Divorce - Custody and finance issues

HappyG1rl

My husband wants to sort the finances and wants the house sold quickly but there are so many complicated issues to deal with. Is it best to go to the CSA first about the kids or sort the finances?

hobo28

Hi

I think the way to see this is as a starting point. He's obviously put a lot of thought into what he wants to walk away with and is most favourable to him. Your friend needs to have a think about what she wants and what she will accept or not.

For example, having the kids every single weekend is unrealistic since as you quite rightly say, she'd miss out on too much quality time.

Mediation is the place to sort these things out if they can at all. Its certainly cheaper than using a solicitor!

Perhaps a chat with a solicitor will also give her a better idea of her position should mediation fail.

A friend of mine is on the verge of divorce and his kids are much older. He's been advised by his solicitor that his wife would likely get most of the house equity and he would be unable to sell until they'd left home. However, each case is different so a solicitor is a must. No-one here can or should give legal advice.

As for joint residence, that would not necessarily mess up tax credits. So long as she remains the parent with care and holds the child benefit, she will still get them. He will still need to pay child maintenance too, albeit a reduced rate.

Anyway, to me I guess he's come into mediation all guns blazing hoping to win the best deal he can. If he's entitled to 50% he's going for 70% so he has room to wiggle back. Hopefully mediation will help them both sort it out amicably.

Good luck

paddy's_mum

Purely on a practical level, your friend must refuse her husband having the children every weekend. It doesn't work because mother never gets to do anything fun/good with the children on weekends and eventually, the children will see mother as the one who is constantly nagging "wash behind your ears" or "what have I told you about leaving dirty clothes on the bedroom floor" but father as the source of everything good and exciting in life. Not fair on either the children or the mother. Two weekends a month is what most separated parents agree on in order to keep things in balance.

tsstss7

hi toots

I'd say that this case is way too complicated for mediation and will go to court eventually ..may take a while though.

Your friend needs to find a good solicitor asap and not give in to anything at all!!! He will try and bully her to get what he wants so she needs to take a tough stance including not letting him mess the kids around on access - in her position I would send a written (keeping a copy ) proposal of access and definately do not let him have more than she can reasonably agree to -it is easier to increase than decrease as I found ( my ex had wed t times until ds went to school then I stopped it as it was way too disruptive, he took me to court and was awarded wed night in school hols which I would never have contested anyway - and he doesn't do anyway it is too much trouble for him and not quality time at all - he now does every other weknd and time in the school holidays when he is not working which works better for us all)

Also for access find a regular routine and STICK TO IT do not use him as child care unless it fits very well into the routine find someone else if that is an issue especially if he is unreliable. I do get my ds's dad to bbsit on occasion now but very rarely it is far easier to use someone who doesn't always have an agenda about where you are going etc.

tsstss7

I've tried to say that she needs to think about how much time she would let him see the children for but she is totally devestated by the turn around in his behaviour lately. He is a mental health nurse and knows what buttons to press. He is telling the children things and making them promise not to say anything because "it will make mommy angry". She is one of those people who is always calm and he just hates that. Yesterday she told me she was so angry but you can't ever tell with her so the fact that she has told me she is makes me know how hurt she is.

The 6 year old has told her mommy this (my friend makes a point of not questionning them) and she does not want to spend time at his mom's house. She is happy to be at her other nanny's but prefers to be in her own home. My friend tried telling him this but he thinks these are ideas she has planted in the children.


I was thinking she should suggest he sees them on a Wednesday if she is working but in her home.


NO THIS IS A BAD IDEA ! IT WILL ONLY CAUSE PROBLEMS - FAR BETTER TO SEPARATE CHILDCARE ARRANGEMENTS AND ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS. CAN SHE NOT CHANGE HER WORK PATTERN OR TAKE A LEAVE OF ABSCENCE WHILE SHE IS SORTING THINGS OUT?

He could stay over and sleep on the sofa if he wants them all night. He could see them for one day each weekend or both days at the weekend if she is working where he could take them back to his mom's house.

Does this sound fair?

DITTO ABOVE - IT IS OVERCOMPLICATED AND ONCE AGAIN REVOLVES AROUND HER WORK ! WHILE IT MAY SEEM LIKE A GOOD IDEA. IN THE LONG RUN IT WILL NOT HELP HER WIN HER CASE - THE CASE NEEDS TO FOCUS ON THE NEEDS OF THE CHILDREN AND CONSISTANCY OF CARE IS ALWAYS QUITE PARAMOUNT.

tsstss7

Toots wrote: »

Trouble is not long ago he didn't want them on the Saturday, he wanted them on the Sunday probably because his gf and child might want to do something on a Saturday and my friend has issues around them seeing the child and mother at the mo. She realises they will develop a relationship with his mistress if they are serious about each other but she wants to meet her first and ensure they are on the same wavelength as to what things they can and cannot do, bedtimes, what they watch on TV etc.

trouble is you dont get to vet the ex's new OH - as he wouldn't be allowed to vet hers - she is going to have to accept this contact in the end however much she hates it so it may be in her best interest to agree to an access arragement that suits her such as every other wknd as otherwise it may end up worse.

My ds was a vegetarian as am I but every other weekend his dad would feed him McCarp nowt I could do about it unfortunately!!:mad: :mad:

Bright side is now the mistress is going to have to have two energetic children in her house everyotherweeknd - not just the nice cosy little family shehas come to expect.



They have already met their father's child because for 2 years running they went away for a week with their Dad, his mistress and th baby. They did not know who it was at the time - they just thought it was the baby of a friend called Jackie. My friend's hubby asked if he could take the children away for a week on holiday with a friend called Jackie from work who was apparently about 60 years old. There was a baby with them that they mentioned to their mom when thy came back and her hubby told her this 'Jackie' had adopted her.


!!!!! what an !!!!!!!


I must admit I can't believe the stupidity of my friend in allowing this but she was a very trusting wife and just thought he was being kind to this lady. This lady however is not 60, her name isn't Jackie and has been having an affair with my friend's hubby for over 3 years.

It says something about him that he could be devious enough to concoct such a story and take his kids on holiday with his bit on the side and their child.

One of her children saw this child recently and told he mom that she has long hair now. He told the mediator the children haven't see her for two years - but she is only 2 and a half anyway. He's obviously lying - how else would her DD know she has long hair now?

As to the letter thing "without prejustice" makes it useless to her really as it needs to be a tool for court later on to show that she had not been denying access as so many men like to claim!- if she is about minimising contact because she is worried about consistancy or other issues, courts do somtimes award less (once a month for example) BUT she must really consider the desired outcome for her children first and foremost...ie what level of contact would suit them best considering the circumstances. I am talking long term here ...you also have xmas /new year to consider...as well as other special occasions (b'days, mothers day fathers day...) all potential minefields and a bullies delight!!!!

Kimitatsu

He has now told the mediator he wants:
1) Joint custody of the children stating he wants them for 3.5 days per week (50% of the week) and that he wants them every weekend. In the week he wants them on a Monday. He is happy for the children to go to stay at her parents' house on a Wednesday. Now my friend never works on a Monday evening so if he had them Sat, Sun, Mon and she worked on a Wednesday this would mean she never sees them on a weekend at all, she wouldn't see them on a Monday when she doesn't work and wouldn't see them from Wednesday morning to Thursday night. It would dramatically cut down her time with them. He said "good - see how you feel when you don't see them".

It is unlikely that a court would grant this sort of arrangement as the child would always have the weekends at Dad's house; what would the arrangements be for school holidays when I assume that he has to work? How old are the children? Their views will be taken into account, especially if she is over 12.

2) 50% of the value of their house;(she has said she cannot afford to pay this and she wants the children to have the stability of their home so wants to retain her right to stay there and buy him out when the children are 18 or earlier if she was to meet someone and re-marry. He has said if she can't afford it he will buy her out but she doesn't want this - the kids need the familiarity of their home and is just round th corner from th school. It is just a 3 bed semi at around £140k so she couldn't buy anywhere else with the money).

He is not automatically entitled to 50% of the house, especially if he has equity elsewhere. The house is there for the protection of the family to live in, at worst she is entitled to reside in the house with her daughter until the youngest child leaves full time education or reaches 17 whichever is later. It is far more likely that he will be awarded a proportion of the house and a mesher order put in place, which means that when the child comes of age either your friend can buy him out of the house or the house will be sold and the proceeds split as per the mesher order.

3) 50% of her pension (because she has paid into hers longer). She let him give up a job to study to be a mental health nurse and he only did some agency work so she has always contributed more to the household budget too;

Does he have a pension? If so then dependant on their ages this is not guaranteed in either case; if he has a pension then he has made provision for his old age and has to prove that he has not been able to make sufficient arrangements. As he is presumably going off to live with his mistress then the case can be argued that he will have financial support from her as well.

4) 50% of an ISA she took out years ago. She did this for one of her children but it is not in their name. Can she now have this changed so that it is in trust for when the child needs it, perhaps at 18 for when they go to uni?

She could put it in one childs name and then it is out of the equation completely - nothing to stop her doing that!

5) He has a PEP which he says is for this child so she can't have 50% of. Can she find out whether he has any authority to use this money so that she can ensure it is used for her child?

She needs to see a solicitor and ask him for full financial disclosure. Then she will be able to see whose name the PEP is in, if it is in his name then it is a marital asset and she has a right to the money as much as him. There could also be a case to answer that as she supported him whilst he was studying then if he has put it in someone elses name with him as the signatory it is still a marital asset.

6) His mother lives in an ex-counil house. She lived by herself and he and his brother decided it was best for the house to be bought from the council. As far as my friend knew she and her hubby plus her BIL and his gf bought the house so that his mother could live there. My friend has found out that the house is only in the names of her hubby and his brother (no mention of her or her BIL's gf). However my friend and her hubby took out a second mortgage on their own house to finance this which she is still paying for.

You can check online with the land registry as to the legal owner of the house. If it is in her husbands name then once again it is a marital asset - you can download the copies of the legal documents off the web for £3 I think it is. She wants to get a copy of it in case he tries to sign his portion over to his brother, in that case he is trying to hide his assets and it is an imprisonable offence.

I have told her she is entitled to 25% of the value of the house his mother lives in (partly because she is entitled to 50% of her hubby's assets and partly because she can prove in court that she has been paying half of the cost of the second mortgage for it).

It would probably be offset against her portion of her house, it may be better for her to do that because then she gets the value of the house outright.

He told her in mediation he will give her back her contribution which she rejected. The mediator has told him to get the house valued.

they both need to get the house valued independantly (3 is the usual number) so that they can agree on a true value.

I believe she is entitled to 25% of it's value plus he would have to pay 50% of the outstanding amount of their second mortgage for this to be fair to both parties.

Maintenance covers the mortgage so she is not automatically entitled to ask him for this - if she can get it then good for her but I somehow doubt it. The argument goes that maintenance for the wife (if she can get it granted) and the child covers their household and the remainder is made up with tax credits if there is a shortfall between need and income. Bear in mind the court has to take into account his second family and not be seen to cause undue hardship.

7) Cars - he has recently bought a car which he reckons only cost £2,000 which he says she can't have 50% of as it is his 'work' car. His old car he reckons is only worth £350 so isn't worth having half of. He offered it to her once but I think he would prefer her not to be independent so withdrew the offer.

If he cant work he cant pay maintenance, to be honest thats the least of her worries so I would let that one go!


What I suppose I am writing this for is for anyone to come up with any fair ideas on finances and custody.

Ask the children what they want - if it goes to court thats what a CAFCAS officer will do. She has to be happy that the childrens welfare comes first so if they only want to go one day a week thats what happens, if they want to go 3 days a week then if she is ok with that let them go. They need to feel happy safe and secure, and that is who the court will put first.

She needs to see a solicitor and get decent legal advice, dont agree to anything with the mediator without getting legal advice, let him state his case, smile sweetly and tell him you will consider the options and get back to him. She also needs to contact the CSA and put the wheels in motion, because he will use it as a weapon and withold funds just when she needs them. Contact your local CAB and ask for a benefits check or go to entitledto.co.uk and see what she can get there.

Hope this helps for now!

hobo28

Toots wrote:

Thank you - we didn't know that. What exactly does being the 'parent with care' mean though. If he had the for exactly 50% of the time, couldn't he say she doesn't have this?

Basically PWC means the primary carer. (The legal concept of custody is outdated now). Even with a shared residence order (ie. joint) all this really means is that he must be consulted on major decisions such as schools, religion, medical issues etc. She would in all likelyhood remain the PWC. The tax credit ppl, CSA will all treat the person holding child benefit as the PWC too.

When my ex & I first split up, we tried the whole every weekend thing I'd drop off on Sat pm, and she'd have until Tues morning. With hindsight it didn't work very well. Reason being that the kids were constantly being ferried from A -> B. Esp when you factored in the childminder as well! Now the alternate weekends works much better for me.

From reading what you've written I would guess that he would be unlikely to get what the access arrangement he wants. More reasonable would be alternate weekends and a night in the week. He might want 50% access but then again, I want a BMW! Like I said treat his current position as the start and chip away at it if she can. His solicitor (if he has one) will prob. tell him he's unlikely to get every weekend.

As tsstss7 quite rightly points out, your friend cannot demand to meet her ex's mistress and vet her. His time is HIS time and HIS rules. If he chooses to delegate that to his new GF then thats his perrogative. Luckily, my ex's BF's have always been quite decent but it is hard to accept sometimes another person raising your child THEIR way.

vaio

Kimitatsu wrote: »

........

4) 50% of an ISA she took out years ago. She did this for one of her children but it is not in their name. Can she now have this changed so that it is in trust for when the child needs it, perhaps at 18 for when they go to uni?

She could put it in one childs name and then it is out of the equation completely - nothing to stop her doing that!

5) He has a PEP which he says is for this child so she can't have 50% of. Can she find out whether he has any authority to use this money so that she can ensure it is used for her child?

She needs to see a solicitor and ask him for full financial disclosure. Then she will be able to see whose name the PEP is in, if it is in his name then it is a marital asset and she has a right to the money as much as him. There could also be a case to answer that as she supported him whilst he was studying then if he has put it in someone elses name with him as the signatory it is still a marital asset.

6) His mother lives in an ex-counil house. She lived by herself and he and his brother decided it was best for the house to be bought from the council. As far as my friend knew she and her hubby plus her BIL and his gf bought the house so that his mother could live there. My friend has found out that the house is only in the names of her hubby and his brother (no mention of her or her BIL's gf). However my friend and her hubby took out a second mortgage on their own house to finance this which she is still paying for.

You can check online with the land registry as to the legal owner of the house. If it is in her husbands name then once again it is a marital asset - you can download the copies of the legal documents off the web for £3 I think it is. She wants to get a copy of it in case he tries to sign his portion over to his brother, in that case he is trying to hide his assets and it is an imprisonable offence…………

She can change the name on an ISA but he can’t change the name on a PEP or house?

Doesn’t make sense to me

Kimitatsu

Everyone has the right to open an ISA - children have a tax free allowance too, so in thoery she could open an ISA in one of the childrens name (or all of them if she wanted) and that money would be in their names.

Because PEP's are now defunct the only way he can do anything with it is to close it and open another tax free savings product now. If he does that then the money is still his and so she has a claim to it.

With the house if he gives the house away to a relative by transferring the equity to someone else it is still taken into account as his, because he is just doing it to try to hide his assets.

On the grand scheme of things the ISA and the PEP are relatively unimportant (maximum in an ISA is £7K and I think it was £5K for a PEP) but the equity in the house is.

At the end of the day proper financial help and disclosure is required from both sides. As has been said before this is one case that cannot be solved by mediation, it will take a court order to split the assets properly, my advice to this lady though is to make a list of everything she can think of and get as much detail as possible about each one. Then prioritise what it is she wants so that when the negotiating begins she gets what she wants, and leaves the relatively unimportant things behind.

findingmyownway

This is clearly a complicated situation - even if the 2 parties were amicable the finances would be complicated, but the arguing makes things even worse.

Its seems there are 2 issues here and i think keeping them separate would help:

1) The finances. It is likely that these will be resolved by the solicitors. As other posters have said, the OP (or her 'friend') needs to make a long list of all their assets and debt, choose which are most important to her and the kids and start from there.

2) Access to the kids. By asking for 50% custody it seems clear the father wants to remain a big part of his childrens lives. As hard as that may be for the OP, she must try to remember that the interests of the kids should come first here - and having a strong relationship with their Dad certainly is.

Trying to get his access to fit perfectly with her shifts is never going to work. He is entitled to regular access, regardless of whether or not she happens to be working that night.

Maybe they could start off with an agreement that every other weekend (fri-sun) kids go to Dad (obviously the weekends he doesnt work as his weekend shifts are regular) and alternate weekends they stay with mum (if she has to work, find alternate arrangments). Then, if both parties agree to that they can build in other days/nights (a regular stay after school etc). The key here is to maintain a REGULAR pattern so that mum,dad and the kids know whats going to happen. Its not fair to the kids for them to get pushed around from pillar to post with no routine. Its alreasy an unsettling time for them - no need for arguing adults to make it worse.

Mediation is great, but it has to be approached with an open mind and without anger.


One final thing - the other posters are right, the OP has no right to 'vet' her Ex's new girlfriend. She's clearly not a monster, the kids have spent time with her and their half-sister before.

Its time to accept that this man is a cheat, she may not want him in her life anymore but her children certainly want him in theirs.