Telephone
Helpline
Discussions
& Chats
Case
Histories
Available
Downloads

You are not logged in.

Facebook Twitter Google Digg Reddit LinkedIn Pinterest StumbleUpon Email

In order to post messages to this discussion board click here to login/register

Back

Home Register

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:

Message

Subject: Quick Clean Break question Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

back ground info here http://www.ondivorce.co.uk/messageboard/mb-index.php?mb_id=1&subject_id=9161. We have a 4.5 year son. We both agreed the consent order but her sol is saying to put a nominal £1 order as we have a child otherwise the courts won\'t approve it. I have agreed to pay her a lump sum and we are not claiming anything else of each other ie pensions, house as there isn\'t one etc. why won\'t the courts approve it if me and her have agreed already.

Replies

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

I know i cannot get a clean break from my child which is fine but i just want a clean break from her as i am giving her a lump sum. I don\'t want her coming after my house if and when i have one, pension, income, etc. Me and her have agreed this.

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

i think it\'s all be sorted now. The final consent order is being drawn up stating Periodical payments is for the child, not Maintenance for the spouse.

sometimesitdoesn'twork

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Thursday, December 5, 2013 - 13:03:30

There are some local differences and in some places judges invariably insist on a nominal amount of SM as insurance so that the family doesn\'t suffer undue hardship should the parent with the lower income lose/reduce their income, say, because of unemployment due to redundancy or acquiring a disability. Even when there is an order for nominal maintenance further claims to capital and pensions are dismissed. If the issue is raised again the one thing to avoid is a joint lives order by ensuring the term is limited to your child reaching 18 or finishing university and there is s28 bar so the term cannot be extended.

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

Does this make sense: The respondant (me) do pay or cuase to be paid to the Respondent Child Maintenence in the sum of 0.05 pence per annum. This is for the periodical payments for the child in the consent order. One Sol wrote this and the other checked\\read it but it doesnt make sense to me.

sometimesitdoesn'twork

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Thursday, December 5, 2013 - 13:03:30

Surely that should say something along the lines that the respondent is to pay the petitioner for the benefit of the child xx per month/year until the child attains the age of 18 or completes full-time education (possibly including tertiary education to first degree level) whichever is later??

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

My sol is to change from respondant to petitioner and send it via Dx today. With some luck, the DJudge should approve and it\'s all over. Its been a roller coatster and I\'ve even lost some of my hearing trying to de-stress. I got a test tomorrow. :\'-(

EnglishRose

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:33:37

Why is the child maintenance so low though? It\'s a clean break from your spouse but why would the child maintenance be so low?

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

This is a nominal amount i would have to pay on top of CSA.

sometimesitdoesn'twork

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Thursday, December 5, 2013 - 13:03:30

Is this to avoid a nominal order for SM? It\'s rather unusual to have a nominal amount of child maintenance because as the law currently stands the CSA/C-MEC normally has jurisdiction and the courts have no power to order or vary child maintenance. I think you need to be clear about when the nominal order ends (age 18 or completion of full-time secondary/tertiary education, whichever is later) and be aware that the courts can extend the term and vary the amount for over 18s in education or training.

MrNoOne

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 10:28:19

The order has been signed an sent to the court. Will just have to wait and see now if it gets approved but I\'m getting disheartened. So basically whatever me and her agreed makes no difference and the judge won\'t approve it but at the same time he wanted us to sort it out out of court and urged us not to come back.

sometimesitdoesn'twork

Joined:
Posts:
Location:


Message

Posted: Thursday, December 5, 2013 - 13:03:30

When negotiating a consent order it is often necessary to compromise and make a judgment about what more can be agreed, at what cost and over what period of time and at what benefit to an improved settlement. At the end of the day if the order is fair (ie within the s25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 criteria) and works for the individuals concerned the judge should approve it. Being clear about when the nominal order ends was really a question of dotting the \"i\"s and crossing the \"t\"s to avoid any misunderstanding.
You need to login / register to post a reply.