Non married ex asking to see my accounts

gettingtheresometime

justworriedabit said:

elsien said:

A prenup wouldn’t make the slightest difference here because they weren’t married. 

I wholeheartedly and totally disagree with you  100% as you are wrong as I am clearly implying to contracts and the
only difference is the name they go by. My post clearly state what these contracts hope to achieve if a partnership goes wrong.

It may not be called a prenup but I stand by what I have said re married people prenups and those living like a couple. 
Perhaps  don't take my word for it as there is a mass of info on the net that supports prenup or similar agreements for those living outside wedlock.
Just one of the many sites that agrees with my stance and it is very, very clear.

https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/uk/consumer-advice/money/a30870044/prenups-explained/
I therefore recommend that everyone going into a marriage or similar consider a prenup or something that is the same but different in name only if you are wanting to live together as a couple. Prenup or whatever you want to call it, draw up a contract via solicitors if you want to safeguard your hard  work and not get kicked when you are down.
Thanks.

I don't wish to come across as rude but what use is this advice to the OP? He's not married to the mother, never has been. Isn't that a bit like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted?

I would agree that getting proper legal advice is needed here.

sassyblue

janpaul said:

I do not want to engage with the solicitor without having a solicitor to make sure my wording is correct etc. My belief, as intimated/stated before is that my ex would like a % of my biggest asset ie my house, even though I paid for it pre our relationship. It’s all here.........................“We understand that you are paying a nominal level of child maintenance to our client. We have advised our clients that they could make an application to the Court for one or more of the following Orders:-

 a) Periodical payments for our clients on the children’s behalf, or to the children themselves;

b) Secured periodical payments for our clients on the children’s behalf, or to the children;

c) A lump sum for our clients on the children’s behalf or for the children themselves;

d) Settlement of property for the benefit of the children;

e) Transfer of property to our clients on the children’s behalf or to the children themselves.

 Our client would like to discuss financial maintenance and up-keep of child and to this end would like to invite you to agree to disclose your financial position and assets to her in the hope that an agreement can be reached regarding the maintenance of child and his future. “

TIA

She’s a cheeky mare! Make an appointment to see a Solicitor ASAP. You said that you paid a lot to your ex and I usually don't believe it when people say things like that but I do in your case because this seems like a stab in the dark for more free money.

in short, you weren’t married so she doesn’t have a claim on your property as long as she never contributed towards it’s bills or maintenance.

Why does their letter say they could advise 'their clients' in plural?  It also says children as though there is more than one.

In any case, see a solicitor and no, don’t let them have any of your financial information unless your solicitor deems it necessary. If you are paying child maintenance in line with what the government calculator advises then don’t worry. Threats of court action are normal and yes, she could make an application to the court but these are often empty threats, court action is costly and before you go to Court she will have to attend Mediation which you should be invited to attend - providing there was no controlling, bullying or threatening behaviour from you in the relationship.

janpaul

The plural is just textbook quoting as their is just one child. Thank you for all your responses. I was wondering if anyone else is paying their unmarried ex correctly through CMS but have been threatened that the ex will come after assets too? I can’t imagine I am the only one 🙈

TBagpuss

sassyblue said:

janpaul said:

I do not want to engage with the solicitor without having a solicitor to make sure my wording is correct etc. My belief, as intimated/stated before is that my ex would like a % of my biggest asset ie my house, even though I paid for it pre our relationship. It’s all here.........................“We understand that you are paying a nominal level of child maintenance to our client. We have advised our clients that they could make an application to the Court for one or more of the following Orders:-

 a) Periodical payments for our clients on the children’s behalf, or to the children themselves;

b) Secured periodical payments for our clients on the children’s behalf, or to the children;

c) A lump sum for our clients on the children’s behalf or for the children themselves;

d) Settlement of property for the benefit of the children;

e) Transfer of property to our clients on the children’s behalf or to the children themselves.

 Our client would like to discuss financial maintenance and up-keep of child and to this end would like to invite you to agree to disclose your financial position and assets to her in the hope that an agreement can be reached regarding the maintenance of child and his future. “

TIA

in short, you weren’t married so she doesn’t have a claim on your property as long as she never contributed towards it’s bills or maintenance.

That's not correct. It is open to her to make an application under Schedule 1 of the Children Act,  which allows financial application to be made for the benefit of children and was designed to ensure that the children of unmarried parents were not disadvantaged in comparison with the children of married parents.  

Obviously the provisions relating to periodical payments are typically relevant where the CMS doesn't have jurisdiction or where it's reasonable for additional provision to be made (it gets used to cover things like school fees, nannys etc for the children of wealthy parents, and sometimes where a child has disabilities or special needs which mean that increased provision is appropriate.  It can also be used by children over 18 for help with university of college costs, for instance, when hey have aged out of the CMS.

I think she would struggle to convince a court that you should pay higher maintenance than the CMS assessment, particularly if you are yourself in receipt of Universal Credit , and if she were to seek a lump sum or any order about the house she would have to convince a court that it was appropriate and necessary for the benefit of your children - and the court would also need to consider their needs while they are with you, as well as with her. 

It may be sensible at this point for you to write to her solicitors, explain that at present, you are only able to pay a low amount as you are not working / on a low income and receiving universal credit but that you are actively trying to improve the situation and will of course continue to pay maintenance in accordance with the CMS calculation.

You could add that if there are specific needs for the children at the moment to let you know and you will try to help if you can. 

sheramber

justworriedabit said:

elsien said:

A prenup wouldn’t make the slightest difference here because they weren’t married. 

I wholeheartedly and totally disagree with you  100% as you are wrong as I am clearly implying to contracts and the
only difference is the name they go by. My post clearly state what these contracts hope to achieve if a partnership goes wrong.

It may not be called a prenup but I stand by what I have said re married people prenups and those living like a couple. 
Perhaps  don't take my word for it as there is a mass of info on the net that supports prenup or similar agreements for those living outside wedlock.
Just one of the many sites that agrees with my stance and it is very, very clear.

https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/uk/consumer-advice/money/a30870044/prenups-explained/
I therefore recommend that everyone going into a marriage or similar consider a prenup or something that is the same but different in name only if you are wanting to live together as a couple. Prenup or whatever you want to call it, draw up a contract via solicitors if you want to safeguard your hard  work and not get kicked when you are down.
Thanks.

and what about the bit at the end of the article
while prenups are not absolutely binding, recent case law determined that where they have been properly set up they carry very significant weight (following a landmark Supreme Court case 10 years ago).
 

Alias_Omega

Solicitor is on a fishing trip, dont respond. Any response you provide, will be giving them evidence. 
You only need to reply, if you receive letters from the court instructing you to do so.
The solicitor will be costing your ex-partner money.; I suspect they will run out money/time....eventually.

janpaul

Alias_Omega said:

Solicitor is on a fishing trip, dont respond. Any response you provide, will be giving them evidence. 
You only need to reply, if you receive letters from the court instructing you to do so.
The solicitor will be costing your ex-partner money.; I suspect they will run out money/time....eventually.

Thank you. This is what I’m hoping as best case scenario. I would love to hear any similar cases 😀