zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »
One joint account holder cannot put the account into a single name (of either party) without the other's consent. But provided the account is in credit, either joint account holder can close the account on just one signature.
I suggest that you transfer everything to your own account, empty the joint account, close it, and tell her that you will pay an amount into her sole account until things are sorted out. If she doesn't have a sole account she will have to sort one out.
It is foolish to leave the joint account as it is, because she can empty it and/or run up an overdraft, and the bank can pursue either of you for the full amount.
Re your earlier comments about wanting to come to an amicable agreement over the divorce without involving lawyers - that was probably never going to happen - she will almost certainly instruct lawyers to make sure she gets the best financial deal, which in reality means that you will need to do the same. But in any event, where one part is a high earner and there are other assets such as property, the court will often direct the parties to seek legal advice before continuing (even on an amicable settlement, a consent order should be laid before the court for approval to formalise the agreement, as otherwise either party can come back later for a second bite of the cherry as informal agreements are not legally binding unless sealed by the court)
sharp910sh wrote: »
How much do you earn? It sounds like you are giving her all? Just give her 20% of your salary and thats all. Nothing more nothing less. None of this extra money bullcrap. Tell her to get a job or claim benefits like everyone else. Does she think this is a free for all? She is walking over you my friend. And she wants more than 50% of the house. jesus!!
daman2k wrote: »
You don't need her permission to go in your house. Furthermore she's got it sweet ain't she? Your paying all her bills then giving her £1000 as spending money.
As has been said give her 20% and tell her to get a job.
RAS wrote: »
Unless she has an order excluding you from the property, whilst your name is on the deeds, you have the right to enter the house.
However, I think that people may be underestimating the likely outcome of the financial settlement. If she has not been working as she was rainign children and there is a major difference in earning potential, she may be entitled to short-term spousal maintenance to allow her to retrain for the job market as well as support for the younger child.
She is also likely to get more than half the house (if she did not want to move then possibly half when the youngest left school) and a portion of your pension fund. You may want to think about whether you would trade equity for pension?
A lawyer will help based on your particular circumstances but do not get into a barney on the assumption that the split is 50:50 and 15% of the take home pay as child maintenance (assuming the elder child has completed A Levels ort equivalent).
It is actually to her advantage to divorce whilst the younger child is still in secondary education.
JackRS wrote: »
Yes I was aware from speaking to solicitor, wife is also aware and said that due to earning potential and needing more rooms etc she would entitled to greater portion of house plus pension and house maid, gardener, chef...
RAS wrote: »
I hope you are joking about the second part:eek:
Plainly you must have been very very unhappy.
There’s a trick to extend them
We want to hear from you
This week's MSE Forum highlights