Separated, how much should I provide?

RAS

On a more basic point regarding the car (assuming it is acceptable for ex to have one on the company scheme).

Make absolutely sure that she is responsible for any extra bills as a result of her failing to get it serviced, running voe the mileage allowant etc. And does she need anything like the mileage allowance now she has moved down south?

barbiedoll

RAS wrote: »

On a more basic point regarding the car (assuming it is acceptable for ex to have one on the company scheme).

Make absolutely sure that she is responsible for any extra bills as a result of her failing to get it serviced, running voe the mileage allowant etc. And does she need anything like the mileage allowance now she has moved down south?

Also, she should have to make good any damage; dents, marks on upholstery, scratched wheel trims etc etc. I've got a lease car which is going to cost me a new set of wheel trims before I give it back! I've heard that the lease company will charge a fortune to put right any damage, I think we can assume that Jack will be picking up that bill unless he gets a watertight agreement to the contrary. Personally, I think it would be better to buy her a second-hand car outright, and leave the rest to her (servicing, repair bills etc.) But then again, I'm neither a lawyer nor a judge, and it seems that the car deal is set in stone. Lucky her!

justme111

Mojisola wrote: »

Her unwillingness to compromise has meant the tens of thousands of pounds that could have been divided between them has gone in legal fees.

I am sure she could have said the same about him. She "has lost " quite a bit as well having aspired to maintenance till retirement age (and I hope will lose more after jack does mortgage affordability calculation, he should be able to pay it off till retirement so it should be taken into account )

duchy

With regards to the car I seem to remember from way way back Jack saying he could lease several cars to nominated friends or family as a work perk. I remember because it seemed very generous so I'm fairly sure if Jack was to need another car for a new partner he could still do it without losing the ex's leased car.

Marisco

barbiedoll wrote: »

Also, she should have to make good any damage; dents, marks on upholstery, scratched wheel trims etc etc. I've got a lease car which is going to cost me a new set of wheel trims before I give it back! I've heard that the lease company will charge a fortune to put right any damage, I think we can assume that Jack will be picking up that bill unless he gets a watertight agreement to the contrary. Personally, I think it would be better to buy her a second-hand car outright, and leave the rest to her (servicing, repair bills etc.) But then again, I'm neither a lawyer nor a judge, and it seems that the car deal is set in stone. Lucky her!

Personally, I think she should buy her own dammed car!

SandC

I'd rather get a car for the son than provide another for the ex wife.

JackRS

SandC wrote: »

Jack i would think very carefully about the car issue. Aren't there any rules about the provision of a lease car to be to certain family members only and with you shortly to be divorced are you sure that this scheme will still be available?

You've been separated for two years, it wouldn't be all that unreasonable for you to have already met a new partner, be living with them and waiting for the divorce so you could get married - yet new wife wouldn't be allowed a lease car from your work cos ex wife has got the perk? Just doesn't sound right to me, even if you just look at it from a responsibility point of view.... the vehicle wouldn't even be kept in the same area as you!

Hi and thanks for your concern. Actually the scheme I have use of allows me to get up to 3 additional cars to my management vehicle. These cars can be for friends or family (not that she fall into either category), obviously it would be cleaner not to have the tie and every year getting involved in the car change etc. I was trying to use it as a bargaining incentive, but as she wants her cake and eat it and some cream and a cup of tea and seat with a sea view.....and a car......did I mention the boat....

kelpie35

Hi Jack, I hope if you have had your yearly appraisal that it all went well for you.

Is there any word of your offer being accepted/rejected yet?

Please try to look after yourself and say strong.

Take care.

JackRS

kelpie35 wrote: »

Hi Jack, I hope if you have had your yearly appraisal that it all went well for you.

Is there any word of your offer being accepted/rejected yet?

Please try to look after yourself and say strong.

Take care.

Yes I managed to get through the appraisal OK, he recognised that I'm not performing to my potential but understands why.

I got an email from my solicitor back from her holidays, she wrote the following and attached a letter outlining the final offer giving 14 days to respond:


I write further to your Financial Dispute Resolution hearing on 2 April 2015 whilst I was onannual leave. I am sorry to hear that the court hearing itself did not live upto expectations. I understand from Mr T that, initially, the DeputyDistrict Judge was helpful and indicated that:

• As the children were no longer the court’s first consideration, ex could manage in a two-bedroom flat.
• If ex was having the bulk of the liquid capital, you would have to the obtain a large mortgage to meet your housing needs.

Iunderstand the Judge was less helpful in respect of pensions and spousalmaintenance. She found that:

• Ex was unlikely to secure particularly well remunerated employment (though she must take steps immediately to find work)
• There should therefore be a joint lives maintenance order or at least until retirement
• There should then be a pension sharing order sufficient to keep her from poverty in her retirement.

Mr T commentedthat the indications were all ‘a bit woolly’. I understand that you were verydissatisfied with the whole exercise. Litigation is a risky exercise. Iappreciate that you are the Respondent to ex application and it was not yourchoice to enter into the exercise. To make matters worse, the court staff hadbeen told that they could go home early for Easter and therefore considerablepressure was put upon you to either agree your family finances or agree anorder listing your matter for a final hearing.

I understand thatex opening offer was that she had the majority of the matrimonial pot.This would not have been fair to you. She wanted £650 per month, the car for aterm of six years as well as having £220,000 from the house. She would agreenot to have any pension sharing.

I understand thatex was seriously considering your final offer of: £650 per month with nocar for a period of three years, capital of £215,000 and no pension sharingorder. If ex wanted the car then her capital would reduce to £210,000. Youagreed at court that you would put forward these proposals to ex’ssolicitor on a without prejudice basis.



Mr T was fairlyoptimistic that ex would accept your last offer. Had you had more time atcourt, it is Mr T's opinion that she may well have agreed to this at thehearing itself. What is clear is that ex is not interested in a pensionsharing order but that she wishes to get as much capital as possible torehouse. It also appears that she is not as fixated on the lease car aspreviously thought.

I have now drafted therequired letter for your approval and I would be grateful for your instructionson the same. I do apologise for the delay in coming back to you but, as you areaware, I have been on annual leave.


I replied as follows:


Welcomeback I hope you were able to enjoy your holiday.

Theother key point about the FDR on the 2nd April was that theoriginal judge allocated to hear the case wasn’t present on the day,consequently the substitute judge hadn’t reviewed all the documentation thathad been submitted.

Thejudge did indicate that a lower proportion share of the capital was moreappropriate as you say. Therefore this I hope would encourage her tosettle as this indication would mean if we went to a final hearing not onlywould there be significant costs involved, she may well end up with less of thecapital, which is against her main objective. I’m not sure if this shouldbe pointed out in the letter, although I appreciate this would also result inpension share and long term maintenance.

Thefinal offer that I made was more than I wanted to offer but it was made in a hopeto get a conclusion in the day. I suppose at this stage I would not beable to retract from that and propose an alternative settlement?

Iwould prefer if the offer was made the other way round, £210,000 , lease carand maintenance. Then option for £215,000 without the car. Mypreference is to have the extra £5,000 and provide the car.

Interms of the detail within the letter I would like to ensure it’s precise interms of timing and description. The 3 years for Spousal Maintenance endswith the last payment at the end of March 2018 and that it is not additional toCSA of £650pcm that is currently paid (final payment end of June 2015). Effectively the CSA that is currently paid changes to Spousal maintenancein July 2013, last payment end of March 2018. It’s important these dates arefixed at this stage otherwise they will drag things out and assume it’s 3years from some other point. This should also have trigger events asbefore such as any changes in my employment circumstances, if she cohabits etcand if she earns more than £1200pcm (net). I am not sure if you need thisdetail in the offer letter or if it’s detail that is contained somewhere later?

Gigervamp

Jack, looks like you've left your ex's name in the email from solicitor. You should edit your post.