# Interesting consult with attorney



## free2beme14 (May 2, 2014)

So I had a consult with an attorney on Thursday, I left pretty shocked. She gave me best case scenario--where we agree on everything and she just files the paperwork and its signed off on and we are divorced in about 10 days. 

Worse case, I could have to pay him maintenance of about $615 per month for 8 years, because I make more money than him. She said she doubts a court would ever grant this since he has the ability to earn more money and could support himself on what he makes. She said he also had a job making more money and could always go back to that. 

Everything else was pretty much a wash, I take all the martial debt (because I have to ensure it is paid due to my job and credit check I have once every 5 years as part of a security clearance), we sell the house and profit goes toward joint debt, we each keep our own retirements and banks accounts.


----------



## Maneo (Dec 4, 2012)

so what did you find shocking? sounds like the attorney gave you practical advice on what to expect.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

That sounds pretty fair to me too, other than possibly the "martial debt". How much does martial arts training cost anyway? >


----------



## free2beme14 (May 2, 2014)

technovelist said:


> That sounds pretty fair to me too, other than possibly the "martial debt". How much does martial arts training cost anyway? >


Sorry about that, spelling is not always my best subject. The joint debts are about $12,000 in credit card bills.

I guess the part I found shocking was that I could have to pay him maintenance. Only because he is able to work and could make more money at a different job if he would put in the effort to work. Or he could go back to the union job he had and make a ton more than me. I've spent a large chunk of the past 10 years taking care of him, and now to be told it could go on another 8 years caught me off guard.


----------



## Pluto2 (Aug 17, 2011)

free2beme14 said:


> Sorry about that, spelling is not always my best subject. The joint debts are about $12,000 in credit card bills.
> 
> I guess the part I found shocking was that I could have to pay him maintenance. Only because he is able to work and could make more money at a different job if he would put in the effort to work. Or he could go back to the union job he had and make a ton more than me. I've spent a large chunk of the past 10 years taking care of him, and now to be told it could go on another 8 years caught me off guard.


My ex was out of work for several years by the time we split. There were three possibilities concerning spousal maintenance: ONE, a court finds that he can't sufficiently work to support himself and I pay him support, or TWO, the court imputes income to him due to his voluntary unemployment, THREE, I get him to waive support. I got him to waive support by taking the marital debts. It was only supposed to be until he got a job, then we renegotiate but that just won't happen for lots of reasons. If he wanted to push the support issue he was going to have to find his own attorney, and explain away his quitting the last job-things he was unwilling to do. But I dodged paying him support.


----------



## TeddieG (Sep 9, 2015)

I can see how the possibility of having to pay maintenance to him would come as a shock. But as I read your post, it seems your lawyer is only saying it is a remote possibility. My h hasn't really worked since 2004, except for a stint delivering auto parts, and that's how he met the ho, who was looking for a military retirement check and found it in my h. She doesn't want to work either. I hate people like that, who could be gainfully employed but mooch off the hard work of others. I suspect your lawyer has experience working around this. Because my h is lousy with money and he is taking on the debt, credit cards and truck payment, in his name, I am kind of anxious to get the divorce done so that when he gets behind and tanks his credit record, it won't affect me. But I would not be willing to resolve it quickly if there was something I hadn't had time to think through and resolve the consequences of. It sounds to me as if you're hoping this resolves quickly, but a good lawyer will advocate for you and hopefully you can reach an agreement that won't involve support for your ex-h, especially if you're taking on the marital debt. It sounds like you are a responsible person and are feeling the potential consequences (and feeling like you're going to be constantly "rewarded" for being so) of holding the bag for his laziness. Hang in.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

free2beme14 said:


> Sorry about that, spelling is not always my best subject. The joint debts are about $12,000 in credit card bills.
> 
> I guess the part I found shocking was that I could have to pay him maintenance. Only because he is able to work and could make more money at a different job if he would put in the effort to work. Or he could go back to the union job he had and make a ton more than me. I've spent a large chunk of the past 10 years taking care of him, and now to be told it could go on another 8 years caught me off guard.


I was just making a joke about the "martial debt".

As for your shock, welcome to the "family court" world that mostly harms men. However, I think this is unfair no matter who is getting the shaft. 

Hopefully you will be able to avoid having to pay maintenance since he could get a job if he wanted to.


----------



## McDean (Jun 13, 2015)

TeddieG said:


> I can see how the possibility of having to pay maintenance to him would come as a shock. But as I read your post, it seems your lawyer is only saying it is a remote possibility. My h hasn't really worked since 2004, except for a stint delivering auto parts, and that's how he met the ho, who was looking for a military retirement check and found it in my h. She doesn't want to work either. I hate people like that, who could be gainfully employed but mooch off the hard work of others. I suspect your lawyer has experience working around this. Because my h is lousy with money and he is taking on the debt, credit cards and truck payment, in his name, I am kind of anxious to get the divorce done so that when he gets behind and tanks his credit record, it won't affect me. But I would not be willing to resolve it quickly if there was something I hadn't had time to think through and resolve the consequences of. It sounds to me as if you're hoping this resolves quickly, but a good lawyer will advocate for you and hopefully you can reach an agreement that won't involve support for your ex-h, especially if you're taking on the marital debt. It sounds like you are a responsible person and are feeling the potential consequences (and feeling like you're going to be constantly "rewarded" for being so) of holding the bag for his laziness. Hang in.


Agree with the 'hate the deadbeat' thinking but keep in mind most SAHMs can work and will be granted regardless. Courts also take into account the years he was in the role he is in now - if he's been doing his job for 3+years(varies by state) then it won't matter much that he is 'capable' of doing more because the logic is most all of us could 'do more/earn more' etc....If he had a higher paying job until 6 months ago then most likely they will give that more weight in determining if and how much you should support him...

Lastly, is your shock due to the long-standing belief that wives 'win' financially in divorce? If your husband earns what you earn now and you him, what would you be expecting in support? Something tells me 'nothing' would be just as much of a shock......

But if he is a deadbeat it will most likely come out in the process in support of you paying less or none.....we can all hope at least! :smile2:


----------



## free2beme14 (May 2, 2014)

McDean said:


> Agree with the 'hate the deadbeat' thinking but keep in mind most SAHMs can work and will be granted regardless. Courts also take into account the years he was in the role he is in now - if he's been doing his job for 3+years(varies by state) then it won't matter much that he is 'capable' of doing more because the logic is most all of us could 'do more/earn more' etc....If he had a higher paying job until 6 months ago then most likely they will give that more weight in determining if and how much you should support him...
> 
> Lastly, is your shock due to the long-standing belief that wives 'win' financially in divorce? If your husband earns what you earn now and you him, what would you be expecting in support? Something tells me 'nothing' would be just as much of a shock......
> 
> But if he is a deadbeat it will most likely come out in the process in support of you paying less or none.....we can all hope at least! :smile2:


If I was a SAHM, I would completely understand wanting support. If I had worked part-time as a choice to raise children that we had decided worked best for our marriage then I would realize I needed to go full-time and earn more. 

I guess my "shock" in it is that I have been supporting him for years, through job loss, underemployment, etc. and to be expected to do it for another 8 years I find offensive. 

He used to work out of the union hall, it was basically part time based on weather conditions, lack of construction, etc. But when he worked he made $30/hr---more than I make. He never actually quit there, he just stopped going to the hall each morning to get work, so then he started this job which at first was just part time. He was finally hired full-time about a year ago and makes $33K per year, plus bonuses and OT. When we first married he had a good stable job making about $40k per year, he lost that job due to being late to work. Before we were married when he didn't have enough money to support himself, he got a part-time job. However, while married even when not working he just expected me to support him. 

He has been going to school part-time for the past several years to get a job at the refinery as an operator. Once he completes that program and gets a job doing that he will make far more than I make. 

I don't expect to "win" in the divorce, I just think we should each be able to walk away on our own.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

My ex wife was a SAHM by her choice, even through our bankruptcy, and has not fully supported herself a day in her life. She is fully able bodied and educated. We were married for 17 years. I got lucky in that I was ordered to pay maintenance of $1200/month for only five years, along with 100% of the marital debt. We have been divorced for three years now, she still does not have a job, has petitioned the courts for an increase in child support, which I pay at the rate of $1500/month, along with paying for her vehicle. She even had the audacity to fight my motion to end maintenance when I found out she moved in with the guy she cheated on me with. As things stand now, the maintenance was ended, but it was an uphill battle for sure.

And announcing here on this thread first, I am gearing up with my attorney to try and get full physical custody of my youngest son, and you better bet I will be asking for child support as well...not that she has a job to pay it with, but just on principle.


----------



## McDean (Jun 13, 2015)

Free - totally understand where you are coming from and given the additional detail provided around your husband's history, and my limited experience in these matters, I'm inclined to agree with your attorney that it will be less than the max and possibly even none but don't be surprised if it is something.

Sadly, our country affords a lot of able/capable people the opportunity to do 'jack-squat' and get away with it and still live comfortably....but it is also (I was told by an attorney/professor friend) one reason alimony/support has remained in place...the logic of Uncle Sam being it's better to force another person with means to pay for them than to have another citizen on the welfare books....I won't argue if their logic has merit as that would probably blow up the post lol....

My fingers are crossed for you Free - hope you get out with the bare minimum of financial impact given his 'antics'!


----------

