Even if both spouses want to settle via mediation, your friend must have an attorney review the proposed terms of settlement. Not to do so is to risk overlooking something important.
To repeat: the mediator is not either party’s advocate. Only one’s lawyer has that role and duty.
Ok, she’s seen 6 lawyers. Now she needs to choose one to work on her case. If none of the 6 will take her, it could be the size of the deal, maybe she’s selected some who go for the big-profit high visibility cases, but it also could be that something about her presentation is unclear or tentative- or, sorry, that she presents as difficult. I’d have expected at least one of them to recommend something. Sorry. Plenty of small or moderate divorces get resolved each year.
Also, mediators are skilled in this sort of thing. Depending on the state, some are even attorneys. (You still should have your own, imo,in case some detail is skipped or confusing.) I don’t know if there’s some misconception they’re like schoolyard adults who simply tell kids to shake hands, but they are generally trained and certified.
This: She is not in a hurry for the divorce. If he is in a hurry, then she needs to see someone that will put together a good plan for her and the children that he can sign off on. That’s a big part of what CYA is. An attorney will step her through this, from the perspective of her and her kids’ interests. A mediator can do the same but isn’t representing either side.
We’re talking about how divorces can get messy, but to me, you can’t control for him, only that your own a** is covered.
Sometimes, you have to “look forward.” That’s more than college planning or who pays what for a wedding, years from now. It’s more: he blindsided her once and can, again. Will she be ready? She will have X days to respond, if her serves her, but then what? A mad scramble? You can probably sit in a good bookstore and find books aimed at women who need divorce advice, the woman’s and the kids’ perspective. But she needs representation. Maybe you can help her with her presentation when she consults.
Ok, alimony is likely taxable to her, child support to him. He is getting advice from at least one person who knows what he/she is kind of doing. (though child support generally can be modified, so not great advice) She really needs professional advice. She has to protect herself and her kids.
I have only been skimming the past few pages, but this jumps out. Your friend needs to make financial decisions based on what is viable to HER in the long term. Keeping the house may be the easiest route physically and emotionally for the kids in the short term, but it sounds like it will likely cause a financial disaster for your friend in the future.
What the husband is proposing absolutely sounds nutty – this is why she needs her own counsel, not just a bunch of us supplying her with suggestions. I posted a couple of books a few pages back and, TBH, those may be worth their weight in gold.
One of my friends is a professional (professor) and got a divorce. The H insisted on keeping the expensive house, which he is maintaining. The “kids” were in their 20s and older, so they were launched/launching and mostly at college and moving on with their lives. The W got bought out by the H and used the funds to purchase herself a 6-8 bedroom. She is renting out the bottom 3 bedrooms for college students attending one of the nearby Us and lives with her disabled S in the upper floor. They have space for her older kids to stay with her when they are in HI, so it has worked out great for her.
For your friend, being stuck with an expensive home which will be a struggle to afford does not give this woman much breathing space or flexibility. It’s far more important for her to have a home she can afford so that she’s now drowning in debt–now or in the near future when H claims poverty and refuses to pay “his share” for kids’ expenses (which happens all too frequently). Kids can adjust to moving as needed, but having their custodial parent constantly stressed about whether there is enough to pay the bills is not good for them or the parent.
But I know may divorced families stay in the house until the last kid goes to college, and then they sell the house and split the proceed.
BFF’s ex wanted to make the payments on the mortgage (and any repairs) and then skip alimony. Mediator nixed that one fast. She was entitled to alimony in her state and just imagine if ex stopped paying the mortgage or didn’t agree the boiler was kaput.
If the wife really can’t afford the home on her own and he isn’t offering substantial support to cover the needs, all the emotional stuff about keeping it for the kids goes out the window. This becomes a negotiating point.
It’s really important for this woman to be as unemotional possible in securing the best financial future for herself and her kids. From what you’ve written, it doesn’t sound like keeping the house is part of her BEST financial future. The kids can and will move on and just want parents that aren’t worrying about whether they have the assets to cover the bills, now and going forward. Yes, it will be sad for them to have to move from the family home, but if the youngest if 5 years old, the chances of the H who dropped the bombshell being collaborative for the next 13 years on finances so that they don’t sell the house until this youngest is off in college become pretty small. Even if they weren’t so small, having to depend on his cooperation for the next 13 years is something I wouldn’t want to do, personally.
13 years is a very long time. I have heard of/known couples who allow the custodial spouse to keep the family home for a short period of time (especially when all kids are in HS), and then sell and split the equity, but we’re talk about over a decade with someone who doesn’t even live in the same state most of the time.
Wife can afford home, but will have to cash out some stocks to do so.
Husband is entitled to alimony on paper, but as NCP, has to pay child support. So far he says he will not ask for alimony, and has given three levels of child support based on when they leave for college.
Yes, that is the thing. I don’t think it is wise to depend on him for paying 50% of the mortgage. I don’t even know if he can be counted upon to pay his child support for more than a few years, as he has international opportunities (possibly the reason for the divorce).
I think that pushing selling the house right after telling the kids about the divorce would not be good for anyone. House in our area in that price range are often on the market for 6 months or a year or even more.
I’m not sure if I’m being clear, or if we are wrong, but here is what I understand are house options:
The last thing is what they are planning to do. He wants to make sure she doesn’t sell the house, so is trying to blackmail her into a clause that says “if the house is sold, child support payments are decreased by X amount” where I believe X was 50% at least of the child support payments. I said maybe instead you give him half the current equity, refinance under your name only, and then put in a clause that says “if the house is sold, ex-husband gets 50% of any additional profit, based on his payout at the time of the divorce”.
I’m sorry if I presented she was in dire financial straits. Rather, she wants to protect her money for the children because she does not trust him to stay in their lives and keep payments regular.
If he is trying to blackmail her into anything, she really needs a lawyer. Period.
Will she lose his $250K capital gains exemption if house is sold X years from now? I may be completely incorrect here, but just thought I would ask.
He wants out fast, what’s there to blackmail? I would use it to your friend’s advantage.
Who is the responsible one when it comes to parenting and finance? If it is your friend, then exchange future child support (college costs) for opting out of claim on the house. I don’t think I would want to spend my time going to court in trying to get the ex to pay.
Her assets may be subject to the divorce, depending. (Need a lawyer.) Also, when married X years, spouses may be entitled to pat of each other’s pensions/retirement benefits and SS.
“Most states have equitable distribution laws. The only exceptions, as of this writing are Idaho, California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana and Washington State which have community property laws. Laws are constantly being changed and updated so consult your attorney to confirm the law in your state. In community property states, property distribution is a 50/50 split. In equitable distribution states the Court determines a fair, reasonable and equitable distribution which may be more than or less than 50% of any asset to either party.”
In any case, not sure she should be cashing in her assets based on being forced to keep the house. .
Option: She gets ownership upon divorce. They could agree to have the house appraised shorty before the time of the divorce, for realistic sale value (not taxes or some wishful thinking or what some neighbor got.) She agrees that, on sale (let’s say, a year or two after the divorce,) he gets, “Half the proceeds, after all fees, not to exceed (the 50% value now.”) If it’s appraised for 600k and sells for 500, he gets 250. If it’s appraised for 600 and sells for 900, he gets 300. (This works when they do agree to market the house by some date.)
Yes, in theory, even if the value decreases, he should get the $X that represents his half share today, but her interests should be protected (and we are discussing this with her in mind.) Eg, if we have a major real estate downturn. You can ask for that.
It’s not, “if the house is sold, child support payments are decreased by X amount” where I believe X was 50% at least of the child support payments.)"
CS continues based on the costs to support the kids, including the new housing, utilities, transp, general welfare, and extras, etc. If they move to a cheap apt, maybe their $ needs are lowered. yup. But not automatically by some fixed %. That’s bogus. The sort of women who get trapped by that are missing a you-know-what to advise.
If you had a you-know-what, you wouldn’t be worrying about his sort of wingy request.
Child support- make sure in the agreement it is reviewed every so often so that as his income increases the childsupport increases. ( ex. every 18 months it should be revaluated ) $500/month today won’t buy much 5 years from now. It should be documented in a way so that it is hassle free.
Childrens medical insurance- discuss does it end at 18 or does he have to provide it till age 26. If it ends at 18 all of a sudden mother will have to add all kids to her insurance. (its costly)
Take into account all holidays and summer vacations - daycare costs, camp costs, after school care, educational costs- sat prep, college apps, sports, equipment, holidays) Usually the one have primary custody ends up having to manage most of these costs on their own. Document all these expenses in the settlement agreement otherwise she will be out of luck getting any of this covered.
If medical costs are split 50/50 what will she do if he tells the doctor I am not paying any costs or he lets the bills go to collections. The point being the agreement should be as detailed as possible so that there is no cause for confusion later.
International moves don’t eliminate child support. If he works for an American or International company, likely they can be automatically deducted. If he doesn’t pay, he can be charged and have problems with his passport. Child support, if ordered, isn’t optional. And though he earns less, having so little custody (and less if he moves overseas) will obligate him to pay. She has to be prepared to hold him accountable.
The insurance until 26 is a big deal and should be included in any settlement.
After reading post 168, YIKES those three house options are incorrect! Look at the recommended books.
Of course H wants $$ now. He has a woman in the wings.
She needs to use the time factor, and his desire for $$ now to her negotiation advantage.
In no way have H on the mortgage or home documents after the Divorce. He is a taker! He is wanting to divorce his wife, so how much does he care about her - he has her replaced. He is obviously a pretty selfish guy too IMHO.
I agree with everyone who says to get.a.lawyer. if there isn’t one yet.
To be clear:
Child support is not income to the recipient and is not deductible by the payer.
Spousal support is income to the recipient and is deductible by the payer.
So it make a difference to both parties how the payments are characterized. Likewise it is important who gets to claim the children as dependents on the tax return – they can negotiate that they alternate tax years.
My friend’s H dropped the D bomb on her as soon as their youngest went off to college. According to her, the divorce was amicable, they were doing what was best for the children, yada yada. At the time, the H proposed to pay alimony to my friend instead of paying her out right. They were pretty well off and my friend didn’t care whether he paid her now or later, so she agreed to it. Of course, once all the dust settled she figured out what a jerk he was. He started dating soon after and wanted to buy a large apartment in NYC. Oops, he couldn’t get a mortgage because of his hefty alimony payments. He asked my friend if he could pay her out in order to stop the alimony payments. My friend told him that she liked her annuity, but would reconsider in a year or two. My friend also sold their family home within few months after her ex moved out. She told the kids and her ex to take what they wanted, anything that was not taken she got rid of. She said she didn’t want to be the keeper of the tomb. She moved to a place where she always wanted to live. Her kids now visit her regularly and she has a thriving new career.