Ex partner trying to get money out of me

hanb

I had a similar yet different situation a couple of years ago. I received 2 or 3 letters from a 'Solicitor' acting on behalf of someone who thought they deserved 'compensation' to be taken from inheritance I'd received. I ignored all of the letters and didn't hear from them again (as advised by my Solicitor at the time). It was a no win no fee chancer entertaining someone trying their luck. They knew they had no actual claim so didn't follow the matter up.


I would suggest ignoring the letter and enjoying a nice glass of something to celebrate how much better off you are having this person out of your life

paddy's_mum

caprikid1 wrote: »

"Sometimes it is perhaps better to look at things from a pragmatic viewpoint especially as the OP has already made it clear that she is dreading an ongoing battle. "


As soon as the expectation is set that you feel that he is owed, surely he is going to go for half.


Do one surely has to be the only response.


Sounds like the sort of case that as soon as it looks like his case is not 100% he is not going to persue it due to the cost.

I had not envisaged that the OP would be gaily phoning the chap up, while waving her cheque book! I had assumed that she would continue to seek the advice of her solicitor.

Whoever has the right or wrong of it, it is very common indeed for 'without prejudice' offers to be made in an effort to negotiate settlement without dragging matters into court, however "stupid" ( ) that way of dealing with things may be.

I made the suggestion simply to open up another possibility for consideration.

I think it's interesting that the OP has made much comment about the lies he has told and the letters she knows of but has not said whether, or not, the former partner did in fact make a provable financial contribution in the past. It seems odd that his solicitor (we assume) has enough information to advise his client that he has accrued a beneficial interest if there is no hint of such evidence.

The former partner has already spent money on legal fees to get this letter sent so clearly is not just muttering under his breath.

C_Mababejive

No,,as i said before just ignore it. I suspect it will just go away.

Paulinepgibbons01

paddy's_mum wrote: »

I had not envisaged that the OP would be gaily phoning the chap up, while waving her cheque book! I had assumed that she would continue to seek the advice of her solicitor.

Whoever has the right or wrong of it, it is very common indeed for 'without prejudice' offers to be made in an effort to negotiate settlement without dragging matters into court, however "stupid" ( ) that way of dealing with things may be.

I made the suggestion simply to open up another possibility for consideration.

I think it's interesting that the OP has made much comment about the lies he has told and the letters she knows of but has not said whether, or not, the former partner did in fact make a provable financial contribution in the past. It seems odd that his solicitor (we assume) has enough information to advise his client that he has accrued a beneficial interest if there is no hint of such evidence.

The former partner has already spent money on legal fees to get this letter sent so clearly is not just muttering under his breath.

Thank you for your comments however I posted on here for advice for me not My ex, you are right in as much as there are two sides to a story. We did have a loan together but it was for me to buy a car and him to buy a motorbike I still have a copy of the letter written to my bank explaining what we wanted the loan for, I also have his workings out of what percentage each would pay. My ex was more than aware that I was buying the house for myself & my young children otherwise we would have been homeless. I paid the deposit for the property after my ex husband and myself sold the ex marital home. Before then I was renting and once the ex marital home was sold I had six months in which to buy a property. My ex partner had no involvement in viewing properties, my mother & father came with me, I paid the conveyancing & land registry search and put a deposit down of £9000. Any loans for improvements were through my bank & through my accounts and payments for all of these came out of my bank account. Money my ex partner paid as far as I was concerned was rent & his share of the food etc. Unfortunately at the time of purchase of the house I ignored my fathers advice to get my ex partner to sign an agreement that he would have no interests in the property. My father obviously was wiser than I was then. I wish I had listened to him. No written agreement regarding rent either.

silvercar

Money my ex partner paid as far as I was concerned was rent & his share of the food etc.

Once you start referring to money as rent, things move from black & white to grey. His share of food, his share of entertainment, his share of utility bills are all clear. A partner renting off someone they are living with is less clear cut.

Thrugelmir

silvercar wrote: »

A partner renting off someone they are living with is less clear cut.

No grey with regards to who owns the property though. Simply giving someone else money doesn't not infer any rights. Matter goes to court word vs word. Nothing to rule on. Courts aren't there to arbitrate between warring ex partners.

paddy's_mum

I'm sorry that you believe I am trying to help your ex partner, to your detriment.

I am holding in my hand at this exact moment a copy of Form N181 Directions questionnaire for Fast track and Multi-track Small Claims procedure as I am typing up the necessary paperwork for a relative's claim.

Section A/1 says, very specifically, 'Given that the rules require you to try to settle the claim before the hearing, do you want to attempt to settle at this stage?'

The heading of that section requires any legal adviser you have to sign this following statement 'I confirm that I have explained to my client the need to try to settle; the options available and the possibility of costs sanctions if they refuse to try to settle.'

Anyone can google to find this form and read it themselves.

If either you or your ex were to proceed with this as far as a court, you will be required by the law of this land to try to negotiate a settlement and that means that he and his claim are not likely to evaporate after just one approach.

Whether you do or don't like my comments is irrelevant. I am actually trying to offer YOU sound, sensible and reasoned advice. What you do with it is entirely up to you. I wish you well.

silvercar

Post in a different part of the forum and you get different advice!

See this thread, different OP but similar situation:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5402367

Lemonsqueezer78

paddy's_mum wrote: »

I'm sorry that you believe I am trying to help your ex partner, to your detriment.

I am holding in my hand at this exact moment a copy of Form N181 Directions questionnaire for Fast track and Multi-track Small Claims procedure as I am typing up the necessary paperwork for a relative's claim.

Section A/1 says, very specifically, 'Given that the rules require you to try to settle the claim before the hearing, do you want to attempt to settle at this stage?'

The heading of that section requires any legal adviser you have to sign this following statement 'I confirm that I have explained to my client the need to try to settle; the options available and the possibility of costs sanctions if they refuse to try to settle.'

Anyone can google to find this form and read it themselves.

If either you or your ex were to proceed with this as far as a court, you will be required by the law of this land to try to negotiate a settlement and that means that he and his claim are not likely to evaporate after just one approach.

Whether you do or don't like my comments is irrelevant. I am actually trying to offer YOU sound, sensible and reasoned advice. What you do with it is entirely up to you. I wish you well.

Your advice to settle financially with her ex is horrible, sorry. An option, yes... but horrible nonetheless. Nothing the OP has said gives any suggestion that the ex has any kind of claim here. The £5k you are suggesting she could settle for would be far better spend defending this, since there is every chance the claim would be dismissed promptly - and probably for less than £5k in costs.

There is no "law of the land" requirement for the OP to negotiate a settlement with her ex, beyond entering a defence that explains why they refute the claim in its entirety.

paddy's_mum

I give up!

I did not 'advise' the OP to give the man £5k. I suggested it might be one way to look at what she herself states is a very stressful situation and one that is unlikely to just disappear with the morning mist, especially if there is evidence to support his claim.

Nobody want to reward a bully but equally, what is the point of spending thousands of pounds on non-recoverable legal costs and fees if a bit of adroit legal manoeuvring now could short-cut the whole rotten process.

If offering a greedy man some dosh in full and final settlement of his claim will avoid perhaps years of aggravation, stress and continuing dread about there it will all end, then I maintain that's a sensible use of money.

Whether such a result would sit well with the OP is another matter entirely but sometimes the unpalatable smooths the way, as many a divorce settlement will testify. I bet the Queen didn't enjoy shaking hands with Gerry Adams and Co but something somewhere had to give before progress could be made.

At the end of the day, the OP will take as much or as little as she needs from the opinions offered and that is surely the whole point of any discussion.