Separated, how much should I provide?

janninew

I'm confused about this inheritance issue. Surely if Jack is paying spousal maintenance there won't be a clean break agreement therefore Jack could have a claim on any future inheritances as long as spousal support is paid? I wonder if Jack came Into any money whether she would try to get he hands on some?

carolan78

It can and does get included. Especially in situations like this where there isn't enough in the pot to set them both up with a mortgage free home.

Will I have to share my inheritance?
This is an area which often creates misunderstandings. The fact is that, usually, if an inheritance has been received before the divorce, then it forms part of what is in the pot and available for division.

It will be a resource; when it comes to dividing who gets what, it will be relevant.

Of course, it is important to acknowledge that the money or property came from one family rather than the other.

But if you are having difficulty finding enough to fund two separate households, then where any available money originally came from becomes less significant.

This can seem unfair, especially if one lot of parents has died and the other has not. There is no chance to redress the balance later, unless possibly if maintenance is still being paid.

If there is enough money to fulfil the needs of both parties and any children, then arguments that certain amounts of money or properties came from an inheritance on one side may be more forceful. In particular, the court will look at whether the inherited assets were ever used by the family as a whole, or whether they were kept separate from the main run of marital assets. If they were kept separate, the court is more likely to allot them back to the party who inherited them in the first place, as long as this will not lead to hardship for the other party. This is particularly true if the inheritance was recent. If it was a long time before the divorce, it will be much more difficult to show that it never formed part of the family pot.

So inheritances are relevant and have to be disclosed. That also goes for potential inheritances depending on how certain the inheritance is and when it is likely to likely to arise. This sounds !!!!!ish, but in practice is only usually relevant where there is some sort of life interest with a residuary estate already written in trust for one or other spouse. If in doubt about this, consult your solicitor.

http://www.wikivorce.com/divorce/FAQs/Sorting-Out-The-Finances/Will-I-have-to-share-my-inheritance.html

Somerset

spender wrote: »

Looks like the back and forth is going to start again with all the additional expenses.

Agreed. It's ridiculous. The cynic in me says this is all about generating fees and nothing to do with Jack's interests. You have to know when you're being taken for a ride.

Somerset

carolan78 wrote: »

That also goes for potential inheritances depending on how certain the inheritance is and when it is likely to likely to arise.

There is no certainty about inheritance full stop. As someone previously mentioned it's easy enough to skip a generation to ensure the only certainty is there is no potential inheritance.

duchy

spender wrote: »

Her projected lifestyle has changed and everyone is now demanding that not only does she get a job but she gets an excellent paying job overnight. This could of been finalised a long time ago. Solicitors cause friction as well

Ummm you have read the first post and noted the date of it haven't you.

I don't think your definition of "overnight" is terribly accurate !

I think there would be a lot more sympathy for ExMrsJ had she made even the slightest effort to apply for jobs she had even a slight hope of getting an interview for or had even registered for temp work to get a bit of experience onto her C.V.

carolan78

I really hope the judge looks on her very unfavourably because she hasn't done anything at all to help her situation. Even if she had done a few weeks temp work here and there it would at least show willing but I think we are approaching 2 years since the separation and she hasn't done an hours work.

framnz85

Hi, I think there is no obligation for a father or mather to provide to the rest of family left. But just let your concience be heard.

ampersand

Hello Jack, another Friday - another week has passed, hence my usual hope of 'a quiet mind and peaceful heart' for you.

I see you've 'thanked' without comment - again, I'd love to think 'No News is good news'. No fall-out from maintenance decision is the best to be hoped for atm.

Otherwise, complete repeat of #2118

Are you secure under your roof?

Have you followed duchy's post #2101 - this is a very good plan.

Did you advise solicitor of her 'incomplete' email and missing response to your 3 options?

I did not conment earlier, but that mention of 'lottery win' is frivolous and flippant.

No-one is more aware than you of what this dragging downward spiral means.
No more could any upward boost at work be relevant to anyone's future but yours. She seems to mean 'between now and Judge's determination, arising from 15 January 2015'.

Form E farce - update? Any figure trumpery by ex can only be justifiably downward in terms of her expenses, with now-Uni daughter in London. Hope she is still loving it, establishing a good working patternkeep[/B] up, you never catch up' being a stern-ish goodie:-)] and communicating with you.

I hope you stood out and looked up at some fireworks, found a positive metaphor or two there.

As always[and in my thoughts at Compline last Wednesday night: you were one in quite a list this month...] - do take care of Jack, Jack.

kelpie35

Thinking of you too, Jack

10 weeks to go now.

JackRS

Rental: Agent has discussed with Landlord that it would be best to let me stay however Landlord is advised by their solicitor they’ve a strong case so advised to go to court. Obviously solicitor is keen to as they get paid for working on case, Landlord has legal insurance so no cost to them. Agent thinks it’s 50/50 and believes I’ll know today but still no response yet.

Financial settlement: I’ve not heard any more, I have responded to my solicitors email, I got another bill for Octobers ‘admin’ £400!
I sent the following to my solicitor:
If it’s possible to agree without a hearing then yes that would be better, however I’d like to avoid unnecessary communication between all parties as I cannot see the value. I am frustrated by this process and can’t see the value being added so far for the amount that has been paid in fees on both sides. Mediation wasn’t able to reach an agreement so I’m not sure a proposal will be agreed now. This is why we went for a court hearing so that a Barrister with appropriate experience and an objective to reach a fair and reasonable outcome meeting the clients requirement/expectations. I appreciate this is also expensive but at least it will be conclusive. Currently I feel there seems to be no cap on the correspondence and costs between parties.

You suggest we need to put our ‘marker in the sand’, I’m guessing from what you wrote in your email you did not consider my proposals in email 20th October email suitable, as maybe they would be too much in her favour as a stake in the ground, so I’ll adjust them below. I’m not sure if showing some options is the right approach, but you’ll see that effectively each option is basically the same in terms total pay-out but the timing different. Option 3 is different as it includes a pension share, I recognise as you say this would require a pensions report, so has additional costs. However we know that her objective is to get as much of the assets now to be able to buy a property, so I suspect this will not be an option they prefer. I wonder if it can be used to demonstrate that I’m prepared to give a pension share but she wanted the cash now, in which case there should be some benefit to me in terms of SM.
My main concern with me having a small share of the assets is that if my circumstances change in terms of my income I will have a large mortgage still to pay.


Option 1

a. House sale £300K she receives £210K (70% e.g. if £290K then £203K)

I. Assumes manage own debts

II. Assumes no pension share

b. CSA £650/m until June 2015

c. Lease car provided 1800miles July 2015 (value £185/m)

d. Clean break

Option 2

a. House sale £300K less combined debts (£26K Sep 2014) =300-26 = £274K x 50%= £137K

b. £37K Cash equivalent of transfer value of pension 1/3 x pension cash equivalent difference (1/3 x 111 = £37K)

I. If sale = £300K then she will receive 137 + 37 = £174K (no pension share)

II. If sale = £290K then will receive 132 + 37 = £169K (no pension share)

c. CSA £650/m until June 2015, then SM £500/m to June 2016 (plus trigger point criteria in terms of either parties circumstances changing)

d. Lease car provided 1800miles July 2015 (value £185/m).

e. Clean break

Option 3

a. House sale £300K less combined debts (£26K Sep 2014) =300-26 = £274K x 50%= £137K

b. Pension share at retirement

c. CSA £650/m until June 2015, then £500/m to June 2016 (plus trigger point criteria in terms of either parties circumstances changing)

d. Lease car provided 1800miles July 2015 (value £185/m).

e. Clean break

FMH has another viewing this Saturday.....