Separated, how much should I provide?

JackRS

Ex MrsJackRS has requested another mediation next Friday where she intends to make an alternative proposal?

My solicitor has just written back to my questions and wrote the following, I’ve taken some of the details out so it won’t make a lot of sense but you can get the gist:

I have now had the opportunity of considering the below.

There is dispute between lawyers as to the exact amount of lump sum payable to offset a claim against a pension, and this is usually something that the Actuary would comment upon, when instructed. That said, the ‘rule of thumb’ is indeed 1/3, certainly not 2/3.

Regarding the lump sum payment to ex MrsJackRS (to be mortgage free) did you take along alternative properties particulars? (Yes I did)

Regarding a ‘best case / worst case’ scenario, this really does depend upon the approach of a particular Judge hearing the case. Worst case for you is a lump sum to MrsJackRS of £xxx,xxx, pension share to equalise income and maintenance. I do think this really would be an extremely unlikely outcome.

I am of the view (as I have said before) that a more realistic outcome would be lump sum payment to MrsJackRS, no pension share (given that she is having more than 50% of the capital) and a term maintenance order.

I am of the view that your proposal set out below is entirely reasonable. If MrsJackRS wants a 50% pension share and maintenance on a term basis (until pension income falls due) then there should be more of an equal split of the capital.

In realty I am of the view that on her proposals put forward to date, she is effectively having it all, which cannot leave you with a sense of fairness. Yes, you may have to concede more capital than you would wish to in order to achieve your clean break, but money well spent.

On a final point, if you do agree to maintenance at £xxx p/m stepping down to £xxx p/m until June 2016, then it is vital that you have what is known as a section 28(1)(a) bar. This will prevent MrsJackRS from being able to extend the term of her maintenance and effectively acts as a guillotine.

It will be interesting to see what MrsJackRS revised proposal consists of. She must feel it is something you’re likely to consider to even request the next appointment.

Keep me updated.

JackRS

RAS wrote: »

More importantly JackRS, re renting.

1. If you rent the house out, then you have to accept that it could take 6 months plus to "get the tenant out" if they decide not to move; the flip side of the problem you are causing your landlord.

And the tenants are under no obligation to allow viewings.

2. Consequently, most buyers will refuse to even look at it. And if they do look at it, disinclined to make an offer at least until a S21 is served correctly.

3. There are additional costs in letting, Gas certificate, LL insurance, replacing equipment etc.

4. You will both be taxed on almost the whole income.

5. Unless you are very lucky, the property will deteriorate and become less valuable.

6. Every chance that even post tenants will leave without paying rent and will trash it.

Sorry for late reply, yes exactly to the above which is why I didn't want to rent out.

ampersand

Well Jack, given that you tend to pop into my mindful head of a Friday, this post has more positive content/interest than several relating to your solicitor!

Some promise, I feel, but what are you thinking?

At last, solicitor says ' then it is vital that you have what is known as a section 28(1)(a) bar', which obvious action we have long tub-thumped.

Hmmm......'She must feel it is something you’re likely to consider to even request the next appointment.' It would be good to feel ex has had a talking-to from her solicitor, but do porcine wings flap?

How are you Jack? Any progress on new temp. roof or is that on back burner atm?

Is there any option/procedure on where/who re: Judge? I'm not finding precise google answers and your Thread is probably a better place to ask.

Do have some 'me' time this Bank Holiday w/e, please.

JackRS

ampersand wrote: »

Well Jack, given that you tend to pop into my mindful head of a Friday, this post has more positive content/interest than several relating to your solicitor!

Some promise, I feel, but what are you thinking?

At last, solicitor says ' then it is vital that you have what is known as a section 28(1)(a) bar', which obvious action we have long tub-thumped.

Hmmm......'She must feel it is something you’re likely to consider to even request the next appointment.' It would be good to feel ex has had a talking-to from her solicitor, but do porcine wings flap?

How are you Jack? Any progress on new temp. roof or is that on back burner atm?

Is there any option/procedure on where/who re: Judge? I'm not finding precise google answers and your Thread is probably a better place to ask.

Do have some 'me' time this Bank Holiday w/e, please.

In terms of rental, have rent review panel on 24 September. Also have an official eviction notice from landlord's solicitors with a new Section 21 and eviction date end of October so I've got a couple of months to sort out where I'm going.

Mojisola

Have you raised the issue of getting a share of any inheritance she gets during the time you're still paying her spousal maintenance?

JackRS

Mojisola wrote: »

Have you raised the issue of getting a share of any inheritance she gets during the time you're still paying her spousal maintenance?

Thanks No I haven't but honestly I don't want it. I for some reason don't believe I should be entitled just as she would not be if I won some money or had some inheritance. I think it's a really low thing to request and goes against my morals. So should she receive money or be paid more than expected then I'll cross that bridge. It works both ways, so she would have no claim on me either. Even if i did have some clause I'm sure her parents would find a way to get round it.

I just had following reply from my solicitor in response to my email see below:

I agree with you – dogs being cared for in the day is not sufficient reason to achieve £30,000 - £50,000 by way of a capital settlement.

I really am of the view that if ex Mrs JackRS is receiving a capital split significantly in her favour, the maintenance is not on a joint lives basis, but is only on a term basis.

I just want to explain that even with a ‘term’ maintenance order, the level of maintenance can change if either of you make an application back to the court.

For example, if ex Mrs JackRS obtains a job earning double what we anticipate, then you can make an application to vary downwards the variation. If your income improves dramatically, ex Mrs JackRS may apply to vary the maintenance upwards. It is always better to have the clean break wherever possible.

Mojisola

JackRS wrote: »

Thanks No I haven't but honestly I don't want it. I for some reason don't believe I should be entitled just as she would not be if I won some money or had some inheritance.

Do make sure that's the case and that it's in writing.

If she is still receiving support from you, wouldn't she also be able to claim on any windfall you get? If she can, then it should work both ways that you would get a share of any lump sums she gets.

Even if you have no intention of wanting money from her, it may be a useful part of the bargaining.

harz99

JackRS wrote: »

Ex MrsJackRS has requested another mediation next Friday where she intends to make an alternative proposal?

My solicitor has just written back to my questions and wrote the following, I’ve taken some of the details out so it won’t make a lot of sense but you can get the gist:

Thanks for the update; good to see your solicitor making some sensible points, and good luck with the next mediation meeting.

duchy

Good for you about the inheritance issue (but what I assumed from your stance throughout)

JackRS

Got last months solicitor bill, just for reading and replying to a few emails from me and 2 phone calls £480! So far I've spent £5000 on solicitor bill and really not much further on. One of her calculations was wrong. Don't feel I'm getting much value for money.