It seems to wording in the consent order is now a sticking point. She's conceded on the gap year for child maintenance but is adamant that 'best endeavours' will suffice for getting me off the mortgage and that nominal maintenance has to remain in place.
I don't trust her at all and would have thought that me giving her the house at the very least would remove the nominal???
In order to avoid going to final hearing, she suggested I give her the house and she would 'accept' my offer of CMS (I'm paying slightly above as mentioned earlier). I said ok to that on the basis there is no funny business in the terms of the consent order, which to me there is.
I have agreed to stay on the mortgage for 3 years until she remortgages, but she seems unwilling to put a hard date in there, resorting to 'best endeavours' which is useless. So that's one strike.
She wants CMS paid till my youngest finishes tertiary (one degree) with a gap year...so that's what, 23? She's willing to drop the gap year (so kind).
She wants a nominal maintenance order, that's the killer for me. I do not want to pay adult maintenance, in any circumstance to her. Is she being reasonable though? Is it normal to expect this? Is it actually something I should be worried about?
i think you should follow standard procedure. stop child maintenance when child finishes non-advanced education. your already paying above the CMS rate of maintenance. now she wants you to pay for university, and your willing to pay 3 years mortgage. too greedy.
If I were you I’d go and see a barrister and they’ll tell you what they think is a fair settlement .you might be surprised as to what that is , of course there’s no telling what a judge may order. Use a direct access one. It’ll work out cheaper than paying solicitors by the hour . I wouldn’t rely on anyone’s best endedours either .in my case it would have been a hell of a lot quicker and cheaper to go to court , but maybe I got a “good deal” on the settlement who knows . It’s all a balancing act .
You should aim to have a time limit on spousal maintance too . There should be no meal ticket for life and I believe the courts are supposed to aim to make the other side become as financially independent as possible when the time is deemed fair .
In my experience, I do not see why you would be paying spousal maintenance if your salaries are similar. Mine was considerably higher than my ex, but my solicitor added my CMS, and her additional benefits together, plus her wages and she was having more spare cash than me by some margin. No maintenance was awarded.
And I believe standard practice for CMS is till 18, maximum 20, so why go above it?
I sense there is stuff we you have not listed, because it seems you are being asked unreasonable demands, but you believe this is your best outcome. For instance a barrister suggesting 1500 maintenance when on the face of it there would be none if everything is as it seems.
Given an ex that seems to think she is entitled to stuff that others may not, means having legal is imperative if you are to understand what is your best settlement. But perhaps you have already gone that far.
Our salaries are genuinely similar, she has the children most of the time I admit but we used to have an aupair to allow us both to work full time.
Now she's self employed (veterinary surgeon) and is refusing to get an aupair or go back to full time work (she picks shifts and works odd hours, maybe it pays the same as full time though.).
There is honestly nothing I'm not saying, I couldn't believe the FDR...she started at £2400 a month and me at CMS, my barrister just kept saying 'so what will you offer now?'. It got to 5pm and I was about to sign a deal at £1500 a month for 4 years and then £1200 for 9 years after, just railroaded. I then reminded my barrister that I'm on 50k a year and so is she...on £3200 or so a month after tax, how on earth would anyone suggest I give up half my income. That's why I sacked him.
I was paying her £1200 a month for 2 years in a hope it'd help her adjust, but she just sees that as minimum child maintenance now! She's a terrible terrible person my ex, complete narcissist.
Can someone just say on the nominal issue, is that something to worry about? Is it normal?
If your name is on that mortgage you are liable to make sure it’s paid ...
The second your ex decides to renege on any verbal agreement you may have made the games up and you’re on the hook ...
FWIW the 1st barrister I had suggested something that was in excess of what the ex would have likely got .. but they take into account pensions , savings and so on
'Our client will provide an indemnity in respect of the mortgage in favour of your client together also with her agreement to use her best endeavours to procure the release of your client from the mortgage in three years, thereby avoiding the early redemption penalties currently applicable to the mortgage.'
That suggests I'm not on the hook to pay the mortgage no?
I have no pension, no other assets, my first barrister just seemed to be going through the motions....
This is the nominal part:
'There be a nominal spousal maintenance order in favour of our client to terminate upon the earlier of our client’s death, remarriage, co-habitation with another man as husband and wife for a period in excess of twelve months or upon the youngest child of the family attaining the age of 18 years or ceasing full time secondary education whichever is the later.'
Which sounds like a normal nominal clause?
I just want to try to work out if me worrying about a future that might not happen (her varying the order if she becomes worse off, or I earn more money) and details that may not be important in the long run is worth us going to FH and me paying a further £10k that I really cannot afford.
She has wealthy parents who have paid all her legal fees to date.
Maybe you’re ok then re the mortgage but as you know there are all sorts of crinkles solicitors use .
I think it’s standrd to leave in a nominal amount say £1 a year just so that it’s easy to vary if your ex applies . They are free to apply to court to vary an order after a year I believe should they wish .. unless you get a “clean break “
Have you spoken to a direct acces barrister ? They will be so much cheaper ...
You’re right no point winning a pyrhcc victory but you need to know from a legal mind exactly what agreement you’re entering into