or the feasibility of this, and it may be that it wouldn't be do-able. That is a decision for JackRS and STBEx to make.

lucym

Mojisola wrote: »

Is saying that she is being unrealistic in expecting to live to the same standard after the separation as she was before being unpleasant?

Or suggesting that she starts to take control of her own life and claim benefits and look for work?

She doesn't seem to expect that her standard of living will be the same and I wouldn't have thought that she qualifies for benefits.

wannabe_credit_free

Talk about kicking a dog when she is down and not here to defend herself. There are 2 sides to every story and this thread only consists of 1. Jack's

Yes, I have read all of this thread, been following it for sometime now...

quidsy

HurdyGurdy wrote: »

No. I am saying that the lifestyle they had before the separation was not within the family's financial means, or they wouldn't have accrued debts.

The lifestyle was supported by jackrs, he paid the bills, if she was overspending then it was a conversation they should have had but for all any of you know the debt could be as a result of something he purchased or his hobbies or some major family purchase. Whatever the reason it was acrrued as a couple & was deemed acceptable even on top of a large living budget.

HurdyGurdy

quidsy wrote: »

The lifestyle was supported by jackrs, he paid the bills, if she was overspending then it was a conversation they should have had but for all any of you know the debt could be as a result of something he purchased or his hobbies or some major family purchase. Whatever the reason it was acrrued as a couple & was deemed acceptable even on top of a large living budget.

Yes, you are right. "For all we know." But neither you nor I, nor anyone else on this thread, knows whether or not that conversation was had. Nor what the outcome of any such conversation was.

JackRS has chosen not to share too much of the background to the marriage breakdown, and actually, the reason is largely irrelevant. JackRS started the thread to ask for advice and opinions on what was a fair amount for him to pay to his wife and "children". Nothing else.


The fact is that after what, nearly 18 months, JackRS' ex-wife still seems to believe that she should be able to maintain the spending capacity she had when she was part of a married couple - which she no longer is - at a minimum of input from her. She appears to have made no efforts whatsover to look for any kind of employment, and refuses to apply for benefits to which she may be entitled.

Quite frankly, unless house prices are reasonably similar in the area she wants to move to, compared to where she currently lives, I think she's being very unrealistic to demand enough money to buy what she wants, where she wants. I would think a more fair split of the funds would be for her to have enough to buy a three bedroomed property in the area she currently lives (given that she seems to think she has a duty to provide a home for her two near-enough adult offspring), and if she wants to buy a more expensive house, in a more expensive area, then she should be funding the difference herself.

From what JackRS has said, (and I may have misread or misinterpreted it) she seems to think that JackRS should have only enough to pay for rent/mortgage, food and essential bills, and any money from his salary left over from that should be paid to her, for her to continue her lifestyle as closely to the current one. JackRS, seemingly, should have no life/hobbies/interests outside of work.

I think one of the main issues seem to be that she sees it as her lifelong duty to provide everything for her "children", which is unrealistic, unreasonable and quite patronising towards them, suggesting that they expect this, and are not capable of providing for themselves in their chosen career paths down the line.

duchy

We appear to have a invasion of people who feel that in a marriage break up it is a requirement that one person is completely in the right and the other completely in the wrong.
Life isn't like that
Jack has tried to work out what is fair ..... Few husbands offer to pay £1200 a month plus pay for a leased car without legal intervention especially when the marital home is mortgage free so essentially that's three hundred pounds a week which is more than most people have after housing costs.
He could have simply paid child support which is half of that and no more.

Perhaps if he had she'd have decided to look for work sooner to fund her preferred lifestyle?

Neither of them are monsters. But both of them are human .

quidsy

duchy wrote: »

We appear to have a invasion of people who feel that in a marriage break up it is a requirement that one person is completely in the right and the other completely in the wrong.

Neither of them are monsters. But both of them are human .

Do "we"? Where?

Lol, talk about dramatic. My posts today in defence of the ex were purely after reading such condescension about what she should or shouldn't do and various names bandied about.

No one has said one is right and the other wrong but several of us have objected to the blatent nastyness aimed a women none of you know and know nothing about beyond what her ex husband who is currently in the middle of a less than pleasant separation with her has told you.

She acts like a woman scorned, because she is, all understandable in the situation but as per my previous posts, she will have to agree a deal, who gets what depends on who holds their nerve the longest and who has better lawyers but jackrs, although clearly trying to close this out in the fairest way possible is still not a helpless victim nor is he a hero for supporting her financially during this process, irrespective of what "other" men might do.

Until the settlementt is agreed and until she is willing/able to stand on her own two feet, it is his moral duty.

madvixen

quidsy wrote: »

Until the settlementt is agreed and until she is willing/able to stand on her own two feet, it is his moral duty.

Sorry but "willing" doesn't come into it. She is able to work and therefore she should. Jack should not have to subsidise her sitting around all day when she is capable of working. As for moral duty, Jack has done far more than most people would have expected him to do and he should be applauded for this.

supersaver2

madvixen wrote: »

Sorry but "willing" doesn't come into it. She is able to work and therefore she should. Jack should not have to subsidise her sitting around all day when she is capable of working. As for moral duty, Jack has done far more than most people would have expected him to do and he should be applauded for this.

Have to agree, what if she is never willing? Not entirely sure it's fair that Jack work full time to support her whilst she does nothing! Fair do's when you have young ones but she certainly hasn't got that excuse anymore. What on earth does she do all day? Wish I could stay at home with my dogs and be given £300.00 per week to spend as I see fit! Does she have no pride or self respect to start at least paying some of her own way instead of standing with her hand open? Crazy situation. Splitting pension pots and house proceeds I can understand but a fully capable of working adult that expects a hand out and to do nothing all day I really can't understand.