Spousal Maintenance or Blood Money?!

Whilst there are numerous posts all over the internet about "deadbeat dads" who don't pay a penny towards the upbringing of their children, just who is championing the cause for those fathers who are being bled dry by their ex-wives who are demanding spousal maintenance on top of their child maintenance payments?! The answer is simple - No-one!

The Family Courts receives application upon application from scorned ex-wives who feel that that have a right to be paid compensation for the injustice caused to them by the fact that their husband has chosen to leave them for whatever reason.  And the result? Fathers being forced to pay excessive amounts of cash in order for their ex-wives to live the life of Riley whilst they themselves struggle to maintain any sort of reasonable lifestyle.

You may be asking "What exactly is this "spousal maintenance"?" Well, it is generally defined as maintenance that is paid by a husband or a wife to their former spouse following a divorce. And its purpose?! Apparently it is paid to "meet the ongoing reasonable financial needs of the financially weaker party". So, is this actually the case?

In our case this is a definitely resounding NO!

Scenario: I have three children from a previous relationship, and a two year old daughter from our relationship who we support. The step-munchkins stay with us for four days per fortnight, along with two weeks per year for holidays with us, and I work full-time and so does the other half. The other half does, and always will, pay Child Maintenance.

My other half earns approximately £1,520 per month (after tax) based on hours actually worked (bearing in mind there is no sick pay scheme within his employment), whilst the Evil Queen herself takes home £1508 per month (after tax and salaried). So is there a financially weaker party?! I'm not sure that £12 per month is a massive difference! Now let's add on the benefits she receives - Child Tax Credits at £368.03 per month and Child Benefit at £149.06 per month. For those of you who can't be bothered to do the maths, that means her take home per month is £2,025.09 - so, now who is the financially weaker party?!

I imagine that some of you are now currently screaming at your screens, as you probably do not have that level of income yourselves! But it gets worse!

So, what happened in the Family Court for us?! Well, she submitted an apparently "reasonable" statement of her income needs, according to the Judge. I won't bore you with the boring stuff, like Council Tax and water rates, but this included £65 per month for cigarettes and alcohol, £40 per month for a mobile phone (which I presume is a gold plated Iphone...and has she never heard of Giffgaff?!), £500 per year for Christmas and birthday presents for two children aged 7 and 4,  (I managed to buy birthday and Christmas presents for six children for less than this! Thank you to Argos and the regular 3 for 2 sales on Toys!) and £2500 for a holiday and daytrips (I will admit that we have had two holidays for 8 people this year...but this has cost us about £800 including spending money....Hooray for camping and roughing it, and Tesco Clubcard points!).

And the result of the Court hearing?! The Judge ordered the other half to pay spousal maintenance (including Child Maintenance) at £500 per month. Again, I won't bore you with the maths but it now means that his take home pay per month is £1060, whilst hers is £2525.09! I'll ask the question again...who is the financially weaker party?! And to top it off, she claims this is still not enough and she need £2,839.96 to survive each month!

But it's not all bad, right?! Court Orders have a fixed term normally, so it won't go on forever. No, it won't - but it will go on until she dies (and as she is like the Ever-Living Mumra, for all you 80's children, this is unlikely!), or until she cohabits or re-marries (which being the martyr that she is, or the sociopath that men should and will avoid, is also unlikely), or until the youngest child finishes full-time education (potentially 17 years from now). So the other half is only liable for another £102,000 - again, not all bad, right?!

You are probably thinking that I have failed to take into account that I work full-time...have you seen the costs of child care for four children under the age of eleven these days?! It's horrendous! I actually (and I can't believe I did this!) looked into benefits we would receive if I gave up work, or the other half gave up work, and we'd be a damn sight better off sadly. But that's not us...we are not scroungers. We work hard to support our kids and always will.

It's just a shame that some mothers think that they are entitled to a free ride.

Please feel free to add any comments below or follow me on Facebook and leave any comments there x