|
|
Post by baza on Dec 19, 2016 20:40:56 GMT -5
Last Friday night, having a few brews with friends on account of a new grandkid appearing.
There are about 10 of us there, conversations, laughter etc etc.
Subject of divorce comes up.
Host, a good mate of mine, pipes up with - "Georges missus took him to the cleaners in the divorce"
My hackles rise immediately (as we live in a no fault jurisdiction, and I know a little about 'George' and his circumstances)
"Really ??" I ask.
"Oh yeah, he came out with fuck all" says my mate.
-
Discussion ensues.
George (and his missus) as it turns out, were living a rather extravagant lifestyle, nice house, cars, latest mechanical and electronic wizardry etc and altogether having a lot of assets and trappings of success.
They also had monumental debt on these assets, and rip-roaring credit card debt to boot.
The nett asset position, their equity in other words, was very slim.
-
Anyway, suffice to say that George DID get fuck all out of the divorce, but that wasn't because his missus "took him to the cleaners".
It was because there was fuck all in the way of net assets.
George got his right whack out of the divisible assets, and so did his missus.
50% of not much.
-
It is true to say that George didn't get much out of the divorce.
It is just as true to say that Mrs George didn't get much out of the divorce either.
It was NOT true that "Georges missus took him to the cleaners"
Essentially, they both individually and collectively took themselves to the cleaners by virtue of their financial choices in the past.
They both got 50% of not much.
-
But, it does sound way more dramatic that George got "taken to the cleaners by Mrs George".
And, in her circle, she is probably telling a tale of how "George took me to the cleaners".
|
|
|
|
Post by jim44444 on Dec 19, 2016 21:55:18 GMT -5
I have never, not once, known someone who got "taken to the cleaners" during a divorce. I know a few that gave a lot away to get out fast. And some like George who lived beyond their means and got knocked down a few rungs. The concept of losing everything IMO is a stereotype left over from when men controlled all of the assets. A divorce left the guy feeling like she "took him to the cleaners" even though she just got her equitable share.
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Dec 20, 2016 0:29:37 GMT -5
Yes Brother Jim.
I know myself back in the day thinking that "I" was going well financially, with "my" house equity, "my" superannuation, "my" share portfolio, "my" assets, and "my" wages.
I knew it was "ours" rather than "mine", but I still used to think in terms of "mine".
Truth of the matter (in my jurisdiction) is that only half of it was ever mine (and indeed my missus played a 50% role in the accumulation of "our" wealth, by contributions of money, labour, child care etc etc etc.
My jurisdiction has been "no fault" since 1975.
I have heard quite a few divorced people reckoning they got hosed in their divorce over the years, but I am yet to hear of one where they can make a convincing financial case to back the claim up.
Of course many of them CAN make a convincing case about what an arsehole their spouse was, and how difficult they can make custody / visitation / child support and other matters requiring collaborative action.
I think a lot of people think that the divorce process ought carry with it a punitive component to "punish" the other party for their shithouse behaviour. That, is NOT the role of the State to undertake.
The States role is to facilitate an equitable division of the divisible assets, and as far as possible, look after the interests of any minor children embroiled in the situation.
And, of course, I got hosed in my divorce !!!!!!!!
In as much as, I settled for a 36/64 split at the time, figuring I could make up that 28 point difference quite easily (which I did, in spades over a couple of years) and I could live my lifestyle quite comfortably out of my whack.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Dec 20, 2016 8:28:01 GMT -5
There is one aspect of all this, that I am looking forward to learning more about. When your spouse withdraws large amounts of cash,(25% of your total assets) and has been depositing them in accounts under their name only, with out your knowledge or approval. Or has shifted large amounts of funds years ago, without your knowledge, and they come out in the divorce, how much of that are they held liable for? Once that is settled, happy 50/50 splitting.
|
|
|
|
Post by GeekGoddess on Dec 20, 2016 12:15:39 GMT -5
I drove myself to the cleaners because it was easier & more timely than fighting about money. All I wanted was OUT.
I got a little screwed at tax time. I was pissed but I never made a request in the divorce papers about how we would be filing those tax forms. My bad.
The Ex moved in with his daughter. He pays nothing to the house, last I checked, but provides 3 days of daycare (he already did that before moving in, too). He's traveling a bunch & now a grand adventure to Ecuador has been announced. I was hurt to see that but - fuckitol has to be my mindset.
I wanted out. I got out. He has more cash assets than I do. He has the access to the granddaughter. That bit hurts me but only if I focus on it too long.
I'm told I'll get invited for visiting this week - see the baby among a lot of folks. I'll take what I can get & behave while I'm there.
I gave in on some things that weren't the smartest. But you know what? Other than the access to grandkids, I do think I would do it roughly the same because it helped the timing so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Dec 20, 2016 18:43:51 GMT -5
There is one aspect of all this, that I am looking forward to learning more about. When your spouse withdraws large amounts of cash,(25% of your total assets) and has been depositing them in accounts under their name only, with out your knowledge or approval. Or has shifted large amounts of funds years ago, without your knowledge, and they come out in the divorce, how much of that are they held liable for? Once that is settled, happy 50/50 splitting. I would imagine that in these scenario(s) Brother GC, that it would come down to what the aggrieved spouse can "prove" to the court. Otherwise, it is a matter of "he said - she said". Specifically in your case, did you not engage a forensic accountant recently ? Your lawyer and your forensic accountant are probably the ones to put these questions to. As a sidebar, it again hi-lites the responsibility on us all to be up to speed with our own financial situation, our spouses financial situation, and the joint financial situation at any given moment in time. In my jurisdiction, if a spouse took a whack of joint funds and put them in their own account (without your approval), a very strong case that "fraudulent conversion" had taken place could be made. That would be a civil matter to pursue, like "theft". |
|
|
|
Post by unmatched on Dec 20, 2016 18:48:05 GMT -5
There is one aspect of all this, that I am looking forward to learning more about. When your spouse withdraws large amounts of cash,(25% of your total assets) and has been depositing them in accounts under their name only, with out your knowledge or approval. Or has shifted large amounts of funds years ago, without your knowledge, and they come out in the divorce, how much of that are they held liable for? Once that is settled, happy 50/50 splitting. My guess is it doesn't much matter whether the accounts are in her name or yours. What will matter is when/where the money came from and whether it comes under the court's remit. (Always assuming you can find it and know it exists, obviously.) |
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Dec 20, 2016 20:39:59 GMT -5
greatcoastal, to her surprise she may find out that by commingling clearly joint funds into her "sole-and-separate" account taints her account and makes everything in it very arguably joint funds. I've known someone who was on the receiving end of this slip up (by depositing one joint check into his separate account), and it's a huge reason you must never do this with business funds - it tears down the boundaries.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Dec 20, 2016 21:27:18 GMT -5
greatcoastal , to her surprise she may find out that by commingling clearly joint funds into her "sole-and-separate" account taints her account and makes everything in it very arguably joint funds. I've known someone who was on the receiving end of this slip up (by depositing one joint check into his separate account), and it's a huge reason you must never do this with business funds - it tears down the boundaries. I sure will learn a lot from this. All "life experiences" that I can use to help myself and others in the future. Looking toward the bright side! |
|
|
|
Post by becca on Dec 21, 2016 2:36:30 GMT -5
greatcoastal , to her surprise she may find out that by commingling clearly joint funds into her "sole-and-separate" account taints her account and makes everything in it very arguably joint funds. I've known someone who was on the receiving end of this slip up (by depositing one joint check into his separate account), and it's a huge reason you must never do this with business funds - it tears down the boundaries. I sure will learn a lot from this. All "life experiences" that I can use to help myself and others in the future. Looking toward the bright side! Yep! I know I am taking notes on this thread! |
|
|
|
Post by Pinkberry on Dec 31, 2016 19:06:12 GMT -5
I think it depends on your state/country and how the initial filing goes down, as well as the skill and effort of your counsel.
I got screwed both in the marriage and in the divorce, but not in the good way of course. My ex refused to work during our marriage and refused to stop spending money. I yelled, threatened, showed him the damage to our finances, and more. No difference. Because he wasn't working, all of our debt including our home, the utilities, the credit cards, and more was in my name only because his credit was shit from his first marriage when we first got together. So, I got stuck with the house, the debt, the shitty credit when I couldn't pay it all off on my own after he stole my kids and a huge portion of my income went to child support, but was really paying his new mortgage and utilities.
So, yes, people get taken to the cleaners and not always because of their extravagant lifestyle choices.
|
|
