Living to your reasonable means

Hi all
I just need to gauge opinion as my ex is really trying to grind me down to the point it's becoming unbearable which is her main tactic.

At the point of the final hearing (Likely turn of the year) it'll have been only been a two year marriage. 1 child over the age of 1.

Both in our thirties, both highly qualified and capable of earning in the £50k category. No pensions pots to speak of.
Ex didn't want me at the house and I had to leave for my own safety.

Ex is just refusing to cooperate at any level and adapt to the obvious change of circumstances.

In my view the house is likely to be judged too excessive of her needs, a six bed-roomed property with £350k equity. House is valued probably about £550k. Ultimately my ex and one child don't require a six bed roomed house in a a well to do part of the area.
It's ridiculous and there is clear sign of downsizing to a house in similar size to what she had prior.

At the cusp of the breakup she took out both a business loan and an expensive car lease yet on paper the business won't earn more than £25k per annum and even then only after two years.

It's obviously not financially viable for me to continue paying long term the full mortgage, CMS and assist with her other debts as this is two thirds of my income. She never tried mediation, didn't attempt to negotiate before the first hearing and seems very unlikely to attempt it in the 2nd. She's oblivious to divorce procedures that expect you to attempt negotiations prior to each hearing. She just seems intent on me either giving up entirely on the house or her gambling everything at a final hearing which is crazy.

My main question is even at the point of the house being ordered to sell which appears likely she will have a claim for spousal maintenance. Can that maintenance ignore the potential of what she can earn (£55k) as it's her choice not to return to her mainstay career of the past 15 years and focus on something that pays far less.

It's somewhat like me packing in my job and going to work on a help-desk, a judge wouldn't accept that and I can't see how that logic can't work vice versa

She is overhoused, she can’t argue that, and with 350k equity she will be able to downsize.

Does she contribute to the mortgage now? Does she claim the benefits she is entitled to (if she is entitled)? Is she working now? If you are paying for everything and not living there she has little incentive to move things along!

Is the car lease in her name? I’d the business in her name? Are either secured against the property?

You are both young and can build up pension lots and have mortgage capacity.

She would be expected to maximise her income, but your child is very young so it may not be reasonable for her to return to her full earning capacity immediately.

Where are you living now?

Thanks for the reply.
Not a penny towards the mortgage since November. Her argument being that 1) she was still on maternity (now over) and 2) with her new business venture on part time hours it won't make her any cash until two/three years in.

She claims I think the max benefits but it's simply not a lot given the size of the house and the fact she's deemed as working and the fact she now has her parents living there.

The car lease and business loan are all entirely in her name but I was ordered in an MPS hearing to pay towards them.

So yes you are correct she has little incentive to move things along but my understanding of divorce proceedings is she is expected to be reasonable and cooperate which she just isn't doing.

I'll see what her proposal (if any) is at the 2nd hearing but her initial plan privately to me was being giving her 50% of my income for the next three years so she can then buy me out. The buy out only being what I'd given her in that three year period. Shes giving me nothing to work with.

I'm renting privately at the moment in a place deemed reasonable so thats no issue.

At the same time shes got every incentive to drag this to a final hearing my impression from the judge at the first hearing was she tried to encourage her to talk. I get the feeling from what I have read is a judge will take a dim view on her if she drags this to a final hearing simply offering nothing along the way.

So you’re paying for three adults and one child? That isn’t fair nor reasonable.

Do you think her business will make her a reasonable wage in two/three years? If so would you consider offering her decreasing spousal maintenance for a set period until the child gets older and the business takes off? That would be a huge risk for you if it doesn’t take off...

What’s expected of you and what happens are two different things. You will see many posts here about non compliance of orders! And heel dragging is standard practice I’m afraid!

It’s almost certain the house will need to be sold, she doesn’t need it and can’t afford it. If her parents want to live there with her then could they buy your share out now?

Tell me about it.

I personally don't and can't trust a word she says going forwards which is the fundamental problem.

Even *IF* her venture works she's only going to make out it'll be capable of a small buyout. Your talking 20% of the equity and thats based like you said on a what if with this business.

There's no indication and frankly no chance they will offer a buy out. They're heads are well and truly stuck into the ground on the basis one child is a meal ticket for 18 years living in a half million pound house.

Ludicrous. I've had the impression the house is likely selling, that's beyond question but whether she realises this I don't know.

I'm not sure if it's a tactic to make me break and then compromise at the last minute as the only chance I see them having is her returning back to her old employment.

The amuing thing is even if I walked away from the house as she wants I'm not sure a judge would even rubber stamp it

It’s not happening. Any solicitor will tell her that. Even if her living arranagements remain as they are (which wouldn’t be factored in to the divorce anyway) she still doesn’t need a six bed house! Are her parents paying you or her rent? May be worth mentioning occupational rent to them!!

To return to exactly the same role as before baby may not be realistic straight away but she would certainly be expected to maximise her earnings over a period of time. The child is young and you would need to consider if her going back to work full time is really what you want for the baby too?

But as a qualified professional it would be necessary for her to maximise those earnings moving forward.

Also remember trigger points for the end of SM include cohabitation and remarriage.

Occupational Rent maybe something I'll have to go down.

What I mean is the only hope I see her having of staying in the house (if thats what she wants) is returning full time to her old role. Otherwise there are plenty of part time roles available in her old career locally but again won't be enough money for her to stay in the house.

The demand is there and it would be more secure and pay more than her basing everything on the uncertainty of a fledgling business.

This business idea is just another unknown and it seems a hell of a risk by her to put the onus of that onto a judge when ultimately he can't ignore higher paid and more secure part time work thats available to her. It's a pure lifestyle choice if she wants to gamble on a new business.

Would cohabitation with her parents be a factor of SM?