Divorce settlements.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34524641
The above article will detail the divorce settlements obtained by Alison Sharland (£10mill) and Ms Gohil after their husbands had lied about the worth of their assets during the first settlement.
Do you think this is fair? Discuss.
The above article will detail the divorce settlements obtained by Alison Sharland (£10mill) and Ms Gohil after their husbands had lied about the worth of their assets during the first settlement.
Do you think this is fair? Discuss.
Scroll to see replies
It isn't at all fair. This is why you get a Prenup.
Well marriage nowadays is almost like the American dream. Gets everyone excited, many people dream and aspire to it but most people still fail at it.
This doesn't apply to the older generations though, there's clearly something we're doing wrong.
This doesn't apply to the older generations though, there's clearly something we're doing wrong.
The scenario is a stay at home wife with no assets and a rich husband, she brings up the children.
In principle the woman should get, for the duration of the children's minority:
1. Compensation for loss of earnings based on her qualifications and career only.
2. Stipend for future (not retrospective) child-rearing as charged at market rates for hours outside school hours. This contingent on visitation rights.
3. Contribution, assessed based on the shortfall after (1), housing benefit entitlement, and average percentage cost of rent, towards the rent or mortgage on a house with the criterion being sufficient bedrooms for the children.
As a ballpark I pretty much think under the above system an averagely qualified woman with two kids shouldn't ever receive any more than £6-800,000 over the lifetime of the children. This is about £25 to 30k a year.
In principle the woman should get, for the duration of the children's minority:
1. Compensation for loss of earnings based on her qualifications and career only.
2. Stipend for future (not retrospective) child-rearing as charged at market rates for hours outside school hours. This contingent on visitation rights.
3. Contribution, assessed based on the shortfall after (1), housing benefit entitlement, and average percentage cost of rent, towards the rent or mortgage on a house with the criterion being sufficient bedrooms for the children.
As a ballpark I pretty much think under the above system an averagely qualified woman with two kids shouldn't ever receive any more than £6-800,000 over the lifetime of the children. This is about £25 to 30k a year.
Original post by Eva.Gregoria
Well marriage nowadays is almost like the American dream. Gets everyone excited, many people dream and aspire to it but most people still fail at it.
This doesn't apply to the older generations though, there's clearly something we're doing wrong.
This doesn't apply to the older generations though, there's clearly something we're doing wrong.
3 words, no fault divorce
Original post by scrotgrot
3 words, no fault divorce
And how would that improve things?
Original post by Eva.Gregoria
And how would that improve things?
Stop people getting married in the first place without properly thinking about what it means, keep parents together unless there is a very good reason (fault) to split up.
Or if you are a romantic about it keep marriage and divorce as quaint cultural ceremonies, just transfer all the actual law onto some new construct that more directly incentivises collaboration to raise a child, which is the point of marriage.
Original post by scrotgrot
Stop people getting married in the first place without properly thinking about what it means, keep parents together unless there is a very good reason (fault) to split up.
Or if you are a romantic about it keep marriage and divorce as quaint cultural ceremonies, just transfer all the actual law onto some new construct that more directly incentivises collaboration to raise a child, which is the point of marriage.
Or if you are a romantic about it keep marriage and divorce as quaint cultural ceremonies, just transfer all the actual law onto some new construct that more directly incentivises collaboration to raise a child, which is the point of marriage.
You're giving human beings a bit too much credit, a no fault divorce isn't going to be deterrent because no one thinks they'll have a divorce until they are actually at risk of having one.
I read on this in the Metro on the tube on my home. Some men thought that " the courts were geared towards favouring women". I'm not really too sure myself, but they are losing a lot of their hard earned money.
Original post by Eva.Gregoria
You're giving human beings a bit too much credit, a no fault divorce isn't going to be deterrent because no one thinks they'll have a divorce until they are actually at risk of having one.
We have no fault divorce now. If we brought back fault then all these cheating whores (statistics show that today's women are as likely to cheat as men but divorce is filed by almost 70% women) would not get a penny and marriages would last if the husband forgave them or they knew they'd get nothing after doing it.
Personally i do feel divorce is too geared towards women and would attempt to hide my assets.
So far as i'm concerned she deserves half the primary assets (i.e. house and car) and then if she has custody of the children she should be given money for them. Under no circumstances do i believe that alimony is justified to maintain her living standards, the husbands responsibility is to the children, not her upon divorce.
So far as i'm concerned she deserves half the primary assets (i.e. house and car) and then if she has custody of the children she should be given money for them. Under no circumstances do i believe that alimony is justified to maintain her living standards, the husbands responsibility is to the children, not her upon divorce.
it's a disgrace. No wonder less and less are getting married. Raw deal for men.
If you lie in court, man or woman, you are guilty either of perjury or of contempt of court. Regardless of whether or not the settlement should be changed, you should be imprisoned.
I find all these arguments about income after divorce settlements distasteful. Perhaps there should be a maximum both wife and husband can receive after a divorce, with the rest going to any children or to charity.
I find all these arguments about income after divorce settlements distasteful. Perhaps there should be a maximum both wife and husband can receive after a divorce, with the rest going to any children or to charity.
this is surely proof that marriage is a terrible idea for men
Original post by DiddyDec
It isn't at all fair. This is why you get a Prenup.
They're really not worth the paper they're written on now
Divorce settlements are absolutely absurd in cases where one partner earns all the money.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Zerforax
The appeal was about fraud/dishonesty.
Of course it's fair that you shouldn't be allowed to lie and get away with it.
Of course it's fair that you shouldn't be allowed to lie and get away with it.
This is true. They did lie. £10 million seems a bit excessive.
Original post by barnetlad
If you lie in court, man or woman, you are guilty either of perjury or of contempt of court. Regardless of whether or not the settlement should be changed, you should be imprisoned.
I find all these arguments about income after divorce settlements distasteful. Perhaps there should be a maximum both wife and husband can receive after a divorce, with the rest going to any children or to charity.
I find all these arguments about income after divorce settlements distasteful. Perhaps there should be a maximum both wife and husband can receive after a divorce, with the rest going to any children or to charity.
Yes. However, I can never see this being implemented.
I saw this the other day...I don't knowwwww
I mean it doesn't seem fair because of the sheer amount of money they were able to receive. Do I believe on a general scale it is fair? yes. At the end of the day is was a lie, a lie is a lie.
I mean it doesn't seem fair because of the sheer amount of money they were able to receive. Do I believe on a general scale it is fair? yes. At the end of the day is was a lie, a lie is a lie.
Original post by Underscore__
They're really not worth the paper they're written on now
Divorce settlements are absolutely absurd in cases where one partner earns all the money.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Divorce settlements are absolutely absurd in cases where one partner earns all the money.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Do you study law?
Quick Reply
Latest
Last reply 1 hour ago
Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 1 hour ago
Can I do economics degree without a level maths?Last reply 1 hour ago
How to choose unis in UCAS application for CS undergraduate course?Last reply 1 hour ago
Rishi Sunak pledges to remove benefits for people not taking jobs after 12 monthsLast reply 2 hours ago
Got my crush's number 2 days ago and no reply yet. What could be the reasons?Posted 2 hours ago
GB News set to axe 40 jobs after channel posts heavy lossesLast reply 2 hours ago
Rwanda bill likely to be stalled at least till April after seven defeats in the LordsPosted 2 hours ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKTrending
Last reply 20 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 20 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
