Husband's ex wife wanting more money

itsanne

FatVonD wrote: »

Something a lot of posters could do

I thought about including something along the lines of maybe it is time for everyone else to do the same and awaiting the flak .

I decided against as it's not for me to say .

ash28

paulineb wrote: »

I totally agree.

Her staying at home and looking after the child may have saved them childcare payments, but again we dont know if they had extended family who would have looked after kids, or whether the OP could have worked part time, shifts when the OPs husband was home from work.

Plenty of people have part and full time jobs and bring up more than one child.

If people do choose to be stay at home mums and the husband works or stay at home dads and the wife works, totally fine.
But there are so many ways people can choose to run a home, the notion that he could only work because she stayed at home to look after the child is one that plenty other families manage to successfully work around.

Including single parents.

By the end of this thread the mum will probably have turned into a saint or thereabouts with all the sacrifices she made for this terrible husband who isnt willing to pay her £150 quid for a school uniform at a weeks notice, when all she got from the divorce was a poxy house worth 300k and 450 quid a month maintenance.

Seriously I hope they all manage to sort this out but lets get some perspective on this before it turns into an episode of jackanory.

I would have thought her staying at home was a joint decision, more than likely made either because of child care costs vs her potential earnings, or it was because they could afford it and wanted the child in it's formative years to be brought up by the mother.

I know a number of families where the mother stays at home because it is what both parents want......and some of them make financial sacrifices to allow this to happen.

I was a stay at home mother for a few years when our children were young...we had 3 under 3 and there was no way could we pay for child care for them. During those years everything was paid for out of OH's salary....I didn't class that as his money...it was our money. In the same way that it would have been our money if I had been the breadwinner and he a stay at home parent. As it was he earned more money than I did and he wasn't happy looking after babies.....when they were older he did look after them when he could when I was at work.

The house was our house....jointly owned and we were both jointly liable for the mortgage.....it wasn't his because he paid the mortgage.

For the OP's husband to let his ex wife take out a mortgage on what remained of the original mortgage must have been a joint decision....she would have to remortgage on her own. What he got out of it was the ability to start again and get a mortgage on a new property.....something he would have found much harder if he already had a mortgage on another property. What he could have done was to stay on the original mortgage and have a financial interest in the house...it was their decision not to do that, for whatever reason.

I would imagine the ex wife worked and contributed before the child was born.

What I gave up by staying at home was career and salary progression and potential pension for those years.....the youngest was 5 when I went back to full time work, I had 8 years out of full time employment - difficult to catch up - it was like starting again at the bottom. And if OH and I had split up it would have been another 7 or so years before I could have gone back to full time work.....we had no family support.

What happened in the past is in the past (probably jointly made decisions by her husband and his ex that both were ok with at the time), the OP needs to get over it and concentrate on what happens going forward.

exarmydreamer

Time of the month Duchy?

peachyprice

ash28 wrote: »

I would have thought her staying at home was a joint decision, more than likely made either because of child care costs vs her potential earnings, or it was because they could afford it and wanted the child in it's formative years to be brought up by the mother.

Or she could have just said she wasn't going back to work because she didn't want to. Who knows.

I would imagine the ex wife worked and contributed before the child was born.

Why on earth would you imagine such a thing from the small amount of info OP has actually posted.


Far, far too many assumptions being made on this thread.

Melaniep101

Hi all

Sorry for the radio silence today, I've been at work (part time job) so been offline.

I've had a good think about things over today, and I think maybe hubby and I should give his ex wife the benefit of the doubt in this instance. I really wouldn't want my stepson not having the proper school uniform when he goes back to school. I've earnt £50 today from my Saturday job, so I'll find another £25 for my share, and see if hubby has any cash, but I think we should take him shopping rather than handing over the cash.

FBaby

I don't doubt though that his ex being a stay at home mum made his working life a lot easier with him not having to juggle child care in holidays, worrying about taking time off if the child was sick etc.

Ha ha, if they fell under the norm, even if she had been working, she still would most likely have been the one with that worry doing all the juggling anyway!

I've had a good think about things over today, and I think maybe hubby and I should give his ex wife the benefit of the doubt in this instance. I really wouldn't want my stepson not having the proper school uniform when he goes back to school. I've earnt £50 today from my Saturday job, so I'll find another £25 for my share, and see if hubby has any cash, but I think we should take him shopping rather than handing over the cash.

Famous last words, I think you are absolutely right to suggest that they agree on a list of what she can buy and what you guys can buy and do it this way. Just out of curiosity, does your step-son knows how much his dad contributes? Asking because I would expect there would be different views as to whether this is appropriate at what age etc..., no right or wrong, but just wondering in your case.

Melaniep101

Hi FBaby

Firstly, thank you so much for 'getting' where I was coming from with this issue, and I really appreciate your comments on this thread.

As to whether my stepson knows how much my hubby contributes, I'm not sure it's ever come up in conversation with him to my knowledge. He may well be aware but my husband doesn't talk to him about it as its not for DSS to worry about IYSWIM...

shoe*diva79

Melaniep101 wrote: »

Hi all

I've earnt £50 today from my Saturday job, so I'll find another £25 for my share, and see if hubby has any cash, but I think we should take him shopping rather than handing over the cash.

Why are you finding £75 of it? Surely its your husbands responsibility (and the PWC)? If your household income is all 'in one pot' then the whole £150 comes from that?

Guest101

duchy wrote: »

Umm

The PWC gets the benefit of needing to find a job that works around the needs of the child/children - limiting job choice-limiting overtime etc
The PWC is the one who takes time off if the child is ill, meetings at school etc etc
The PWC is the one who has to drop everything if needed if the child is injured, locks themselves out
The PWC is the one who spends the time supervising homework , running the kids to activities ...the one who gets the call "Mum I've missed the bus and there isn't another for an hour " or "Mum I've lost my bus pass/dinner pass/left my homework behind"
The PWC can't just decide to do something on impulse but needs to make sure childcare is in place first.
The PWC can have a well earned break from working plus all of the above planned - and get an 11th hour phonecall from the NRP "Sorry can't have them this weekend after all as we have planned something else - we'll have them next week instead"

Most parents with care don't resent any of those things it's part of the package - but if you cost out all those "extra services" it's a bit like costing out what a SAHM's services would cost for a newborn.......it adds up to far more than would be economically viable ........so it's a bit pointless trying to put a financial value on either parent's contribution and benefits.

Most NRP's have built a life that accomadates children for limited periods but would struggle to swop lifestyles (not saying that is wrong - the OP and her husband for example both work fulltime ....they'd find if the child turned up tomorrow they'd need to make massive changes which would impact financially especially as they both work to pay a big mortgage currently)

I once suggested to my ex we moved to a 50/50 arrangement (I had been offered a fantastic job that would have changed my life but it came with needing to travel at times)- we talked about how it would work......with his work pattern and his social life it didn't work at all and we decided it worked better for both of us with me working part-time and him working full-time - basically when faced with the choice he didn't really want to have to make the changes it would have needed. I suspect the fantasy and the reality for many seperated parents would be the same.

If the PWC doesnt like it, they can always swap, cant have it both ways, so deal with it.

Melaniep101

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Why are you finding £75 of it? Surely its your husbands responsibility (and the PWC)? If your household income is all 'in one pot' then the whole £150 comes from that?

Because husband will not have much money left when he comes back from camping. Mortgage/bills/groceries are all joint, but otherwise we earn our own money and keep it separate. We only have enough in the joint pot for regular stuff, there's no contingency.