Divorce settlement

Aslemma, you reminded me I am owed thirty bob.........same arrangement as you I had and never seen a penny.

I've changed my mind a bit as more of the story comes out. There is still a child of the marriage in education, and it was the husband that took the matter back to court to have the original award cancelled or reduced. But still, lifetime support seems to me going too far.

I too was advised to go for the 5p per year award for myself & DD although I wanted nothing more from my ex-H, Solicitor said if you have the Order you can always come back to Court, I never did

I never wanted to be supported by my ex & DD who was only 5 at the time had little to do with her F (not my doing but her choice). I divorced just over 30 years ago.

Whilst I was with H his ex-wife was always going back to Court for more money despite H being self-employed & she had part-time jobs, her children were teens !!!

He kept the business (which presumably had grown while they were married) and last year it netted him £200k. I despise women who don't support themselves personally, but the judge (who it appears didn't take to her) had all the facts, not the tabloids. Women struggle to keep a career going during marriage, far more than men do.

Indeed there is always another side Annsixty.
I have always been able to support myself and my children as I had a good, steady job and this gave me an escape route from my violent husband but not every woman is so fortunate.
I personally am very mistrustful of media reports of these issues as they seem to play to the gallery, we probably only know the half of it, if that.

I was divorced nearly 40 years ago, with 5 children from 4 to 14. I was awarded a pittance for the children and 1 shilling (5p) a year for me. I don'-t know whether things have changed now, but it was explained that as long as I had been awarded maintenance, however little, I could take it back to court if either of our circumstances changed, whereas if I had not been awarded anything I could not go back to court.

I think sometimes a divorce can go through with a mark in time for financials to be reviewed

The husband has another wife and a child to support. The woman is depriving the child and visiting on it the consequences of her poor investment choices. She was given an adequate provison and did the equivalent of putting her shirt on the gee gees.

The assets should be split on divorce and an end made of it.

I can only see the other side in my D's case. She was left alone at the age of 49 after 23 years of marriage with 2 teens , one not in good health.
She had uprooted herself twice for her husband's career path. Once was abroard for 3 years with a newborn and she had no 2 when they came back, so her working life is fragmented.
When the youngest leaves education she will be 56. She works part time now to home school due to poor health of the one child
Her H now lives abroad and his partner does not work. He is a high earner but is not over generous in his allowance, they are not divorced.
My D would not manage without our constant help.
There is always another side to every story.

Yes, I agree with n&g, as well. And commiserate with the ex-husband in this case.

I agree with n&g in the case of children etc . This particular case I feel is very unfair to the husband after 12 years. This woman should take responsibility for her own bad decisions.

When I was divorced (after my marriage of around 6 months) I walked away with everything he had put into the marriage which was precisely nothing at all. Well with the exception of my lovely baby son.

Over the years he continued to give us exactly the same as he had always given us which yet again was nothing at all whatsoever.

Good post n&g.

Unless you sign a "Full and final" settlement before the decree absolute either party can continue to make a claim against the other. So if you divorced without signing the F&F settlement and say you won the lottery your ex could make a claim for part of it.

Reading further today it seems the original court order did leave the door open for further court orders because the wife had health issues. But still, the reason for the new, increased maintenance was the failure of her property investments. It's sad that she finds herself in financial trouble, but I just don't see why the man she divorced 12 years ago should be expected to bail her out.

lyndylou The case in the OP is different to the case you are referring to. In the case you are refering to where things hadn't been sighted off, the ex wife received £10 million in addition to what she had already received. This payment is likely to put people out of work.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/06/court-orders-man-increase-payments-wife-lost-bulk-divorce-settlement/

This wife has invested unwisely and expects her former husband to pick up the pieces! She's worked for many years as an estate agent and is very capable of earning her own living. Their only son is grown up.

I can't believe how greedy some people are...

I see where you're coming from jusnoneed and generally agree , but I think there is a case for some sort of support when a woman has young children or no family support. She may not be able to work due to the cost of childcare or lack of it , so until such time as that's not an issue I believe she should receive support. After all, they are both responsible for the children.

Once that is not the case I believe women should get a job and support themselves.

When I divorced it was in the Court Order that no further claim could be made! The Solicitor failed in this case. The woman should have no claim especially after this length of time!

I feel sorry for the ex-husband. He thinks he's sorted it all out and pays the money he's required to pay then wham it's increased because his ex-wife messed up her investments.

My mam is a widow and has a few investments from a lump sum and a pension. If she loses her investment money she can't go to the pension company and demand they increase her monthly payment because she's lost her lump sum.

I don't agree with any maintenance other than for children, I think once you divorce you and only you are responsible for yourself. You didn't expect someone to keep you when single so why when you get divorced?

I hadn't read anything about the deal not being signed off (a court order had been made - I would think most people would think that's the end of the matte) or the ex being content until the new relationship started. But I'm more than a little surprised that the court entertained a further claim so long after the divorce.

From the article I read about this, I understood that the couple had come to an agreement but it wasn't officially signed off. That's why she had a way of taking it to court. She had been content with the arrangement until her ex-husband started a new relationship, or so I believe. I think divorce settlements are set in stone once they have been finalised in court. I certainly hope so, going through divorce once is bad enough!