Split from Husband...need advice please

BitterAndTwisted

Netwizard wrote: »

Because then maybe people won't be as harsh on the OP? (and people are speculating, saying there might be reasons why she jumped into bed with someone else and now wants to screw him for his pension!)

Do you really think it's appropriate, or even decent, to castigate someone for things no-one but the person concerned knows about?

It appears that the only exercise some people around here get is jumping to conclusions.

In my opinion, even if the OP was a wanton trashbag who dumped her husband for no good reason other than sport, she's still entitled to claim a proportion of his pension, just like any other assets they shared.

Netwizard

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

she's still entitled to claim a proportion of his pension, just like any other assets they shared.

I bloody well hope OPs ex other half does the same then! Tit for tat

marisco_2

paddy's_mum wrote: »

Not all so-called infidelity is without justification.

Personally I don't think there is any excuse or justification for cheating on a partner, regardless of what state a marriage is in. If there are problems address them. If they cant be fixed move on and then start again. An affair is a huge betrayal and they don't come about by someone being provoked to seek sanctuary elsewhere. A person makes a conscious choice to take that action, often without care or thought of the devastation that will be caused to the other party. That said, how a marriage ends has no impact at all on how a couples finances are split.

sparkychris

Shocking business...

I blame the Spice Girls.

Tigsteroonie

See what I mean, OP? :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Georgiegirl256

Netwizard wrote: »

Because then maybe people won't be as harsh on the OP? (and people are speculating, saying there might be reasons why she jumped into bed with someone else and now wants to screw him for his pension!)

I agree, as the OP hasn't mentioned the reason why she left her husband (not saying she has to, just that she hasn't), then that's all people can do is speculate.

The way I read the OP is that she left her husband after having an perhaps having an affair with someone else, and so therefore is the 'guilty party', and so therefore the husband is the 'innocent party' and so IMO why should the OP be able to get her hands on his hard earned pension?

I wonder what planted that idea in her mind?

Georgiegirl256

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Do you really think it's appropriate, or even decent, to castigate someone for things no-one but the person concerned knows about?

It appears that the only exercise some people around here get is jumping to conclusions.

In my opinion, even if the OP was a wanton trashbag who dumped her husband for no good reason other than sport, she's still entitled to claim a proportion of his pension, just like any other assets they shared.

Entitled by law yes, but IMO it's morally wrong. I'm not saying it's wrong when the woman is the innocent party and has given up work to raise kids for example, but when she is a 'wanton trash bag' then yes it's wrong and it's money grabbing.

Person_one

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Entitled by law yes, but IMO it's morally wrong. I'm not saying it's wrong when the woman is the innocent party and has given up work to raise kids for example, but when she is a 'wanton trash bag' then yes it's wrong and it's money grabbing.

What if she's a wanton trash bag who gave up work to look after the kids?

There's a good reason why the financials of marriage and divorce are completely separate from the morals.

Georgiegirl256

Person_one wrote: »

What if she's a wanton trash bag who gave up work to look after the kids?.

My view still stands, her fault, (assuming it is), her problem, she walked away from the marriage without (presumably) any other reason than she had an affair....not the husbands fault, so IMO she's got a damn cheek to even think about going for 50% of his pension.

Obviously, the above is speculation, that's all we can do as we don't know any other facts, but that's my take on it.

mountainofdebt

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

The way I read the OP is that she left her husband after having an perhaps having an affair with someone else, and so therefore is the 'guilty party', and so therefore the husband is the 'innocent party' and so IMO why should the OP be able to get her hands on his hard earned pension?

Must admit this is how I read the OP as well.