Clean Break Consent Order question

DrPepper1234

Hi all, more of a scenario.  A clean break consent order covers both parties for future claims ie. inheritance, etc. but what if after clean break is completed and an old debt that both parties were unaware of from the marriage comes up? are both parties liable even though there is a consent order, or, if the debt is in one persons name, is only that person liable? 

Bradden

DrPepper1234 said:

Hi all, more of a scenario.  A clean break consent order covers both parties for future claims ie. inheritance, etc. but what if after clean break is completed and an old debt that both parties were unaware of from the marriage comes up? are both parties liable even though there is a consent order, or, if the debt is in one persons name, is only that person liable? 

I would think that if the debt was in one persons name then they would be solely liable. No harm in asking  the other party to contribute but if they refuse I don't see a a way to pursue them as the clean break order covers future claims.

Hoenir

Check credit records etc prior to agreeing to and signing the financial consent order. You only get one bite of the cherry. 

DrPepper1234

Bradden said:

DrPepper1234 said:

Hi all, more of a scenario.  A clean break consent order covers both parties for future claims ie. inheritance, etc. but what if after clean break is completed and an old debt that both parties were unaware of from the marriage comes up? are both parties liable even though there is a consent order, or, if the debt is in one persons name, is only that person liable? 

I would think that if the debt was in one persons name then they would be solely liable. No harm in asking  the other party to contribute but if they refuse I don't see a a way to pursue them as the clean break order covers future claims.

In that case, is there anything like an addendum that can be added to consent order to protect both parties? I get that its probably a contradiction but trying to think of ways round it

RAS

If this was an old debt neither knew about, I'd be inclined to send a prove it letter before going any further, to confirm it actually belongs to them and is enforceable.

Under English law there is nothing to stop a debt collector resurrecting a statute barred or unenforceable debt, sending letters to old addresses and then trying to collect the debt. So make sure it's owed first as this sort of mugging is legal.

Exodi

DrPepper1234 said:

Bradden said:

DrPepper1234 said:

Hi all, more of a scenario.  A clean break consent order covers both parties for future claims ie. inheritance, etc. but what if after clean break is completed and an old debt that both parties were unaware of from the marriage comes up? are both parties liable even though there is a consent order, or, if the debt is in one persons name, is only that person liable? 

I would think that if the debt was in one persons name then they would be solely liable. No harm in asking  the other party to contribute but if they refuse I don't see a a way to pursue them as the clean break order covers future claims.

In that case, is there anything like an addendum that can be added to consent order to protect both parties? I get that its probably a contradiction but trying to think of ways round it

The whole point of a consent order is to protect the parties from future claims.

If addendum's can be unilaterally added to allow future claims, the whole thing becomes pointless.

As Hoenir says, you only get one bit of the cherry.

If the shoe was on the other foot and the ex-partner contacted you asking you to pay an old debt in their name, would you? (Obviously since you're asking the question the other way round it's in your interests to pretend you would, but if we're honest with ourselves, we know most people wouldn't unless they were very amicable/generous).