• 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.

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Contracting and child mainteanance"

Collapse

  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by PerfectStorm View Post

    Interestingly this is what the chancellor said absolutely couldn't be done in order to provide coronavirus support income for contractors and other people paid via dividend income. So it's workable when you pay money out, just not if you're to receive any.
    Why should a business get a pay-out because their profits drop? Or are we conveniently not businesses when it suits us?

    Leave a comment:


  • PerfectStorm
    replied
    Originally posted by ComplianceLady View Post
    The calculation takes account of income as someone mentioned - including wage, commission, dividends etc.
    Interestingly this is what the chancellor said absolutely couldn't be done in order to provide coronavirus support income for contractors and other people paid via dividend income. So it's workable when you pay money out, just not if you're to receive any.
    Last edited by PerfectStorm; 6 August 2021, 11:12.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lost It
    replied
    Originally posted by Gibbon View Post

    Got everything he deserved, and why oh why do people think when they hook up with a cheater that they won't do it to them, fecking beyond me!
    And the smart ones always have a fallback plan...

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    People here seem keen to believe it
    Ah, so naive, young man. When you're as old as me, you'll know that there are some people who are complete smegheads.
    but then there's a lot of bitter divorcees here.
    Not here.

    Leave a comment:


  • ComplianceLady
    replied
    In a former life I worked in CSA (Now defunct) and specifically in the legal and collections team. Co. Directors were notoriously difficult to assess and pursue for maintenance. The vagaries of how income is structured and the options available meant that if you had someone very determined it was incredibly difficult. Having said that I got the impression that this was only feasible for those who ran their limited as a way of preventing the PWC getting their hands on it. Trying to run a company in the best way for business was not aligned with running it to hide earnings. The calculation takes account of income as someone mentioned - including wage, commission, dividends etc. and there are limits for pension contributions and other essential costs to taken into account. The most economically sound way to reduce maintenance is as mentioned shared care. Though a relationship as described probably doesn't lend itself to shared care being all that feasible. Having heard some absolute horror stories over the years my advice to anyone navigating it would be if there's a way to be amicable, find it. In a really bitter dispute neither side is ever happy with the situation in my experience, those that feel hard done to and those that are dishing it out.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    Whoever suggested they were? A relationship breakdown is nearly always down to both parties even if not in equal measures. You do love to jump to extremes in your arguments.
    wouldn't be fun otherwise

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by Gibbon View Post

    Got everything he deserved, and why oh why do people think when they hook up with a cheater that they won't do it to them, fecking beyond me!
    I basically said that to him, he was apologetic and later the woman pointed out she made the moves. As she did going back to her ex.

    He should have shagged it and shoved it, nasty piece of work. It would have saved his mate a load of trouble as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    Having watched a number of breakups the female is not always blameless or even vaguely stable. Though a number of the males don't behave either.
    Whoever suggested they were? A relationship breakdown is nearly always down to both parties even if not in equal measures. You do love to jump to extremes in your arguments.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gibbon
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post


    Mate of ours took up with a woman who was married to his friend
    Got everything he deserved, and why oh why do people think when they hook up with a cheater that they won't do it to them, fecking beyond me!

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
    Just reminded of the sudden craziness of one of BP's wives.

    I don't do the whole thing "well, we've only got his side, got to be fair to her". That would only make sense if she was a regular posting here. You can't be "fair" to someone who you're not even remotely connected to.
    Eh? It's not about "being fair" it's about a total stranger posting an unsubstantiated story. They are clearly going to post their version of events which either deliberately or not, puts them in the right.
    Ask yourself, isn't the idea that a woman conspired with her family to marry someone, wait half a decade of seemingly happy marriage, get pregnant then run off with the baby, sounding a teensy bit like it might not be quite accurate?

    People here seem keen to believe it, but then there's a lot of bitter divorcees here.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by Lost It View Post

    Oh they definitely are. Anyone who plans something that takes 7 years to execute is very "cute". OP needs to watch his back with this one. Maybe even ask for a paternity check? Might be a bit of a step too far that one though.
    Having watched a number of breakups the female is not always blameless or even vaguely stable. Though a number of the males don't behave either.

    Mate of ours took up with a woman who was married to his friend who she already had a child with, they committed adultery , the girl and her entirely pleasant husband divorced and the new couple moved in together, had a couple of kids, a decade later the Mate is suffering a completely screwed back and is registered disabled.
    The wife decides she made a mistake and goes back to secretly sleeping with her ex who has a new girlfriend and child. She kicks our friend out so in his 50s he is back living with his dad.

    Now our mate is no brain surgeon or George Clooney but he is a loving dad and when he could manage it he hoovered the lounge etc.

    The two women I know who accused mates or husbands of terrible things, threw cutlery & china at their husbands and were undone during the divorce because the husband had witnesses or recordings of the mental behaviour.

    Personally I would make all custody cases take a paternity test. Then the argument never arises.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Just reminded of the sudden craziness of one of BP's wives.

    I don't do the whole thing "well, we've only got his side, got to be fair to her". That would only make sense if she was a regular posting here. You can't be "fair" to someone who you're not even remotely connected to.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lost It
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    agree she also sounds a bit callous & nuts so you need to be there for the child. Anyone who does that sort of thing is not firing all cylinders.
    Oh they definitely are. Anyone who plans something that takes 7 years to execute is very "cute". OP needs to watch his back with this one. Maybe even ask for a paternity check? Might be a bit of a step too far that one though.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    This is based on hearing the side of the story from a man who clearly and understandably has a very subjective view. Her side could be equally strong and very different. To his credit the OP didn't want to go into the personal stuff and I think that's best.
    This would also be best outside General IMO, unless the OP is pretty thick-skinned!

    To get on topic, everything I've heard is that trying to hide income in these situations only leads to more problems. No idea on the legality but everyone knows full well the intent of the rules is not to give contractors a free pass on their dividends so you'd at best be exploiting a loophole. One assumes your ex knows you don't earn a minimal salary and can pull you through the mud to some length over it. Do you want that for own well-being? Do you want your child to grow up under the cloud of their parents fighting over "how little daddy wants to contribute?"
    If the situation he described is true, i.e. he was married to her for 7 years and they had a planned pregnancy, then after 5 months she left sort of suggests there is something odd going on her side. He might have communed with the devil but it doesn't sound like he did.

    I suggested he stick around for the kid because she might not be stable.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    agree she also sounds a bit callous & nuts
    This is based on hearing the side of the story from a man who clearly and understandably has a very subjective view. Her side could be equally strong and very different. To his credit the OP didn't want to go into the personal stuff and I think that's best.
    This would also be best outside General IMO, unless the OP is pretty thick-skinned!

    To get on topic, everything I've heard is that trying to hide income in these situations only leads to more problems. No idea on the legality but everyone knows full well the intent of the rules is not to give contractors a free pass on their dividends so you'd at best be exploiting a loophole. One assumes your ex knows you don't earn a minimal salary and can pull you through the mud to some length over it. Do you want that for own well-being? Do you want your child to grow up under the cloud of their parents fighting over "how little daddy wants to contribute?"

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X