Divorce and Contracting (For chaps eyes only ..)

[Rebecca Loos]

Hey Castoff101,

I might be wrong as I am not an expert on divorce laws in this country, but I would have thought that if:
- you have no children
- your wife has not stopped working when you started living together or got married

Then there won't be anything for you to pay her or vice-versa. Do you own a house together? Hopefully you bought it as "joint tenants" as opposed to "tenants in common" and that way you owe 50% of it each, regardless of who paid the mortgage and the deposit.

So before slagging off the "money grabbing vulture bitch", let's have a look at the basic facts. I do agree that there has been some high profile abuse of the system by ex-wifes in the past few years in the UK, but it was under very specific circumstances (husband earns lots, wife stops working, helps him raise a family/run the household) that may not apply to you.

So tell us more please!

Thanks

Me

[Phoenix]

I agree but you must remember that us blokes get a bum deal in these cases.
The Law etc is dickensian (Is that spelt right? Who cares!)
Solicitors see a woman and offer her the chance to "Screw" the ex...those are the facts Whether she takes this up or not is up to her...
So no, she should not be tarnished with the "money grabbing vulture bitch" label untill she proves otherwise....but why would she wait for this gentleman to get some high payed work before she starts legal divorse ?

[threaded]

I suggest the guy starts the ball rolling himself. Sooner its on the off, the sooner it is all done an' dusted, the sooner he learns his lesson.

And the lesson for today is: never leave a woman in charge of your children or pets.

[Lucifer Box]

You may be right, Becs. She may be a lovely lady and it will all proceed amicably and everything will be lovely jubbly and they'll see each other once a week for lunch afterwards and remain life long friends, but why take the chance? Divorce lawyers can be very persuasive as they have fees to earn and cut-n-dried cases don't earn much in the way of fees. Minimising his income now is prudent. He can give her as much as likes if all proceeds well. If not, he's covered should the worse happen.

In an article in The Economist a few months ago, divorce laws in the UK are now reckoned to be the harshest in the world. It reckoned the smart couples get divorced in Germany (and cited the case of a businessman whose wife told him of her intent to divorce if things didn't improve between them, so he promptly arranged a "reconciliation holiday" in Germany and served her divorce papers there before she could get the first blow in).

[boredsenseless]

I think there are people in Glasgow who would do it for fun.

It was the notion that people from Glasgow knew about fun that made me first aware that LB was making a ludicrous statement

[Lucifer Box]

Jings ! Now yer talking, Aye the Devil has all the best tunes !

Will Tennents 80/- do for you, Jock?

[expat]

Hey Castoff101,

I might be wrong as I am not an expert on divorce laws in this country, but I would have thought that if:
- you have no children
- your wife has not stopped working when you started living together or got married

Then there won't be anything for you to pay her or vice-versa.

I would have thought so too, but it turns out not to be so. The simple fact of one partner being able to earn more than the other (and excuse me if this sounds like a generalisation, but especially if that partner is the man) makes it normal for a transitional perion of 3-5 years to be arranged, during which the one partner will pay a significant regular sum to the other.

One's future ex-wife may be by nature far from a money grabbing vulture bitch, but once her lawyer has convinced her that this is "normal" then it is going to be hard to argue against: you will then be the selfish money-grubber.

[The Lone Gunman]

I would have thought so too, but it turns out not to be so. The simple fact of one partner being able to earn more than the other (and excuse me if this sounds like a generalisation, but especially if that partner is the man) makes it normal for a transitional perion of 3-5 years to be arranged, during which the one partner will pay a significant regular sum to the other.

One's future ex-wife may be by nature far from a money grabbing vulture bitch, but once her lawyer has convinced her that this is "normal" then it is going to be hard to argue against: you will then be the selfish money-grubber.

Funny how a reciprocal agreement is never negotiated with the other halfs side.
He supported her for years so should continue to do so for a transitional period, but no mention of the fact that she ran the household, did the washing ironing cleaning etc and provided sexual favors and should therefore be expected to continue this arrangement during the transitional period.

[Rebecca Loos]

I would have thought so too, but it turns out not to be so. The simple fact of one partner being able to earn more than the other (and excuse me if this sounds like a generalisation, but especially if that partner is the man) makes it normal for a transitional perion of 3-5 years to be arranged, during which the one partner will pay a significant regular sum to the other.

One's future ex-wife may be by nature far from a money grabbing vulture bitch, but once her lawyer has convinced her that this is "normal" then it is going to be hard to argue against: you will then be the selfish money-grubber.

Apologies all round then, I didn't know that. Doesn't seem quite fair to me, but there you go. In this case, I wouldn't disagree with the advice given then (to not work).

[Phoenix]

Apologies all round then, I didn't know that. Doesn't seem quite fair to me, but there you go. In this case, I wouldn't disagree with the advice given then (to not work).

Just remember where you heard it first becca!
You are an understanding, fair minded woman.

Beware the temptation of the on-rushing Solicitor and the Oh! so out of date law system......