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. loxwood


    Joined: Jan 16, 2004

    Posts: 79

    Location: london

    Without making comment on amounts awarded (I don't know enough about either case) I don't think anyone has mentioned that Melissa Miller had a miscarriage before her husband left her for another woman. Probably quite distressing to then find your fellow bonking someone else.


    I don't know about these awards though. My dad got completely fleeced by his second wife and it really did look like she married him purely to get cash after eight years (she did very well for her efforts). Everything stacked up that way. But I guess things are easy to see from a biased view...when I mentioned it to a friend they pointed out to me she spent eight years with him and I'm sure it wasn't enough money to spend that long getting it. And after all, it's only money - my dad's ten times happier since!
  2. NickK


    Joined: Jan 13, 2003

    Posts: 18,336

    I'm waiting for the first house husband to completely fleece the woman.
  3. Shootist


    Joined: Apr 25, 2006

    Posts: 100

    Yeah, like that's ever gonna happen. I'm all for equality but I doubt if the courts would ever be in favour of men. Even a female divorce lawyer thought the judgements were wrong. I'm just glad I got divorced 12 years ago. I got 25% of the value of the house when it was sold, got to keep my pension and I can now do what I like, whenever I like to and no one nagging me for attention. Just let me have my car, my beer, my electronic gadgets and a good fart in bed when I want.
    I see my kids when I want and they stay over frequently.

    Long live singularity.

    An acquaintance of mine is on his third marriage and he lost the first two houses in the previous two divorce settlements. Third time lucky, don't make me laugh.
  4. i know nothing


    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,271

    Location: Socialist Hell

    I couldn't agree more, especially with the woman that landed the 250k per year for life. You would have expected the Judge to have entered some caveat that should she re-marry or co-habit then she would forego any future payments.

    It just makes (some) women look as if they are incapable of existing without a man's money, I'm surprised all the women that are supporting this judgement don't take a step back and realise how it reflects on women in general.
  5. Van_Dammesque

    Wise Guy

    Joined: May 4, 2004

    Posts: 2,196

    Location: NE England

    An absolute disgrace vastly unfair distribution of wealth (earned mostly by him).
    I would like to know what cuckoo land the judge is in; just from this soundbite. How has the woman, by not going to work increased his earning power, surely that is his ability at work!?

    Who forced her to stop her career? Who forced her not to go back to work? In fact based on that she should get nothing if she hasn't contributed to the couples wealth! She has enjoyed a work free (and in style) 15 years (ish) sitting on her backside on then gets a load of money for the privledge!

    It is one of the unaltered laws concerning sexual dicrimination against men. The future for me to avoid all of this crap (trying to avoid swearing ;) ) is having both parties produce their accounts before marriage, then in a case of divorce, produce wage slips whilst married and their accounts after. This way the parties can split the money according to who had what before and what was earned during the interim, in otherwords if a gold digging - female dog wants to sit on her backside then afterwards she gets nothing.