[Solved] Is it a good deal?

Hi 4pence

I don't give much financial advice, as I did not deal with it in my working life. I would strongly recommend you get a fixed fee meeting with a Solicitor,

Finances is not just the property, it is also wages, pensions shares etc that you or she may be entitled to in the future. You also have to consider how much equity there is in the house, and or how much she can borrow to buy you out, or is that savings?

Generally the run of the mill is that the Court start at 50/50 and then other things are taken into account as above. As your ex will have residence of the children, it will move more into her favour, i.e. 60/40ish and she is not asking you for maintenance has to be taken on board too.. Has she actually said that? If so, you will to incorporate that into an Clean Break/Consent Order.

I agree with EnyaM

You put your own career on the back burner to enable her to continue working, this should be recognised. 13% doesn't seem a very fair settlement to me.

I think your situation warrants some legal advice, there are solicitors that offer a free initial half an hour consultation so this might be a good idea. Alternatively you could ask the Citizens Advice Bureau for advice, they have a legal department and should be able to help.

Hi There,

There are 2 ways to look at this

first way, 13% will equate to a nice amount if this is enough to re start your life with a new home and it meant you didn't have to pay child maintenance then it may be a good option meaning you don't have to spend months and months fighting through solicitors to get an agreement made, which could cost thousands.

the 2nd is that 13% is a very low percentage and doesn't take into account the contents of the house, you should as said be entitled to a much larger percentage say around 60% if you managed to get that much you would almost certainly have to pay child maintenance but you should in theory have a lower mortgage to pay so should be better off.

You need to look at this in a way that will give the least amount of stress to both yourself and ex as well as the children, going all guns blazing to get a highter percentage may start to make waves in the way of contact.

It has been said already but seek some legal advice, but be carful that you don't get sucked in too much with the solicitors view that they can win what ever they set out to win, the truth is they probably can but at what cost?

The favourite saying here is choose your battles wisely!!!

GTTS

Thanks for the replies,

Currently, I am of the opinion that it will be better not to stir up a hornets’ nest and to just take the offer and make a clean break. Also, I guess, in the long term, if only for the sake of my children, It will be far better (emotionally) to maintain some kind of “talking” relationship with the ex. However, like I say, whilst 13% would be enough to enable me to start it’s not really much to show for 13 years of life...

Still interested to hear other opinions but, in the meantime, I will take some professional advice and let you know what is said.

I suppose the first thing to do is to work out what the difference is in amount between 13% and, say, 40% - ie what is that 27% actually worth? Then assume that if you fight, you can easily be spending 5 - 10k in solicitors fees - if that 27% is worth not much more than this, then it's not worth fighting.

As above, the career break does count for something, but it's only a couple of years, so your contribution to the house hasn't been massively affected by this. I don't know whether the courts will take into account the fact that your ex is a higher earner compared to you, so has put in quite a bit more into the house - I suspect that combined with the need to provide a roof over the children's heads, it will come into it.

The only thing I'm a little worried about is whether her saying that she won't expect maintenance is something she can change her mind about later on if she goes to the CSA - I think it may be be.

On that basis, I'd be inclined to renegotiate with her for a higher percentage, but on the basis that you will pay maintenance based on the CSA calculation - I think that would be much safer, plus she can't then tell the children later on that you haven't paid towards them.

As above though, I'd get some legal advice on this.

You're right actd, a clean break order cannot include child maintenance, so she certainly could renege on the agreement not to ask for it.

That part worries me somewhat...

Had a quick look at a few other posts regarding the CSA……..i don’t use them so far…..however they can and do not take in to consideration orders made in court in regards to maintenance agreements. So if your ex ever decided to you could find them demanding maintenance and back pay!!

Happened to an old mate of mine about 12-14yrs ago who had an agreement in court to pay his ex £xxx amount per month……she decided she wanted more and got the CSA involved when he refused….they over-ruled the court agreement and also demanded back pay too…..

He had stupidly been giving her cash as she’d asked him (to try and keep her benefits up) he had no way to prove it. He fought against paying until they took deductions from earnings and took over 45% of his first pay packet 20% for two kids and the rest as back pay……
not spoke to him in a while but it took him a long time to get it reduced to reasonable amount of back pay.

I’d look at getting proper legal advice on this one.

It was my understanding that they couldn't over rule a court ordered agreement on maintenance, when I contacted them they were very specific to ask if the court order that had been in place had come to an end.

I also understand that they can only claim as of the first contact made by the claimant, so the only back payment would be if they couldn't contact the non resident parent.

I would make sure you have some very good legal advice on this part so you don't get stung later down the line if you do decide to accept her offer.

I do think you are right not to stir the nest as you say, keeping things civil will be much better all around.

GTTS

I'm sure I read that once the court order had been in place for 12 months the CSA can overrule it....actd has some knowledge on this I think.

I think your right NJ, but I though that if there was a time scale for the maintenance set out in the court order then the CSA can't over ride it, I may be wrong and will be happy to be corrected if I am.

If I am right though a cluase may be placed to say X amount will be paid until the child reaches X age.

GTTS

As far as I know, it's the 12 months after which the CSA can override. I think there may be some circumstances where the court order does stand (if there are special needs for a disability or if the levels of maintenance are higher than the CSA rules apply to) . I vaguely remember seeing something about if the resident parent re-applies or something like that within 12 months, then it can be extended.