Separated, how much should I provide?

quidsy

I believe it means the next date AFTER the education has finished. So end of course = June 15, payment ends August 15

duchy

JackRS wrote: »

look at gov site and it states the following:

When approved education or training ends

When your child leaves approved education or training payments will stop at the end of February, 31 May, 31 August or 30 November (whichever comes first).

Not sure how to read that?

Yes that is what I was talking about - so if his college term finishes in June or July CS payments still run until 31 August then cease. CB claimed by MrsxJ will be on the same schedule.

Speaking of son I do wonder if it was *his* wish you weren't informed about the hospital stay as he isn't currently speaking to you. He's old enough to insist and it may not be his Mum's idea.

justme111

If ex was going to starve -its her choice. She was offered plenty of money, she wants more - will have to wait then .

JackRS

She wrote in her email to me:

Thank you for your emails. I have amended the letters and attach the final version for your information.

I do think it is worth fighting the point at present. I did however wish to warn you of the dangers of continuing to a final hearing. Your proposal is reasonable and fair. However, the proposal that She is putting forward is also one that is within the Judge’s range of discretion to make. I wanted to make you aware that there is a risk that we proceed to a final hearing and the Judge adopts her proposal. You would then have incurred further legal costs and not achieved what you wanted. This may be a risk that you want to take as it is likely that the Judge will agree that you should have a reasonable proportion of the capital.

If you would like to discuss further, please let me know and I will book a telephone appointment for us to speak.

Have a good weekend.

She attached the draft letter pasted below which included my instructions:

We write further to your letter 7 May 2015.

The pension sharing report was dated 26 March and the FDR hearing was not until 2 April2015. Your client therefore had plenty of time to consider the various calculations before negotiating at the FDR. We do not agree that the correct discount for cash is 10% in view of the long time the parties have until retirement. Indeed, this was given only as an example by the pensions actuary. In your previous correspondence, you have suggested a discount of between 20 – 40%.

Your client’s opening position at Court was that she wished to have capital of £220,000, no pension share, £650 per month by way of spousal maintenance as well as the car for six years. These negotiations continued with our client's final offer being upon the terms contained within our without prejudice proposals of 20 April 2015.

Your client is now asking for a further £23,000 by way of capital. If our client was happy to accept your client's opening proposal at the FDR then he would have done so. He certainly is not going to agree to proposals that are in excess of those put forward by your own Counsel at that hearing. Doing so would leave him very little by way of capital once he has repaid his debts.

Both parties’ needs must be accommodated within any order and we have previously commented on the Judge’s assessment of your client’s needs at the FDR.

We ask that you revert to us with confirmation that your client will agree the terms as set out in our letter of 20 April, failing which we are instructed to start preparation for a final hearing. This would be unfortunate when your client was clearly prepared to accept less at the FDR and, to date, very little further legal costs have been incurred. This will certainly change as the parties progress towards the final hearing. We will draw this offer to the Judge’s attention on the issue of costs should an order be made in these terms at the final hearing

Our client also wishes to resolve matters before the car currently driven by your client must be returned to the lease company having reached the end of the lease period. Now that the home has been sold, he would also wish to review the amount of spousal maintenance being paid if an agreement is not forthcoming from your client.

We look forward to hearing from you.

duchy

Sorry but that last paragraph implies spousal mait is a given -rather than something you've already paid for two years so the period of adjustment is now past- I think it could be better worded

JackRS

duchy wrote: »

Sorry but that last paragraph implies spousal mait is a given -rather than something you've already paid for two years so the period of adjustment is now past- I think it could be better worded

Thanks for reviewing, I know what you mean, how would you word it?

duchy

I was trying to reword it before I answered - and realized it needs to be carefully worded so it doesn't come across as inflammatory in say ing "You can forget SM" Let me think about it and get back to you

duchy

JackRS wrote: »

Our client also wishes to resolve matters before the car currently driven by your client must be returned to the lease company having reached the end of the lease period. Now that the home has been sold, he would also wish to review the amount of spousal maintenance being paid if an agreement is not forthcoming from your client.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Our client notes that the current lease agreement for the car is ending soon and the car will be returned. As circumstances have changed in terms of location and residence now the marital home is sold this is one of the issues that needs resolution and agreement as there are differing proposals from our client and xMrsJ . As these will form part of the final settlement this makes early agreement desirable in ensuring any new lease contracts or commitments are not postponed as they inevitably will be if final agreement of full settlement is delayed.



(It's a bit wordy -and I'm not 100% happy with it - but I think it covers it without suggesting maintenance is a given but just a possibility -and makes it clear if she doesn't pull her finger out she won't have a car for at least a while)

I think you need to be very careful that Child support doesn't morph into SM by continuing to pay it after the end of August -as a side note.

My fee is a large cappuccino and a squidgy cream cake btw

justme111

I would not even mention it. As it is cs , not sm.

duchy

justme111 wrote: »

If ex was going to starve -its her choice. She was offered plenty of money, she wants more - will have to wait then .

Thing is she is very comfortable in the house of Mum and Dad and their financial support so she can afford to wait unfortunately.