Separated, how much should I provide?

JackRS

barbiedoll wrote: »

I wonder if she'd be happy if you gave the whole bloody house in return for a totally clean break, i.e. no claim on your pension and no spousal maintenance? She could sell it and then buy her property on the coast that she so dearly covets, and she would have a few quid left over to spend on [STRIKE]nails, hairdressers and massages[/STRIKE] re-training to get a job.

I know you would lose a great deal of cash now, but surely it would be worth it just to get rid of her? And when add up the amount of your pension she wants, plus her monthly allowance, you'd probably be better off after a few years anyway.

Get a rottweiler barrister, someone who will argue your corner in court. Your solicitor appears to be pretty useless, you may as well have set fire to a bunch of £50 notes for the same result! :mad:

Thanks yes I feel no added value from solicitor, I'd be better off dealing with it myself. My problem with letting her having all the house I won't have any deposit to buy and to clear the debts that I have. In negotiation I proposed she had 80% of house with no pension or maintenance but to continue providing car and CSA £650 for another 2 years, this was rejected as not enough. Thinking now actually that is ore than I want to offer but I was trying to save cost of court case and bring a close but it achieved neither.

Thumper7

JackRS


Can I just ask, what percentage was 80% of the house and the car off the combined assets (I'm not including £650 as that is maintenance for your son)


D

barbiedoll

Also Jack, do I remember you saying that the lease car can be provided for anyone you choose, it doesn't have to be a family member? (e.g. you could provide a car for me if you chose to do so?)

I was just thinking that as she would no longer be a family member or spouse, you wouldn't be able to provide it anyway.

What is your employer like? Do they know about any of this? Would they be able to amend your contract so that the lease terms would render her ineligible for the car? Or if you chose to retire early, would they let you come back to work on a "part-time" consultancy basis, or something like that?

Could it be worth speaking to anyone at work about this stuff, they may be able to help you more than you realise? I know men that have had their terms and conditions at work rearranged so that they didn't have to pay out so much to the CSA. Like working less hours but doing more overtime which couldn't be "guaranteed" so that their earnings appeared to be less. I wouldn't normally condone this sort of behaviour but enough is enough! (Although not for ex MrsJackRS obviously!)

dorothyjeffery

ok. maintenance for your son, yes, but that sounds quite a large amount????

your ex wife?? you are no longer responsible for her. she is not disabled in any way??? she is capable of working???? then why are you bank rolling her???? as long as you keep on paying, she will never have to get a job, pay her own rent, buy her own food. stop paying her anything, including the car!!!! likewise your daughter. this has been going on for several years now. bloody stand up for yourself!!! they know exactly what they are doing!!!!

please think on this. throwing money at it will not change the situation and the more you throw at them, the more they will want.

they are all - allegedly - responsible adults?????

STOP letting them take the p**s. you have a right to live a life as well. and they seem to be living the life of Riley!!!!

JackRS

Thumper7 wrote: »

JackRS


Can I just ask, what percentage was 80% of the house and the car off the combined assets (I'm not including £650 as that is maintenance for your son)


D

You can ask anything you like Thumper7!

Not sure I understand your question but I'll have a go the only real asset is the house, the pension is theoretical. So the offer I made was to take both our debt away form the house sale value. Assuming best case of £300K this would leave £274K, so apply 80% gives £219K for her and £55K for me. This was clean break offer so no share of pension but I would continue CSA at £650/m (using online tool calculated from gross salary, which is different to previous years method), however I offered to pay for another year beyond when our son no longer qualifies so effectively paying that until June 2016. I also offered to provide the car for another year. The car scheme is for all employees including those who retire we can provide the car for anyone but the payment comes of of your salary after tax so hers cost £185/month and that's what it costs me. In the future I may be able to provide it but she would need to give me the money just like I would do for a friend. Each employee is permitted to have up to 3 cars on this scheme.

That was rejected but like I said in hindsite more than I am willing to allow why should I loose so much of the cash now.

JackRS

dorothyjeffery wrote: »

ok. maintenance for your son, yes, but that sounds quite a large amount????

your ex wife?? you are no longer responsible for her. she is not disabled in any way??? she is capable of working???? then why are you bank rolling her???? as long as you keep on paying, she will never have to get a job, pay her own rent, buy her own food. stop paying her anything, including the car!!!! likewise your daughter. this has been going on for several years now. bloody stand up for yourself!!! they know exactly what they are doing!!!!

please think on this. throwing money at it will not change the situation and the more you throw at them, the more they will want.

they are all - allegedly - responsible adults?????

STOP letting them take the p**s. you have a right to live a life as well. and they seem to be living the life of Riley!!!!

Completely agree however the law seems to think differently, you have seen teh end of the letter comment about me reducing payment to £650

elsien

Just a slight cautionary note for the keyboard warriors. It does very much depend on the judge on the day. I don't remember all the details re pension, assets etc, but a relative found the house he'd bought prior to a 10 year marriage counted as an asset whereas the ex wife's inheritance from her parents was excluded. He also got lumbered for 4 years spousal maintenance to give her time to retrain, with it left open to being reviewed at the end of the 4 years. And that was despite the evidence to show she'd made no effort to retrain or get a job since they'd separated.

Somerset

JackRS


Personally I'd just stop negotiating and let is go to Court - 12/01 ?? I probably wouldn't reduce the monthly to MrsJackRS, it's only three months. Just try to get a proper barracuda barrister engaged.


This has been going on forever. The negotiations are getting you nowhere, she and her solicitor are not budging. And it's costing ... every time there's a new crappy proposal, it's examined, e-mails, letters back and forth. There's going to be no resolution.


The court decision is in a sense rolling the dice .... but how much worse can it be than what's being demanded ?


Easy for me to say but seriously, she's not moving so what else can you do ?

JackRS

Somerset wrote: »

JackRS


Personally I'd just stop negotiating and let is go to Court - 12/01 ?? I probably wouldn't reduce the monthly to MrsJackRS, it's only three months. Just try to get a proper barracuda barrister engaged.


This has been going on forever. The negotiations are getting you nowhere, she and her solicitor are not budging. And it's costing ... every time there's a new crappy proposal, it's examined, e-mails, letters back and forth. There's going to be no resolution.



The court decision is in a sense rolling the dice .... but how much worse can it be than what's being demanded ?


Easy for me to say but seriously, she's not moving so what else can you do ?

Agree that is also my thoughts as I'm reluctant to engauge my solicitor in negotiating at £200/hour. I get charged around £500/m for a few emails and phone calls that don't move things on.

ampersand

Look Jack - page upon page here, people[many of whom have not read even a few previous posts, let alone the whole Thread] are coming with pretty much the same gist, whether or not they have legal experience and/or training, Ancient or Modern:-).

The same same thrust of solution, only slightly broad brush, is a constant. We've urged you onward on the rottweiller/barracuda barrister quest.

#2056, you finally wrote: 'why should I lose so much of the cash now.'
'Better late than never' is bitter-sweet in that you've already spilled pointless thousands Jack. Others would be bankrupted by now.

Chuck a day's worth, 2 days' worth, of £s at Andrew Day[if you've really done more follow-up research on him and feel he can do the job for you. For about the 5th time I say you, and whoever, must be a glove-fit.

My current info, is that he IS good - and you must tell him everything]. Yes, all v. easy for me to say, but here you are, hooked on growing your debt[this seems an inescapable conclusion], crabbing your future Life chances.

Remember why you finally took REAL courage and ended this [parasitic] alliance. Read your own Thread with a newcomer's eyes.

You have not made a pro-active decision to stop incurring interest charges ...or so it seems, for you keep pouring money down the slow and useless solicitor drip-feed to retrograde effect.

Have you posted even one time here, along the lines of: 'Good news - getting somewhere at last! She's found out blah-blah...no question, they are on the run and now MUST supply blahblah, with doc. proof blahblah by end of this week. ...things are on the turn at last. Further, failing this my solicitor will push for an ex parte order blahblah... She says 15mths of this nonsense has over-reached any norm and ex-'s persistent invention of excuses go beyond the pale. Delay's been even longer because ex's prev. solicitor retired, should never have taken case, which explains ineffectual dealings thus far. New one's playing to re-start the clock; we won't. We're not paying for waiting while ex's new one is played through all ex's old emotional blackmail party pieces' etc.


Jack, I have yet to see ONE SINGLE UPBEAT POST or a single positive legal advance after ANY exchange, ANY meeting, ANY phone call you have had with your solicitor.

Despite way-back-when concerns and warnings re: you emailing ex, you have continued to do so, with cost-saving in mind. Yes, we understand this.

BUT, look at how it is being re-cast by ex's new person - Boomerang.
I have no doubt that this can and will be turned against you even more.

Swap horses - this sort of ad hoc naïvete is a gift to the other side:

'I have been shown emails/texts sent to my client by Mr Jack, emails which his own representative may not be aware of. Certainly, had she been so apprised she may have been able to persuade her client of the inadvisability blah blah....'
- in other words, of going off-piste.

You are also doing all the dogsbody work - yes, 'to save costs', but you have found yourself in the bolt-on rôle of invigilator, on the alert for her forgetfulness, errors, omissions.

Good barristers relish pinning down forensic detail.
They are fast reading sponges with exocet instincts.
The best succeed only by building a reputation for unerring scalpel finding target jugular, which can be clean, skilful, unfazed when necessity demands deep-cut probing.

Jack, this is their mastery.

It is certainly not your solicitor's and not yours.

This is what you need to pay for and why.
#
When, Jack? When?

You ask barrister in initial discussion - 'Reading time, can you give me a ball-park estimate? What can I do to keep costs down?'

Then 'On what you see, am I likely to be £5k or £10k or £15k better off with you preparing/appearing for me, up to these ceilings? I'm good with figures and detail, can help with this and timelines, can show immobility on other side and heel-dragging.'
He may say ' Life has no guarantees, but you have a strong case on x/y/z, a weak case on a/b/c.'

I write these scenarios because they are known to me and others.

I am used to barristers giving %likelihoods of success.

He will be exact in matters of Law, up to speed in Judge assessment.

If he takes you on, he believes he can win for you and for his own 'portfolio'.
There will have to be compromise by both parties. That hasn't happened yet.

Think back
- to being forbidden your own house in the early days,
- to being refused any onward joint decisions,
- to having your character warped to your children,
-to the nomadic unsettled half-life existence you've lived since, with eviction fears right now and more legal battling to do re: that,
- to the effects of all this on your health and pertinently, being noted by your paymasters in your work performance and persona.

Come on, Jack.