You have yet to demonstrate how the law isn’t right.
Again, I don’t know the exact case in Florida, obviously, but if he owns half the house (which that link seems to show), you’ll need to get him to sign away half of the house before you can do anything with it. That would be a fairly obvious clue to someone that he owns part of it.
My attorney has nothing to do with this. I didn’t have a talk with her to ‘plot’ to “deceive” my husband. I am trying to have a quick and cheap divorce. Because there is a minor child involved, we could not do it ourselves. The attorney handled those issues, took the copy of the proposed settlement, attached my prenup and said it all seemed fine if this is what we agreed on. Absolutely the judge will have the final say. I have primary residential custody so my keeping the house isn’t odd at all, as a matter of fact, if I didn’t have any money, I might just get it anyway if there was indeed a fight over it.
This is about whether I should put myself in debt or have to sell the house my daughter has always lived in so my husband gets this money.
You’re welcome. I found the info. on how child support is apportioned, and the 5% rule, to be significant.
You appear to be trying very hard to gain sympathy for your position. While that’s understandable, I have to wonder if this deception on your part, and that’s what it is, will stand the test of time.
I have been married, and divorced, four times w/ significant financial loss each time. It isn’t lost on me that we are so optimistic in the beginning and so cynical at the end. I sleep w/ a clear conscience, if not a fat bank account.
You should do whatever you are legally required to do.
As a child of a relationship in which one parent financially fucked over the other parent can I just say that your daughter will know what you did. Whether or not the law is “the right thing to do” isn’t for you to decide. You married within these laws and you should respect them when ending your marriage. You are truly setting a horrible example for both your children. It’s ok to cheat someone out of something if they aren’t in the right frame of mind to look out for themselves!!
Give him his legal entitlement and keep your self-respect and the respect of your children.
Add my voice to the group that says “Yes, you are cheating him.” He is legally entitled to that money because that was the arrangement you entered into and you knew it. You are ethically responsible to see to it that you follow the rules that were in place. Anything else is rationalization because you don’t want to give him the money.
Treat the child care separate from the divorce. They are different and you shouldn’t tie them together. The divorce is something that happens once, your daughter is something that you share forever. Don’t play games with that one, be completely on the up-and-up.
Now, if you tell him that you are going to give him half, then go after him for child support, and give him the option of making a different arrangement, that’s another thing. He’ll know his options and make an informed choice. But you should be starting at the point where all parties are on the up-and-up, and that means he gets half the house.
IANAL, but if Foxy40 is not hiding assets, then why wouldn’t a mutually-agreed upon deal not be legal (working with the assumption that the details from 40 are accurate). She has made an offer, and rather than get counsel and fully secure his rights, he is accepting the offer and they are filing it in the court. Personally, he seems an idiot, not because of the asset split, but he’s not looking out for his interests in the future upbringing of their child. The responsibility of getting a lawyer and securing his rights is his, not Foxy’s. If she offered him no more than bus tickets to Truth or Consequences, NM, and he accepted, why would you blame her?
Well, I am even less of a lawyer than you are. I am basing my comment on the statement that he is entitled to half of the equity.
I haven’t said that I would blame her, but since you mention it, my personal moral code says that one does not feather ones nest at the expense of others who are ignorant of the full facts. It comes under the general heading “Don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t steal.”
She is hiding assets in the sense that she is keeping him in the dark about what he is entitled to. I don’t care how she rationalizes it to herself, she would be cheating him not to tell him and there’s nothing unfair about the law. She agreed to these conditions when she married him.
[
Well, actually, I had no idea that the prenup didn’t cover this or I would have kept my old house. So following the rules that were in place is a bit subjective. He also assumed that the prenup covered this.
Also, to the comment wondering if I am seeking sympathy. That is the last thing I want or need. I purposely didn’t mention that my child would probably have to leave her home in the original post for that reason. My ex is the one that probably needs the sympathy because essentially, his life will never be the same once he leaves. He got accustom to a life of security and leisure which he will no longer have. He will struggle due to his lack of ambition.
As I am currently leaning towards giving him the money as per whatever formula is “legally” appropriate, so at least he will be okay for a year or so.
The choice isn’t a) give him $20K, vs. b) give him half the house. You have made a reasonable argument that $20K is fair. You have also stated that your ex is a reasonable person and doesn’t want a major portion of your assets. Given that, morally, you have to let him know what the law says so that he can knowingly agree to it. I think the chances are pretty good that the judge will bring it up when you two appear in court. That would not be the best time to spring the news on your ex. The judge will see that he is surprised about it, and the judge is not going to look kindly upon that. The mere fact that you have legal representation and your ex does not is going to raise a red flag to the judge, and he is going to look very closely at the agreement, especially since you have a child together.
I think Foxy40 is being more than generous. The Ex put nothing of his into the purchase of the house, why should he get anything out of it? Legally maybe he’s entitled to half of it, maybe not. Morally speaking, he’s got nothing invested in it.
He’s thrilled with 20k, and why shouldn’t he be? Decree or not, he’s not going to pay child support. Taking a walk with 20 k sounds like he’s getting a good deal to me.
But then it would… 22 years ago, I divorced in exactly the same manner. One lawyer. Two adults agreeing to specifics. Everybody as satisfied as possible, considering a divorce was involved.
Details, FWIW: I kept the real estate, a shit-pile of credit card debt I didn’t run up, an 11 year-old child and a junker truck.
She got the good car, all the household effects she wanted, and my promise that I’d never pursue her for non-payment of child support. She never paid a penny. Fair enough, if you ask me.
Sometimes, when everybody’s in agreement, the best thing to do is simple; do what makes everybody happy.
I don’t see how trying to cheat somebody out of money that is legally his can be called “generous.” Trying to lowball somebody is not moral or fair just because the person doesn’t know he’s being lowballed.
If she didn’t know her pre-nup wouldn’t cover this, then that’s her own fault (or her lawyer’s fault), not the husband’s fault. Failing to read the fine print doesn’t let you off the hook for anything.
Because that’s part of the marriage agreement in their state.
People “luck into money” all the time. They get born to the right family, in the right country, at the right time, etc. In this case, this guy got married and therefore all the benefits of marriage come to him. One of the benefits of marriage in his state appears to be that he gets a 50% interest in the house.
Does he really not realize that he’s entitled to half the equity in the house or is it that he just doesn’t really care all that much?
If he decides not to get his own lawyer and agrees to $20,000 settlement why is it the responsibility of Foxy40 to tell him what he’s entitled to?
It is his responsibility to take care of himself and his assets. He’s an adult. If he’s to lazy or ignorant or if he just doesn’t care enough to do so I don’t really see why it’s her responsibility to clue him in.
I agree with you. There is a purpose to these kinds of marriage laws, which is that it is assumed that one way or another, each person is contributing to the household. Traditionally, one member of the household did not work, but contributed in terms of running the household, caring for the children, etc. In the case of divorce, why should that person be left literally with no roof over his or her head, because this was the arrangement made with the spouse? Presumably, if the marriage had not occurred, that person would have found a way to support him or herself, which, being married under such an arrangement, he or she did not do. The purpose of the law is exactly to protect the non-working spouse in these types of circumstances.
That may indeed be true, but this from post #64:
so she is essentially proposing taking advantage of his good faith in her. That’s what con artists do. Sure we should all be on guard against hucksters, but doesn’t make them right or moral.
Perhaps he thinks he’ll be well rid of her?
I don’t see where she’s trying to cheat him. He’s remaining willfully ignorant. As much as I hate analogies, I’ll use one here: if you agree to buy a car from me for $10,000, even though its blue book value is $5,000, I’m obligated to only take $5,000? Or are you obligated to figure out the car is only worth $5,000, and to offer that? Foxy40’s husband has a duty to protect himself. That includes his financial interests from the marriage and his parental rights. He’s doing neither. That is not Foxy’s problem; it is his. She’s not screwing him over, he is.
Your lawyer has a lot to do with it. She should not be representing both of you. That’s unethical. If she is going to represent both of you then she’s obligated to tell your husband exactly what he’s entitled to. Basically your lawyer is scum.