Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
And it does not mean that the stay at home person is a better parent.
or that they should maintain their lifestyle they had at a level provided by their ex.
Interestingly enough two divorces involving friends come to mind where the 'weaker party' was male both were during the divorce abusing alcohol & drugs yet the wife lost the house or paid maintenance. Though arguably both husbands had during the marriage contributed significantly to the household. Does that change it now its a different sex?
There's no suggestion that he's done that at all; the case seems to hinge on the fact that he's still doing very nicely out of it. Though how it will fare when he's in clink remains to be seen.
Again, there's no suggestion anywhere that the settlement would result in her lifestyle remaining unchanged. In fact, the article explicitly states that she's gone back to work. That sounds like a lifestyle change.
Less than £500,000 in assets isn't really that much in the grand scheme of things. It presumably includes the value of the family home, and the maintenance would just about cover the children's school fees. Or are you suggesting the children must suffer along with the mother?
It does actually (he is being offered Legal Aid because he has no money) but I also listened on the radio and read it in the Littlejohn's column apparently the Telegraph didn't think it was worth mentioning.
If he isn't earning anything as the firm is insolvent and the cash is gone then the Kids will have to suffer the indignity of the local Comprehensive.
Comment