Maintenance of child

liger

Hi, i'm heading to court at the request of ex as she's looking for Maintenance. I've been stressing over this and dont know anyone who has gone thru this personally. has anyone been there and done that? how did they find it? did you do it yourself or with a solicitor??

just so you know, we had an agreement in place for last two years ( nothing in writing ) since we split. I pay half the mortgage on our house and her and the little fella live there but thats out the window and she wants Maintenance, including back payment for last 2yrs.

ntlbell

what do you mean that's out the window? have you stopped paying ?

Nevyn

Get a solictor, one who deals in family law.
Can you prove you have been paying half the mortgage ?
You should have but the terms in writing and got them signed.
There is two ways of looking at this that by paying your part of the mortgage you are helping to keep a roof over the child's head but the thing is when the house is sold you will get that money back and then some so it is an investment in the house and not directly paying for the up keep of the child.

Get solictor and get an agreement sorted and get your visiting sorted as well.

liger

no i havn't stopped paying, and i have a full record of the payments. We had an agreement that i pay half the mortage and if/when the house is sold i would then give her a set amount of for Maintenance. then she told me she wanted Maintenance and when i asked her about the agreement she just said what agreement. next thing i know i've a summons in my hand.

Thaedydal wrote: »

There is two ways of looking at this that by paying your part of the mortgage you are helping to keep a roof over the child's head but the thing is when the house is sold you will get that money back and then some so it is an investment in the house and not directly paying for the up keep of the child.

Yes you can say that she'd never have been able to buy a place on her own. you can also say she that she knew what she was agreeing with but it isnt my fault the house price went up, had the property dropped in value I wouldnt be able to cry about losing out. in fact over last 3months 20k has fallen off the value.

I spoke with a solicitor and she advsed that it would be extremley costly to be represented and i should be able to represent myself, the ex has ignored all attempts for negotiation from myself and solicitor.

I feel like i'm being done over, we had an agreement and everything was fine but now it seems like shes able to say, Sod you i can get more from you.

Nevyn

It will come down to an ammount that the judge deems fair.
I would suggest that you get your financal records in order.
Also if you have your child staying with you for at least 1 night of the year you can apply for a single parents tax allowance.
It could be that she could end up with less depending on how big half the mortgage is and what your income and living out goings are.

liger

thanks.

Will the judge ask to see bank statements, wage slips etc? also whats the correct way to address a judge in court?

Carrigart Exile

you will of course stop paying the mortgage on a house you no longer live in

Nevyn

liger wrote: »

thanks.

Will the judge ask to see bank statements, wage slips etc? also whats the correct way to address a judge in court?

Yep, pretty much they will need to see what you incomings and out goings are,
so all of your finical records.

Carrigart Exile wrote: »

you will of course stop paying the mortgage on a house you no longer live in

Why ?

If his name is on the house and he is going to keep it there and he will expect his spit of the money when the property is sold then he should keep paying his half.
If his name is legally on the mortgage agreement then he is legally bound to that commitment.

howamidifferent

Thaedydal wrote: »

Why ?

If his name is on the house and he is going to keep it there and he will expect his spit of the money when the property is sold then he should keep paying his half.
If his name is legally on the mortgage agreement then he is legally bound to that commitment.

I agree that while his name is on the agreement he is legally bound to pay but the chances of him actually receiving a penny from any possible sale are less than a snowballs chance in hell in my experience.
In all likelihood he will end up signing away any financial interest in the home to his other half at some point in the future either volanterily or under the order of the court and so is wasting his money here.

Best bet if she's playing hardball is to stop payment and let her rent and pay for herself while he provides a "fair" amount for his childs upkeep i.e 50%
.

Nevyn

howamidifferent wrote: »

In all likelihood he will end up signing away any financial interest in the home to his other half at some point in the future either volanterily or under the order of the court and so is wasting his money here.

This does not happen as a matter of course. If he keeps up the payments and so does she and he has equal share in the house then he will get his even split
eventually when the house is sold, but that could be when the child is 18 if they are married and it is the family home.

Carrigart Exile

Thaedydal wrote: »

Yep, pretty much they will need to see what you incomings and out goings are,
so all of your finical records.



Why ?

If his name is on the house and he is going to keep it there and he will expect his spit of the money when the property is sold then he should keep paying his half.
If his name is legally on the mortgage agreement then he is legally bound to that commitment.

If he is now being expected to pay maintenance, why should he. He doesn't live there, he should in fact seek an action of division and sale and get his money out of that house and get himself somewhere. Alternatively, he could continue paying mortgage and charge his ex wife rental for the use of his share of the property.

Carrigart Exile

Thaedydal wrote: »

This does not happen as a matter of course. If he keeps up the payments and so does she and he has equal share in the house then he will get his even split
eventually when the house is sold, but that could be when the child is 18 if they are married and it is the family home.

I am sorry but that is not reality. In essence what happens is the guys pension is threatened with destruction and this is used as the bargaining chip to strip away his rights to the house.

Nevyn

I would just like to state that this junction the gender of the parents really for me plays no part in this what so ever. The mother could have moved out of the family home leaving the father with custody of the child and may points of view would still be the same.

Carrigart Exile wrote: »

If he is now being expected to pay maintenance, why should he.

Hmm let me see for the welfare and upkeep of the child.

Carrigart Exile wrote: »

He doesn't live there, he should in fact seek an action of division and sale and get his money out of that house and get himself somewhere.

Again there is the welfare of the child to consider.
For the most part the stability of the home which is owned by the child's parents is a lot better then a child living in rented private accommodation esp when there is only a 1 year lease.
Also it is the only home the child knows and it is where they have friends and where their school is ( if they are old enough to have friends and go to school ). Parents spitting up can be traumatic enough with out the added up upheaval of having to move to a place that is not 'home'

If the couple are married the legally the house is the family home the spouse who is not living there can not push for the house to be sold until the child is no longer a dependent.

He could stop paying his share of the mortgage and when the house is sold then he will get a % of the sale price in accordance with what he invested in the house.

Ideally he maybe able to keep up his investment in the house and pay some maintenance but that is not always financially possible hence the courts will want to have a look at his income and out goings.

Carrigart Exile wrote: »

Alternatively, he could continue paying mortgage and charge his ex wife rental for the use of his share of the property.

That maybe possible and it could be the court would have a look at such a suggestion, but it is not just his ex spouse/partner living in the house.

Nevyn

Carrigart Exile wrote: »

I am sorry but that is not reality. In essence what happens is the guys pension is threatened with destruction and this is used as the bargaining chip to strip away his rights to the house.

That is only possibly part of the separation agreement if they are married.
If they are not married then she has no entitlement to the pension what so ever.
And the OP never mentioned if they were and if the maintance was for the child alone or not.

howamidifferent

Carrigart Exile wrote: »

I am sorry but that is not reality. In essence what happens is the guys pension is threatened with destruction and this is used as the bargaining chip to strip away his rights to the house.

I've been there and had first hand experience of exactly that situation...

While we don't know if the OP is married or not, if he is then this IS his future as a simple talk to any family law solicitor will tell you regardless of what is supposed to be possible under the law.

If he is not married then he has no more onus to house his ex-partner than she has to house him.

And I'm not forgetting about the child here. I agree the childs welfare is paramount. But as told above he has been putting his child first all along but is now beeing squeezed for more.

Nevyn

Well that falls under the divisions of assets from a marriage in a legal seperation.

Carrigart Exile

Thaedydal wrote: »

I would just like to state that this junction the gender of the parents really for me plays no part in this what so ever. The mother could have moved out of the family home leaving the father with custody of the child and may points of view would still be the same.




Hmm let me see for the welfare and upkeep of the child.




Again there is the welfare of the child to consider.
For the most part the stability of the home which is owned by the child's parents is a lot better then a child living in rented private accommodation esp when there is only a 1 year lease.
Also it is the only home the child knows and it is where they have friends and where their school is ( if they are old enough to have friends and go to school ). Parents spitting up can be traumatic enough with out the added up upheaval of having to move to a place that is not 'home'

If the couple are married the legally the house is the family home the spouse who is not living there can not push for the house to be sold until the child is no longer a dependent.

He could stop paying his share of the mortgage and when the house is sold then he will get a % of the sale price in accordance with what he invested in the house.

Ideally he maybe able to keep up his investment in the house and pay some maintenance but that is not always financially possible hence the courts will want to have a look at his income and out goings.



That maybe possible and it could be the court would have a look at such a suggestion, but it is not just his ex spouse/partner living in the house.

ah so now we use the child as a means of maintaining the other partners lifestyle.

Carrigart Exile

That maybe possible and it could be the court would have a look at such a suggestion, but it is not just his ex spouse/partner living in the house.[/QUOTE]


yet again, the use of teh child to support the financial well being of the other partner. People can and do move home, every single day including those with children.

Nevyn

Carrigart Exile stop twisting this topic into your personal bugbear.

There is a difference between moving house and moving from a stable housing condition to a non stable one.

Carrigart Exile

Thaedydal wrote: »

Carrigart Exile stop twisting this topic into your personal bugbear.

There is a difference between moving house and moving from a stable housing condition to a non stable one.

No more personal bugbears than other posters. I find children used so often as justification for inherent unfairness. Sadly divorce is usually messy and horrible.

The Corinthian

Thaedydal, I'm afraid you're incorrect on your point that equity in the house would offset the value of his paying half the mortgage.

The reality is that he presently has an asset that he cannot rent out and cannot live in and it is this lose of income would be considered rather than the mortgage he's paying at present. Thus if he were in a position to rent out his half then that is in effect the value of what he is paying in maintnance.

For example, say it is a two bedroom house in Dublin; he would be able to rent out one of the bedrooms for €400 - €600. As he cannot (and presumably the other party can - and could well be) then it becomes a very real opportunity cost.

This is not to say that he will not still be asked to pay maintenance as both his and his ex's income will be factors as will the fickleness of the judge, however it will be heavily considered.

Worst case scenario, however, is that he sells his half of the house and consolidates his liability to simply paying maintnance.

liger

Hi,

Sorry i didnt get back, we are unmarried and this week the only thing that happened was case put back to april. I just thought i post because i hate not getting an ending to a story.

l3LoWnA

howamidifferent wrote: »

If he is not married then he has no more onus to house his ex-partner than she has to house him.

What about the child? Completely lost in this absolutely self-centred view! Who does THAT onus lie on? The onus to house the child? BOTH parents equally I should imagine, and THAT'S only the housing costs, there's plenty more costs involved, are ye all absolutely ignorant or do these men who think these "b*tches" are out for their blood actually stop to think exactly how much money is spent on a month to month basis in order to keep a child warm, dry, fed, safe, happy, entertained, educated, healthy?

Liger, I hope it all gets sorted out fairly for you! But really, in my opinion, although I don't know the ins and outs of either your or your exes financial situations, if you have the available income (which a judge will decide I suppose) you should probably be paying a little towards maintenance of your child (apart from the mortgage I mean...)