Advice: Marriage separation > Divorce

[mantis]

I hate to tell you people, that a lot of women get screwed over in a divorce. If they get married young & both worked hard to buy a house, then years later the man gets a higher paying job & has contacts, he will get the house & the kids, while the wife gets FA.

But hey, on this site it's always about the poor down trodden men.

 

[bubblegoose]

Anytime you are in any legal trouble, it is always worthwhile talking to a lawyer.

Makes sense. Initially they'd agreed an amicable seperation plan: agreed on $, assets split & child visits when where etc. The safe bet is the sister may have been scaremongering, etc. But if she gets nasty, he gets nasty - thats the new agreement.

Bubblegoose, good to hear your mate has put his foot down about the house. Hope it all turns out well for him.

Thank you boob lady. He's on track for preparing for the next phase of his life. Dropping his daughter off off having her over for the weekend visit just breaks him though. Very heartbreaking thing to witness.

Bubblegoose, what type of visa does your friend have? Probably stupid question, but I wasn't sure whether it was a permanent visa or spouse visa? I didn't know whether the relationship breakup has the potential to affect his stay in the country.

I asked the same thing. Pretty sure it's a permanent one, was living here married for 10 years. But when the renewal form & his visa disappeared during ex's move out, he was a bit nervous. He did track it down in amongst her stuff. I'm convincing him to apply for citizenship, though I'm not aware of what that actually changes for him? Apart from he won't be outcast at Oz day bbq.

 

[Smell The Glove]

I hate to tell you people, that a lot of women get screwed over in a divorce. If they get married young & both worked hard to buy a house, then years later the man gets a higher paying job & has contacts, he will get the house & the kids, while the wife gets FA.

But hey, on this site it's always about the poor down trodden men.

Wrong. I work part time in a firm that deals with many of these cases, and I can tell you that while 95% of divorces never go to court, the ones that do are almost always split 60-70% in favour of the woman, regardless of income or assets.

But dont let that affect your blind hatred of the white male mantis. I know it wont.

 

[campbell]

Wrong. I work part time in a firm that deals with many of these cases, and I can tell you that while 95% of divorces never go to court, the ones that do are almost always split 60-70% in favour of the woman, regardless of income or assets.

But dont let that affect your blind hatred of the white male mantis. I know it wont.

ah, go the poster.mmm.

so. How does that explain a lady at work, who only got less than 30%. Hubby had the best lawyers money could buy, she struggled. Working fulltime with 3 small children. he gave her no child support.The assests were neatly squared away in trusts. She worked her butt off the whole marriage. Why should she miss out. Why is he allowed to not pay child support? How is that fair on his children. Its just wrong.
Split 50- 50 is ideal and fair imo.

 

[ieasys00]

ah, go the poster.mmm.

so. How does that explain a lady at work, who only got less than 30%. Hubby had the best lawyers money could buy, she struggled. Working fulltime with 3 small children. he gave her no child support.The assests were neatly squared away in trusts. She worked her butt off the whole marriage. Why should she miss out. Why is he allowed to not pay child support? How is that fair on his children. Its just wrong.
Split 50- 50 is ideal and fair imo.

30% of what? If the guy could afford the best lawyers he was probably on a very good wicket indeed - So she may well be rolling in the money right now with that 30% . Not enough details - How long were they married? - What assets did she have as oppsosed to her husband before they got married? How much more did he earn than her when they were married? What did she sacrifice by getting married?

50/50 fair? A billionaire marries a woman on the dole who has nothing - they have a kid & then a year later they split - And you think 50/50 is ideal & fair ???? Extreme example of course but you get the picture.

 

[campbell]

30% of what? If the guy could afford the best lawyers he was probably on a very good wicket indeed - So she may well be rolling in the money right now with that 30% . Not enough details - How long were they married? - What assets did she have as oppsosed to her husband before they got married? How much more did he earn than her when they were married? What did she sacrifice by getting married?

50/50 fair? A billionaire marries a woman on the dole who has nothing - they have a kid & then a year later they split - And you think 50/50 is ideal & fair ???? Extreme example of course but you get the picture.

20 years of marriage. she worked all their married lives. nil assets prior to marriage. both were students, and poor.

he happened to have a good job , she a good job, but worked part time due to children.
he though, was squirrelling money away into trusts throughout their marriage.
how is that fair.

You get good and bad in both sexes.
It can be hard to watch a friend in need though. My friend is lucky, she can work. Sad thing I find is his not wanting to pay anything for his children. He was like that though out the marriage though, very mean of spirit.

 

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

I have a good mate (not me honest) I was just speaking to on the phone who's just separated from his wife after 10 years marriage, they have a 5yo girl.

He's from overseas so doesn't have the family support network that his wife does. He just has a few mates - work people etc.

His wife took almost everything from the house and the child & they got a rental. He remains in the house & has bought new furniture. The agreement was he'd stay in the house & pay her out in a couple/few years.

He's paying child support, over the recommended amount advised by the people he contacted. Also helping out the wife with bills, insurance, etc.

She's now backflipped on the house arrangement & wants to sell it. My mate's distraught, close to breakdown & scared of losing everything, mainly a comfortable place for his daughter to stay & being forced into moving back home.

I honestly have no idea how to advise what my mate should do but he bloody needs help & any advice or suggestions will be welcomed. Thanks.

Haven't read the whole thread but if he still needs help then tell him to try this mob http://www.centacaremelbourne.org/f...spute-resolution-incorporating-mediation.html

Download the brochure for more info.

 

[ieasys00]

20 years of marriage. she worked all their married lives. nil assets prior to marriage. both were students, and poor.

he happened to have a good job , she a good job, but worked part time due to children.
he though, was squirrelling money away into trusts throughout their marriage.
how is that fair.

ok given that - it sounds like its definately not fair - he sounds like an a-grade arseh*le. (hey i beat the swear filter ! )

 

[footyfreak]

20 years of marriage. she worked all their married lives. nil assets prior to marriage. both were students, and poor.

he happened to have a good job , she a good job, but worked part time due to children.
he though, was squirrelling money away into trusts throughout their marriage.
how is that fair.

You get good and bad in both sexes.
It can be hard to watch a friend in need though. My friend is lucky, she can work. Sad thing I find is his not wanting to pay anything for his children. He was like that though out the marriage though, very mean of spirit.

one of a handful of examples (if it is even true) compared to the tens of thousands of men that get screwed over every year. It makes me feel ill to hear you and Mantis crap on like you have any valid point what so ever, you don't. And trying to do so re this issue just makes me realise how evil most women really are.

 

[Eagle87]

20 years of marriage. she worked all their married lives. nil assets prior to marriage. both were students, and poor.

he happened to have a good job , she a good job, but worked part time due to children.
he though, was squirrelling money away into trusts throughout their marriage.
how is that fair.

You get good and bad in both sexes.
It can be hard to watch a friend in need though. My friend is lucky, she can work. Sad thing I find is his not wanting to pay anything for his children. He was like that though out the marriage though, very mean of spirit.

Bollocks.

The Family Court looks through the corporate veil and through Trusts. If they were assets of the marriage "squirrelled" into trusts, then all she had to do was make the court aware of same and they would be treated as familial assets and used in determining the appropriate shares. In normal cases, assets follow the person with primary custody of kids - if she, as you allude, has primary custody of 3 kids and ALL the assets were disputed, she would likely receive 70% of the assets (certainly of the first $1m or so of assets). The best lawyers in the world will hardly change that.

If there is a skerrick of truth in your story - which I doubt - she is one of a very very small minority of women v a very very large number of men who get financially screwed on divorce.

By the way, your comments re maintenance are bollocks. The CSA will simply assess him on taxable income if she cant get satisifaction via the courts. Of course if he has no taxable income then thats problematic - for both parties.

 

[rizzo]

You don't need to spend 10k and have a document to show ur love for someone. Marriage is the biggest sham going around. That being said, we all do it and it is just what happens.

50/50 is a fair split and its only greedy idiots who needlessly drag out the whole process.

But I dare say, someone who is greedy during divorce was no doubt greedy before you go married.

 

[Hooley McBoob]

Is it even possible to get out of paying child support??

 

[Hooley McBoob]

Bollocks.

The Family Court looks through the corporate veil and through Trusts. If they were assets of the marriage "squirrelled" into trusts, then all she had to do was make the court aware of same and they would be treated as familial assets and used in determining the appropriate shares. In normal cases, assets follow the person with primary custody of kids - if she, as you allude, has primary custody of 3 kids and ALL the assets were disputed, she would likely receive 70% of the assets (certainly of the first $1m or so of assets). The best lawyers in the world will hardly change that.

Pardon my ignorance, but why would the assets be divided in relation to who has custody of the children? A house I can understand, but what about shares, other real estate, car etc...?

 

[Eagle87]

Pardon my ignorance, but why would the assets be divided in relation to who has custody of the children? A house I can understand, but what about shares, other real estate, car etc...?

The total amount of family assets is split. The man may end up with all the shares or all the cars or all the house but if a man & woman divorce and the woman has primary custody of 2 or more children then in the majority of cases she will get a weighting of the assets which will result in her getting about 70% of the assets. If the family property is big (multi-millions) this can change or if there were assets brought to the relationship that can also change but in a garden variety divorce you can look forward to getting 70% of the assets and 20%+ of the blokes GROSS income on an ongoing basis (for the kids) .....

Plenty of money to afford cake & coffee with your fellow divorced friends while bitching about how all men are bastards ...

 

[FootyJunkie]

I hate to tell you people, that a lot of women get screwed over in a divorce. If they get married young & both worked hard to buy a house, then years later the man gets a higher paying job & has contacts, he will get the house & the kids, while the wife gets FA.

But hey, on this site it's always about the poor down trodden men.

go fishing with your ex, that'll fix problems

 

[The Boy From Brasil]

The total amount of family assets is split. The man may end up with all the shares or all the cars or all the house but if a man & woman divorce and the woman has primary custody of 2 or more children then in the majority of cases she will get a weighting of the assets which will result in her getting about 70% of the assets. If the family property is big (multi-millions) this can change or if there were assets brought to the relationship that can also change but in a garden variety divorce you can look forward to getting 70% of the assets and 20%+ of the blokes GROSS income on an ongoing basis (for the kids) .....

A question for you Eagle(as I am fairly ignorant on matrimonial law).

Does the courts take into account what assets the partners brought into the relationship? Ie is the assets pool to be split on the total assets or the increase in asset value since the relationship started?

For example, If Mr A had $500,000 of assets and married Mrs A who had nothing, and when they divorced their total combined assets was $600,000.

Would the courts apportion the split on the total assets($600,000) or the increase in assets since they have been together($100,000)?

 

[Hooley McBoob]

The total amount of family assets is split. The man may end up with all the shares or all the cars or all the house but if a man & woman divorce and the woman has primary custody of 2 or more children then in the majority of cases she will get a weighting of the assets which will result in her getting about 70% of the assets. If the family property is big (multi-millions) this can change or if there were assets brought to the relationship that can also change but in a garden variety divorce you can look forward to getting 70% of the assets and 20%+ of the blokes GROSS income on an ongoing basis (for the kids) .....

Plenty of money to afford cake & coffee with your fellow divorced friends while bitching about how all men are bastards ...

Are you serious? That's awful!

 

[Smell The Glove]

A question for you Eagle(as I am fairly ignorant on matrimonial law).

Does the courts take into account what assets the partners brought into the relationship? Ie is the assets pool to be split on the total assets or the increase in asset value since the relationship started?

For example, If Mr A had $500,000 of assets and married Mrs A who had nothing, and when they divorced their total combined assets was $600,000.

Would the courts apportion the split on the total assets($600,000) or the increase in assets since they have been together($100,000)?

Its a case by case basis. But usually all assets are taken into account, regardless of where they came from.

 

[Eagle87]

Its a case by case basis. But usually all assets are taken into account, regardless of where they came from.

Indeed. An area of increasing complexity and argument as more and more people are getting a second or third divorce and brought assets to the relationship.

Typically though, by that stage, they have no dependent children and the asset split is less complicated. But anyone who has assets and is entering a relationship would be smart to take advice on pre-nups or agreements of that nature.

 

[Off The Couch]

I heard that the woman gets a lot in a divorce settlement because the man is considered to be better able to set himself up again and earn a living. Has anybody had any experience with that?

Find this hard to believe.

My brother can't even afford to buy another house because of the amount of maintenance he has to pay and the amount she got from the original settlement compared to him. Once he takes that out, living expenses and a car payment the bank says he is not eligible for another home loan. He has actually given up going into another relationship because he said he can't afford it and is not prepared to risk it again.

Meanwhile she's living in a new home, with a new partner and my brothers maintenance is paying their mortgage while she sits at home on her arse because her new partner is supporting her and there is no need for her to work.

When I was helping him with some issues with maintenance I actually told child support I was embarassed to be a woman if that's how guys were being treated.

 

[Eagle87]

Find this hard to believe.

My brother can't even afford to buy another house because of the amount of maintenance he has to pay and the amount she got from the original settlement compared to him. Once he takes that out, living expenses and a car payment the bank says he is not eligible for another home loan. He has actually given up going into another relationship because he said he can't afford it and is not prepared to risk it again.

Meanwhile she's living in a new home, with a new partner and my brothers maintenance is paying their mortgage while she sits at home on her arse because her new partner is supporting her and there is no need for her to work.

When I was helping him with some issues with maintenance I actually told child support I was embarassed to be a woman if that's how guys were being treated.

.... and that post sums up the lot of Mr Average post divorce

The best bit is the way maintenance works. Lets say he has 3 kids, all still dependent (typically under 18) and they are in the primary care of the mother. He will be paying (under CSA) about 36% of his gross income in Maintenance. So, assuming he has a marginal tax rate in the mid 30% range, every extra dollar he earns, goes tax(say) 36% + CS 36% and he gets to keep 28%! Yippee.

That of course generally eliminates the chance of a housing loan etc etc ... and he has to keep paying even if she re-marries - even if she moves to Toorak with her millionaire husband.... its a great system

Of course, all men are bastards and its always our fault, so that makes it ok...

 

[Off The Couch]

.... and that post sums up the lot of Mr Average post divorce

The best bit is the way maintenance works. Lets say he has 3 kids, all still dependent (typically under 18) and they are in the primary care of the mother. He will be paying (under CSA) about 36% of his gross income in Maintenance. So, assuming he has a marginal tax rate in the mid 30% range, every extra dollar he earns, goes tax(say) 36% + CS 36% and he gets to keep 28%! Yippee.

That of course generally eliminates the chance of a housing loan etc etc ... and he has to keep paying even if she re-marries - even if she moves to Toorak with her millionaire husband.... its a great system

Of course, all men are bastards and its always our fault, so that makes it ok...

Just stupid sometimes

I have always said to my husband

When a guy leaves a relationship it is normally spur of the moment and he hasn't normally thought it through and realised the consequences

With a female, she has planned for months - has sought legal aid (so he now has to pay a lawyer), has siphoned off funds, has accommodation in place and knows exactly what her rights are because half a dozen other divorcees have already given her the heads up.

I realise that there are also heaps of women out there who are doing it tough because their ex-partners are not paying maintenance or have hidden assets - but for every female doing it tough there is also a male and for one reason or another they are neglected by welfare agencies and government departments and this is why so many take their own lives - it just all gets too hard.

 

[Chief]

and he has to keep paying even if she re-marries - even if she moves to Toorak with her millionaire husband.... its a great system

Is this also the case if there are no children?

 

[Power King]

Indeed. An area of increasing complexity and argument as more and more people are getting a second or third divorce and brought assets to the relationship.

Typically though, by that stage, they have no dependent children and the asset split is less complicated. But anyone who has assets and is entering a relationship would be smart to take advice on pre-nups or agreements of that nature.

****ing exactly.

If I work hard to own my own house, car and business prior to marriage, no woman on earthj should be able to take half of what i worked for on my own, and i'll be damned if a woman (or man) out there will tell me otherwise.

 

[Eagle87]

Is this also the case if there are no children?

Typically no. Maintenance is usually only for dependent children (although settlements for the better off sometimes involve large ongoing support payments). Its important to note though that "dependent children" can be over the age of 18 - again typically if they are full time students or the like. I have seen guys paying maintenance to their ex's until the kids complete full-time study at age 25! Usually such extended maintenance needs to be determined by the courts but it does happen.