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!
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.
Logging in...
Previously on "Divorce and Contracting (For chaps eyes only ..)"
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 so out of date law system......
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).
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.
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.
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).
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 ?
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.
[QUOTE=threaded]
Sign on the social, you sound a little depressed so go to the doctor and get signed on the sick as well.
[\QUOTE]
I would agree with that Threaded! Get the Doc to sign you off with mega stress and try to claim Incapacity...
Keep up some IT stuff with a voluntary job or something...The writing is on the wall if she is actually waiting for you to get a job before she starts the legal stuff
However, if you happen to have a contract just at the time of the settlement, you risk being assessed on that as if it were permenent. Worse, her lawyer will amost certainly attempt to claim that your salary = 50 times 5 times your daily rate. Watch out for that. When permies do that mis-calc, it's merely annoying. If a court does it, you're in the hole.
If you do it, then set up a limited.
retain the profits in the company and pay yourself a livable salary (not to low that the lawyers can beat you up about it and not so high that they can multiply it by 12 and say its a lot)
Oh and of course don't make her a director!
Umbrella - now that would be the worst solution of all as at the end of each month you get a payslip stating you've been paid a gazillion pounds. Its very easy to multiply that by 12 and then thats a lot. The courts and solicitors won't give a flying f$ck that the work is volatile and no guarantee of repeat gigs.
Leave a comment: