1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

£250,000 a year for life!

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by HEADRAT, May 24, 2006.

  1. mdwh

    Hitman

    Joined: Dec 29, 2004

    Posts: 663

    But even if she had to start from scratch, I'm not sure it would take the rest of her life?

    I agree that, assuming that it was a joint decision for her to give up her job (I don't know if this was disputed?), and given that it was 18 years, she should be entitled to some fairly large payments - I'm not sure why it should be for life, though.

    The Miller case on the other hand is completely absurd.

    I couldn't disagree more. Being cheated on sucks, but it does not entitle you to money, not should it be punished through the courts. This issue should only be about compensation for lost earnings.

    If people cheating on you entitles you to millions, then I'd like some please! And what about all the people who don't find a partner to settle down with in the first place? Why don't they get their "wealthy lifestyle"?

    No one has a right to a lasting marriage. If you really believe that no marriage is better than risking one, then you are free to remain single - but otherwise, you should be glad that you're still getting what some people never have.

    And does this mean she has to give the money back if she remarries? After all, she couldn't do that if she remained in the "wealthy lifestyle" that she expected...

    The thing I dislike about this is that it basically punishes a person for being genorous and supportive towards their partner - if you give them money and tell them they don't have to work, it means you're going to be even worse off in the case of a divorce.
     
  2. Mr Joshua

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 3,945

    They also said in the report that the courts don't usually go too far into why the marriage split up, it's more to do with splitting the assets from the marriage.

    I don't think he would have gained anything, maybe he would have lost less but I couldn't see him being awarded any large sums of money.
     
  3. HEADRAT

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 18,073

    Location: Cambridge, UK

    Well I think it even worse than that:-

    "Lord Nicholls says this approach is "erroneous" and remarks that "some highly experienced judges are beginning to depart from the criterion laid down by Parliament." "The conduct of Melissa Miller's spouse should not have been a factor"

    so it doesn't really matter who is in the right or wrong that was seen to be a "fair" payout :confused:

    But she "chose" to leave her job, lots of marriages end in divorce didn't she think of that, there are no children what are we going to start doing now give women money because they didn't have children (CRAZY)

    I just can't beleive this statement:-

    "was entitled to a substantial settlement because she married with "reasonable expectation" of a future wealthy lifestyle."

    WTF, so she thought she was on easy street because she landed herself a rich guy, now she finds out you don't even need the rich guy anymore she "entitled " to his money :mad: :mad:

    If I was that guy I would go down to the betting shop tomorrow and put it all on a horse just so the greedy cow couldn't get her greasy hands on.

    HEADRAT
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2006
  4. spoon_a_rama

    Associate

    Joined: May 23, 2006

    Posts: 5

    how do we know that she wasn't already fairly rich herself when they married?

    At the end of the day if his business turns over 15 million in 3 years, 5 million is no real loss to him! Some divorces end up with the wealth being split 50 50. Yes 5 million sounds a lot to us but to him I doubt it is no real hardship. I don't know what he is worth in total but I'm assuming she has got maybe a quarter? Which I think is fair.

    I don't think him cheating entitles her to money, that's not what I'm saying. My point is you can't accuse the woman of marrying him for his money when they are getting divorced due to his adultery!
     
  5. HEADRAT

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 18,073

    Location: Cambridge, UK

    Well he obviously wasn't blissfully happy or he would have gone off with somebody else, I just think £151515 a month is crazy, you can get constructive dismissal so why not constructive adultery ;)

    Also the Law Lord said that the adultery had nothing to do with the payout.

    HEADRAT
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2006
  6. spoon_a_rama

    Associate

    Joined: May 23, 2006

    Posts: 5

    I know the court said it wasn't taken into account that he cheated but was just pointing it out that he broke the marriage vows first. Just don't thing its fair she was being accused of marrying him for his money.

    And yes its a lot of money a month,, but its in proportion to his wealthy so like I said to him I doubt its that big a deal. I am sure he will still be able to buy a new ferrari for himself for xmas! :p
     
  7. Mr Joshua

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 3,945

    Last edited: May 25, 2006
  8. Garrett

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 9, 2003

    Posts: 6,352

    Location: Winchester

    Fair play to the girl.

    He married her, should have know the consequences.
     
  9. Saberu

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 25, 2003

    Posts: 3,263

    Location: Stafford (uni)

    I'm going to make sure I make a prenuptual agreement with my future wife. Courts these days seem to give the ex-wife settlement money even if they were the one doing the cheating or splitting up. I know it's the opposite in this case but just on the topic of divorce settlements in general.

    This is one of the reasons groups like Fathers 4 Justice exist because it's children and money that are both unfairly split.

    The best way to find out if there is sexism involved is to see a case where the sexes are on the opposite sides of the fence and see what the result is.
     
  10. Indy11

    Gangster

    Joined: Dec 6, 2004

    Posts: 270

    Location: New York, NY

    On the 5Million award to Mrs. Miller, she doesn't actually get cash in that amount.

    The award was to pay her 2.7Million lump sum and to pay off the 2.3Million on the mortgage to the house that was awarded to her.

    Although still a high sum for such a short marriage it doesn't seem like all that much of a strange new precedent. The couple were high fliers. Miller apparently made tons of the 17MM or so in the two and change years of their marriage ... most likely bought the house at that time as well.

    It isnot uncommon for the wife the get the house in an "at fault" divorce action against the husband. Especially if the house was bought during the marriage.
     
  11. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,109

    Location: On the hoods

    One of the marriage vows is "all that I have I share with you".

    Perhaps if people concentrated on the nuptial agreements there'd be less of this pre-nuptial cobblers going around.

    I have no sympathy for the chap involved, especially given the fact that he had an affair.
     
  12. Sem

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 4,480

    Location: London

    hire a hitman?



    no bloodsucking **** is taking all my money :mad:
     
  13. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    Absolutely disgusting.

    One of payments, fine. This whole "I COULD have earned £xK/year and you have to make up for it" is complete BS.
     
  14. <Tom>

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 24, 2005

    Posts: 73

    Just wondering what if her husband dosen't make 250,000 a year , what then ??
     
  15. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,109

    Location: On the hoods

    I'd guess his savings will easily cover it.
     
  16. wnb

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 27, 2004

    Posts: 3,810

    I would start selling up and move my cash abroad to get out of paying 250k a year.
     
  17. wsurfa

    Hitman

    Joined: Mar 16, 2004

    Posts: 519

    Location: Surrey

    the short marriage settlement is a real bunch of arse.

    The guy in question worked his butt off for years to get into the position he took just prior to the marriage, this previous work meant he was in a position to reap some fairly high rewards during the marriage.

    She had bugger all input and still gets c25% of his net worth, I would hazard that the house is worth more than the mortage so her settlement is in all probability more than £5m.
     
  18. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,109

    Location: On the hoods

    Yeah, I'm sure the courts would have absolutely no procedures in place should anyone try such a thing.
     
  19. ballistic

    PermaBanned

    Joined: May 15, 2006

    Posts: 2,278

    and run away to a different country with a new identity..
     
  20. Shootist

    Gangster

    Joined: Apr 25, 2006

    Posts: 100

    Exactly my thoughts.
    Here's another:

    Don't bother getting married, just buy someone you don't like a house"