• 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.

Previously on "Good solicitor required to fend off Income Diminisher"

Collapse

  • BobTheCrate
    replied
    Hopefully he will. He might just cut and run. If that is conveyed to you within say, a single sentence of her solicitor's letter. You know what to do next don't you ?

    Yep. Question it. Ask for evidence. Ask in yet another letter, for her ex to confirm in writing. And if he does - still question it.

    You've heard that posession is 9/10s of the law.

    It isn't. It's only 7/10s.

    The remaining 3/10s is subterfuge.

    Leave a comment:


  • Swamp Thing
    replied
    All,
    I'm off now. Thanks to everyone for contributing, especially BTC. There’s some v. good advice there. Bloody good bunch of blokes, aren’t you all?

    Leave a comment:


  • Swamp Thing
    replied
    Originally posted by BobTheCrate
    It's ex Ms Swampy who'll be battling with if it might be considered relevant or not. And her partner's worry as well.

    You won't need to warn him Swampy. You're ex will likely deluge him with all her frustration. He'll love that [not].
    Ah yes. When good income earner eventually gets to understand that he’s drawn into this and questions of his income arise, he’ll tell Mrs Swampy to just drop it.

    Leave a comment:


  • privateeye
    replied
    Originally posted by Swamp Thing
    Residence is a key point. Being resident in France, the legal system there is unlikely to fund a case which was heard and settled in the UK. Equally, UK legal aid won’t fund a UK non-resident’s complaint. This is most definitely the CSA’s position. As an aside, the ex is co-habiting (or about to) with a good income earning chap. So BTC’s comment about asking for her direct and indirect income is not without merit. I feel so sorry for good income earning chap: he’s selling his house in the UK lock stock, to throw his lot in with her over there. I don’t know if I have the heart to warn him…

    BTC: one more thing: the ex was partly and indirectly involved in me losing my perm job last year. If this all got to court, I would be asking for employer anonymity, because the ex had a hand in derailing my permie career. Do you think the judge would be sympathetic to this?
    Stall the whole process until she is co-habitating, get a local PI to provide the evidence and then if it comes to court produce the evidence of income she is not declaring. Do not warn the new partner - they are part of the escape and you could be accused of destroying any future life she may have. Secondly it sounds as if she will be making money from the new partner from the sale of his house etc - the law works both ways so make a claim on it. I have worked on one case where the demands by the ex were so excessive that the judge awarded custody of the child to the father and jailed the wife for four months.

    Leave a comment:


  • Swamp Thing
    replied
    Originally posted by ratewhore
    Not true - this is very relevant. If it can be shown there is increased household income then the argument for more maintenance from the ex-husband is diminished...


    Are you 100% sure on that? This is an area that is v. important, but I can’t seem to get any clear legal view on it.

    Leave a comment:


  • BobTheCrate
    replied
    Possibly ratewhore ... but we're talking child maintenance here.

    Whether it is deemed relevant or not, is not the point. It's ex Ms Swampy who'll be battling with if it might be considered relevant or not. And her partner's worry as well.

    You won't need to warn him Swampy. You're ex will likely deluge him with all her frustration. He'll love that [not].
    Last edited by BobTheCrate; 28 July 2006, 15:15.

    Leave a comment:


  • ratewhore
    replied
    Originally posted by BobTheCrate
    The fact your ex is now co-habiting with a good income earning fellow, gives you even more scope to bury her in more subtifuge later on. Eventually, ask to see his payslips as well. Again I know it isn't relevant, just those jolly ol' tactics.
    Not true - this is very relevant. If it can be shown there is increased household income then the argument for more maintenance from the ex-husband is diminished...


    Leave a comment:


  • BobTheCrate
    replied
    Depends on the judge Swampy and depends on the nature of her involvement. As, when or if it came to court (which I'm confident it wouldn't) no harm to ask for employer anonymity for those reasons. (you can also exaggurate those reasons).

    Now then. The fact your ex is now co-habiting with a good income earning fellow, gives you even more scope to bury her in more subtifuge later on. Eventually, ask to see his payslips as well. Again I know it isn't relevant, just those jolly ol' tactics. Again, important to space out your requests apart over as much time as you dare. Just when she thinks she's seen you off regarding her income (which she won't of course), months later you then come back asking for details of her partner's income. Oh despair ! she'll be pulling her hair out. And just when she's calmed down - low and behold a letter through her letter box detailing her solicitor's account for fees.

    From her POV the whole legal system will suck which will add demoralisation to her frustration. Just the ticket.

    And don't be intimidated by any legal threats her solicitor may make. Just keep your replies pollite. The more they beat their breast the better you're doing.

    Exploit the slightest ambiguity in their correspondence too. Deliberately 'get the wrong end of the stick' sometimes but try to be subtle about it.

    In the unlikely event of court.
    You wouldn't believe the number of divorce settlement & child maintenance court orders that are broken and if subsequently enforced (far from guaranteed), take an absolute age - so enforcing visibility of your earnings and your payslips will be a mammoth task for her if you wish to make it so.

    Also, if you've got a dog, (or even if you haven't) be such a shame the ruddy thing chewed up your payslips the evening before the court hearing. Apologise perfusely as you hand the 'damp', unintelligable slips to the clerk.

    You also wouldn't believe the number of times a glazed look comes over a judge's eyes over divorce settlement issues let alone some silly cow going on and on about payslips. And the judge comes back with, "I really don't expect to see either of you two in front of me again. Now go away and sort this out yourselves".
    Last edited by BobTheCrate; 28 July 2006, 15:06.

    Leave a comment:


  • Swamp Thing
    replied
    Originally posted by PRC1964
    I told you why I changed my mind
    I got bored by playing with time
    I know you thought you had me nailed
    Well, I've freed my head from your garden rails

    Now it's a legal matter, baby
    You got me on the run
    It's a legal matter, baby
    A legal matter from now on

    You ain't the first and you ain't the last
    I gain and lose my women fast
    I never want to make them cry
    I just get bored, don't ask me why

    Just wanna keep doing all the dirty little things I do
    And not work all day in an office just to bring my money back to you
    Sorry, baby
    The Who?

    Leave a comment:


  • PRC1964
    replied
    I told you why I changed my mind
    I got bored by playing with time
    I know you thought you had me nailed
    Well, I've freed my head from your garden rails

    Now it's a legal matter, baby
    You got me on the run
    It's a legal matter, baby
    A legal matter from now on

    You ain't the first and you ain't the last
    I gain and lose my women fast
    I never want to make them cry
    I just get bored, don't ask me why

    Just wanna keep doing all the dirty little things I do
    And not work all day in an office just to bring my money back to you
    Sorry, baby

    Leave a comment:


  • Pinto
    replied
    Originally posted by Swamp Thing
    I feel so sorry for good income earning chap: he’s selling his house in the UK lock stock, to throw his lot in with her over there. I don’t know if I have the heart to warn him…
    Don't bother. He will take no heed if he's smitten. By now, she will have described you to him as a vindictive, evil bastard anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • Andyw
    replied
    Just stand up in court and tell the judge he's a kurb crawling kunt !

    Won't get a decision your way but then nothing ever will, at least you'll have the satisfaction in saying what you feel !

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Well, sounds like really weird request - if your employers gets any problems with you being in court on that private civil matter then you can sue them pretty successfully.

    Leave a comment:


  • Andyw
    replied
    Originally posted by Swamp Thing
    Yes, but would the judge not consider, “Well Mrs Swampy, your involvement was most unfortunate last year. Let’s allow anonymity to Mr Swampy’s employer, so that we don’t jeopardise the maintenance stream”. Basically to prevent the hand that feeds from getting bitten.

    It's doesnt work like that !

    Leave a comment:


  • Swamp Thing
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW
    Seems totally irrelevant to the main case - your personal stuff and perceptions will most certainly be ignored by the judge.
    Yes, but would the judge not consider, “Well Mrs Swampy, your involvement was most unfortunate last year. Let’s allow anonymity to Mr Swampy’s employer, so that we don’t jeopardise the maintenance stream”. Basically to prevent the hand that feeds from getting bitten.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X