Complex CA spousal support due to long separation

[BSTEPP]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

A friend of mine is going through a never-ending divorce! The parties were married on May 2, 1981 & recently agreed upon a separation date of May 1, 2000. The parties continued to live in the same home, but in separate rooms & living as separated persons for 3 years, mainly for the sake of their teenage sons. The husband moved into a separate residence in June 2003, but continued to send money to the wife while their sons lived with her. The husband moved to Southern CA from the Central Valley back at the end of 2004. The husband filed dissolution papers on August 17, 2005. The husband continued to send money each month to the wife’s until Sept. 2006, when their last son moved from the home. The wife immediately obtained an order in Dec. 2006 for temporary spousal support in the amount of $1,001/mo. There is now a status only judgment & after numerous attempts to reach a final judgment, the now ex-wife continues to delay it due to her high spousal support.

Since both parties are in pro per, with limited & unsuccessful attorney involvement for both parties, the main problem is the permanent spousal support. The ex-wife is playing an all or nothing game & despite the ex-husband even setting up a trial, she somehow got the date taken off calendar without his knowledge. The ex-wife began working in 1991 & has been working since 1995 in a federal position now making $45+/yr. The ex-husband was primarily self-employed, but relocated to Southern CA for a position paying $93k-$97k/yr, which is a substantially higher income compared to the income during marriage. Prior to the 2000 separation, the ex-wife’s income consistently increased each year while the ex-husband’s income was somewhat erratic due to a couple of failed partnerships.

It is my understanding that the permanent spousal support should be based on the 3 years’ income prior to separation in addition to considering the CA Family Code 4320. If this is the case, then the average of both parties’ incomes were very similar for the years of 1999-1997 & in 1998 the ex-wife’s income was 3.8x the ex-husband’s income. The ex-wife is demanding non-modifiable $600/mo spousal support for 6 years along with waiving interest in her retirement valued at approximately $15k at time of separation. While this would put a termination date to the support, the ex-husband’s employment as a Civil Engineer is in jeopardy due to the declining market. The $1,001/mo temporary support has been extremely hurting his financial situation & he wants to get this settled right away. With the courts allowing her to take the trial off calendar without his knowledge & enduring 6 Mandatory Settlement Conferences, without a personal appearance from the ex-wife on any of the numerous MSC & OSC, he has completely lost faith in the justice system down here. Next MSC is scheduled 11/10 & the ex-wife has finally been ordered to appear in person. Even if a trial is set again, this will still go into 2009 & continue to cost $1,001/mo. Should he agree with her constant & ever changing demands or stick it out until 2009 to let the judge set the permanent spousal support at trial? Since this is a marriage of long duration he will have to continue paying something even though he has sent her money ever month since they separated, right? What about the fact that she makes over $45k/yr, lives alone in a rented home, but still claims she doesn’t have enough money to meet her basic needs or maintain the marital standard of living?

[Ohiogal]

When was the last year they filed taxes together, married filing jointly?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by BSTEPP

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

A friend of mine is going through a never-ending divorce! The parties were married on May 2, 1981 & recently agreed upon a separation date of May 1, 2000. The parties continued to live in the same home, but in separate rooms & living as separated persons for 3 years, mainly for the sake of their teenage sons. The husband moved into a separate residence in June 2003, but continued to send money to the wife while their sons lived with her. The husband moved to Southern CA from the Central Valley back at the end of 2004. The husband filed dissolution papers on August 17, 2005. The husband continued to send money each month to the wife’s until Sept. 2006, when their last son moved from the home. The wife immediately obtained an order in Dec. 2006 for temporary spousal support in the amount of $1,001/mo. There is now a status only judgment & after numerous attempts to reach a final judgment, the now ex-wife continues to delay it due to her high spousal support.

Since both parties are in pro per, with limited & unsuccessful attorney involvement for both parties, the main problem is the permanent spousal support. The ex-wife is playing an all or nothing game & despite the ex-husband even setting up a trial, she somehow got the date taken off calendar without his knowledge. The ex-wife began working in 1991 & has been working since 1995 in a federal position now making $45+/yr. The ex-husband was primarily self-employed, but relocated to Southern CA for a position paying $93k-$97k/yr, which is a substantially higher income compared to the income during marriage. Prior to the 2000 separation, the ex-wife’s income consistently increased each year while the ex-husband’s income was somewhat erratic due to a couple of failed partnerships.

It is my understanding that the permanent spousal support should be based on the 3 years’ income prior to separation in addition to considering the CA Family Code 4320. If this is the case, then the average of both parties’ incomes were very similar for the years of 1999-1997 & in 1998 the ex-wife’s income was 3.8x the ex-husband’s income. The ex-wife is demanding non-modifiable $600/mo spousal support for 6 years along with waiving interest in her retirement valued at approximately $15k at time of separation. While this would put a termination date to the support, the ex-husband’s employment as a Civil Engineer is in jeopardy due to the declining market. The $1,001/mo temporary support has been extremely hurting his financial situation & he wants to get this settled right away. With the courts allowing her to take the trial off calendar without his knowledge & enduring 6 Mandatory Settlement Conferences, without a personal appearance from the ex-wife on any of the numerous MSC & OSC, he has completely lost faith in the justice system down here. Next MSC is scheduled 11/10 & the ex-wife has finally been ordered to appear in person. Even if a trial is set again, this will still go into 2009 & continue to cost $1,001/mo. Should he agree with her constant & ever changing demands or stick it out until 2009 to let the judge set the permanent spousal support at trial? Since this is a marriage of long duration he will have to continue paying something even though he has sent her money ever month since they separated, right? What about the fact that she makes over $45k/yr, lives alone in a rented home, but still claims she doesn’t have enough money to meet her basic needs or maintain the marital standard of living?

1. The fact that they were living in the same home until June, 2003, indicates that while they may agree that they were separated, the living expenses were not.

2. If he is currently making 93-97k per year, (7750.00 - 8083.00 per month) and 1001.00 in spousal support is breaking him, then he needs to consider downsizing no matter how much spousal support he ends up paying.

3. The fact that he has been providing her money all along backs up the notion that she needed his financial help to manage. While 45k in my state should be enough for a single person to live on, I kind of doubt that 45k would stretch as far in CA.

He really needs to get a consult with a local attorney. Even if he doesn't hire one, I would recommend consulting with one who regularly practices in the courtroom of the judge that will be hearing the case. That would give him the best idea of what that judge might be likely to order.

[BSTEPP]

Originally Posted by Ohiogal

When was the last year they filed taxes together, married filing jointly?

2001. This is also the year he opened a new partnership & he has a paper with her signature on it. Now that the failed business was taken over by another company, she claims she had no knowledge of the severe tax & other debts of the business closed with. She had nothing to do with the business but of course if there was money upon the take over of the company then she would be the first with her hand out.

[BSTEPP]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

1. The fact that they were living in the same home until June, 2003, indicates that while they may agree that they were separated, the living expenses were not.

2. If he is currently making 93-97k per year, (7750.00 - 8083.00 per month) and 1001.00 in spousal support is breaking him, then he needs to consider downsizing no matter how much spousal support he ends up paying.

3. The fact that he has been providing her money all along backs up the notion that she needed his financial help to manage. While 45k in my state should be enough for a single person to live on, I kind of doubt that 45k would stretch as far in CA.

He really needs to get a consult with a local attorney. Even if he doesn't hire one, I would recommend consulting with one who regularly practices in the courtroom of the judge that will be hearing the case. That would give him the best idea of what that judge might be likely to order.

1) So the date of separation should be June 2003 then? This date had been first mentioned, but both parties agreed to the date that they did begin living in separate rooms & ceased marital relations. She mainly agreed to the 2000 date to try to get out of the huge financial obligations originating from his failed partnership that opened in 2001.

2) He did downsize his rented home almost year ago & this lowered his rent by about $500/mo. Of course you can’t rent anything decent in Southern CA for less than $2k/mo unless it's a mobile home. He also has another wage garnishment for past due marital federal taxes that takes out a couple of hundred per pay period. He barely has enough money left over to meet his basic expenses & definitely living paycheck to paycheck (which I know is the situation with most people these days).

3) That is similar to what I told him too. He sort of screwed himself for trying to be a nice guy. I think when he was sending her money each month, prior to the court order, was when 2 of their sons lived with her. He considered it more like family support. She now lives alone in a 3 bedroom home & often takes weekend or extended trips that seems to be at his expense. It is apparent that she is living outside her means, but refuses to downsize or even find a place that is more suitable for a single person.

He has consulted with 3 attorneys, with myself present at each meeting because I'm the one trying to help him out with the paperwork. The 2nd attorney tried to mediate the case into a settlement, but after numerous phone calls finally said she couldn't deal with his ex-wife any longer & that she had to bow out of the case she was put on full retainer. The ex-wife's own consulting attorney dropped her due to her continuing uncooperative behavior. The 3rd attorney wanted $10-$15k to finish up the case, even though the case is nearly done. Of course, he can't afford that in this current situation. This case has been heard before multiple judges in Riverside County, even though it was assigned to 1 particular judge that was extremely fair the 2 times this case was in front of him. This is why he was looking forward to the trial that should have taken place back in July, but she was able to have it taken off calendar & delay it even longer. He’s just wondering if he should go ahead & agree with what she wants, which is not even close to being equitable & has changed several times. Taking his chance in front of the judge is what I think he should do, but that is mainly if the assigned judge hears the case again. A couple of the judges down here have not been fair & paperwork seems to fall through the cracks in this county.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

1. The fact that they were living in the same home until June, 2003, indicates that while they may agree that they were separated, the living expenses were not.

2. If he is currently making 93-97k per year, (7750.00 - 8083.00 per month) and 1001.00 in spousal support is breaking him, then he needs to consider downsizing no matter how much spousal support he ends up paying.

3. The fact that he has been providing her money all along backs up the notion that she needed his financial help to manage. While 45k in my state should be enough for a single person to live on, I kind of doubt that 45k would stretch as far in CA.

He really needs to get a consult with a local attorney. Even if he doesn't hire one, I would recommend consulting with one who regularly practices in the courtroom of the judge that will be hearing the case. That would give him the best idea of what that judge might be likely to order.

I don't disagree with that, but I don't like it either! It indicates that one judge could rule one way and another judge could rule 180 degees opposite, and, BOTH decisions would be considered FAIR?? What is needed is GUIDELINES that steer judges decisions to make them uniformly applied!

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by BSTEPP

2) He did downsize his rented home almost year ago & this lowered his rent by about $500/mo. Of course you can’t rent anything decent in Southern CA for less than $2k/mo unless it's a mobile home.

Ahhh, so he HASN'T downsized. One can get a nice 1-BR apartment for around $1,000/month or less, depending on the area.

[BSTEPP]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

I don't disagree with that, but I don't like it either! It indicates that one judge could rule one way and another judge could rule 180 degees opposite, and, BOTH decisions would be considered FAIR?? What is needed is GUIDELINES that steer judges decisions to make them uniformly applied!

I completely agree about the needed Guidelines for judges. For example...last time he went to court a retired female judge from another county was called in ti hear the cases. One Mexican couple had just received their final judgment & the now ex-wife began crying stating, with the use of an interpretor, that she didn't know she was divorced. This judge actually OVERTURNED their final judgment!!! The man was understandably upset & this decision seems far from being fair.

[BSTEPP]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Ahhh, so he HASN'T downsized. One can get a nice 1-BR apartment for around $1,000/month or less, depending on the area.

Yes, he has downsized. A 1-br apartment is nowhere close to the established marital standard of living. The ex-wife would never agree to move into a 1-br apartment & she is the only person living in her 3-br house. If he did move into a 1-br apartment then she would just go back to court for higher spousal support because of his ability to pay $1,000 more per month. Is it fair for 1 party to drastically downsize & the other not? She is already claiming her standard of living is diminished & still thinks she’s entitled to the same lifestyle even though they are trying to finalize this divorce. With the spousal support, her income per month is almost $5k. Her net pay could be a lot higher but she is putting away the maximum into a retirement account & some other account while he doesn’t have the ability to put anything into a retirement account. I don’t think that post-divorced standard of living is equal to marital standard of living due to the diminished household income, but she continues to think that it should be equal. There has to be some sort of fair compromise.

I don’t think I mentioned earlier that he gave her everything when he finally moved from the home. He was even willing to sign off rights to all of her Federal retirement account. She has had a good paying job for over half the duration of the marriage, & a couple of years her reported income was higher than his. Of course, you know that temporary spousal support is based on current income, which his is twice as high as before. During the last 5-years of marriage, their average incomes only varied by a couple of hundred per year. Now she is pushing for high spousal support based on his ability to pay a higher amount due to his current employment. He received his education as a Civil Engineer before marriage, so she didn’t contribute to his education, & the construction industry has severely declined lately. He doesn’t even know if he will still have his job by the end of this year & has no savings to help out if he does lose his job.