• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Why should I pay expensive alimony?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

angelofmartyrs

Junior Member
I filed a divorce (California). I want to divorce my wife because she doesn’t seem to be in line with my objectives in life and seemed to be sabotaging my endeavors. She was fired from her job eight years ago as a new account officer in a bank. She convinced me that it is better that she just stay home and do house works. She said she was tired of working in a bank anyway. She promised to keep expenses to the minimum so I can handle all expenses with just me working. I told her that while she is not working it was a good time for her to acquire a new skill that she would wants to do. However she did not want to do anything about it. As years went by, she began to be out going. She would take the kids to school, and then she’ll go out hanging out with friends, ballroom dancing, and even going to casinos. It came to a point that her expenses was getting high. Her gasoline expense was more than my gas expense, and my work is about 20 miles away.
At this juncture, the housing industry was booming. I took the opportunity to cash out on the house’s equity and bought another house for investment. Little did I know, that the boom was about to burst. By the time the house was built, real estate market was going down. So, now have two mortgages. I found a renter, but the cash flow from the property is still negative each month.
I told my wife that I need financial help and I asked her to go back to work. Initially she refused to go back to work and argued that I can handle all the expenses. Eventually I was able to force her to go back to work, but she took a part time job, although she was offered a full time job. As matter of fact, because of her experience, and she knows people in the bank, she was offered an officer position. She declined the position. She said, she just wants a light work, and go home. She has been working for over a year, but I have not seen any penny of her salary. I am still the one covering all the expenses including the insurance on her car she purchased as soon as she got the part time job in the bank!
When she got served with the divorce, she managed to get a lawyer. Her lawyer called me and told me that according to her calculation, I will be paying an alimony of 1,730 monthly because my income is significantly higher than her income. I earn six figures. I told the lawyer that I do not agree with that, and if I have to go to court, I will go even without a lawyer.
I have a record of all the expenses in the house using a computer software which I’ve been doing for many years to track down expenses. I also do my banking online and the bank can match the transactions in the software. My expense report reveals that I am negative each month. I’ve been drawing from the savings account to cover the expenses. The savings account is getting depleted. If the court awards her an alimony of 1,730, that will be an additional major expense for me and I am already negative as it is.
My question is: if I bring an expense report to court, proving to the judge that I will not be able to afford such alimony, do you think the judge will consider that? In addition, I will tell the judge that my wife is capable of working full time and taking a higher salary position because she has a college degree in “Banking and Finance” and she has 20 years experience working in a bank. There is absolutely nothing that will preclude her from working full time. Will the judge listen to me?
I will greatly appreciate any response to my question.
 


acmb05

Senior Member
How long have you been married?
Don't you just love that this will be the determining factor in this mess. Never mind that the wife is lazy and just wants to leach off her ex for the rest of her life, even though she is completely capable of working.

You been married 20 years, pay her. Rediculous.:rolleyes:
 

CourtClerk

Senior Member
You been married 20 years, pay her. Rediculous.:rolleyes:
The funny part is that if the correct answer is 20 years, then the sentence will read: You've been married 20 years, pay her for a lifetime or until she remarries or cohabitates.

If they've been married and she's been unemployed for 8 years, then depending on how many more years are added to that 8, he's bordering real close on lifetime support.
 

tuffbrk

Senior Member
The funny part is that if the correct answer is 20 years, then the sentence will read: You've been married 20 years, pay her for a lifetime or until she remarries or cohabitates.
Tell me about it! And it doesn't matter what your fixed expenses are, it doesn't matter if income is trending downward - they use (in NJ) 3 yrs avg. On the other hand, they only look at where the STBX is right now!

Gotta love that the only hard and fast rules applied to alimony are based on the length of the marriage - not based on how many years the other party has not worked, etc. Ridiculous!
 

CourtClerk

Senior Member
Don't get me wrong, there are some times when I believe that long term alimony (which is the actual term CA uses I believe) are definitely warranted. We don't have all of the merits of this case before us, and all we have is the story of 1 part of this, which, when going through a divorce, you know can get VERY skewed with all of the venom running throughout this relationship.

I'm not prepared to say in this situation whether lifetime support is warranted or not, but CA law does retain jursidiction for alimony for long term marriages for virtually forever.
 

tuffbrk

Senior Member
IMHO if a person has never worked throughout a marriage, the party divorcing them should expect to support them in some fashion long term. Disparity in income that cannot be somewhat bridged in a reasonable time could also play into alimony, esp. if there are children that will be affected. That's about it though.

In the Tri-state area it is rare to find SAHM/D's anymore. I don't have one friend in my age bracket that is (or was) able to stay home with their child. For the most part, long term alimony is truly outdated except amongst the older generation (and I'm 45 yo!) whose contractual obligations were perceived differently than they are by couples who married in the late 80's and on.

I bolded the tri-state area as I've learned through this forum that many folks in rural areas still are SAHM/D's....
 

CourtClerk

Senior Member
I bolded the tri-state area as I've learned through this forum that many folks in rural areas still are SAHM/D's....
My BFF was a SAHM for many years and only went back to work because kiddo went off to school and she was bored. We're in our 30's... all of us, including her husband - and we live in a not so cheap part of Los Angeles County (CA).
 

tuffbrk

Senior Member
A SAHM for many years that is in their 30's?! Unheard of. The only folks that you see like that in my neck of the woods are either quite wealthy - or the total opposite end of the spectrum - and are using state/county benefits. I can't imagine being in my 30's without employment while my children are in school all day - well, unless I was very wealthy and could go to the gym, then the spa, lounge in the pool, shop, shop, shop! LOL! But...a trust fund baby I'm not! I'm just a hard working gal.
 
Last edited:

CourtClerk

Senior Member
A SAHM for many years that is in their 30's?! Unheard of. The only folks that you see like that in my neck of the woods are either quite wealthy - or the total opposite end of the spectrum - and are using state/county benefits. I can't imagine being in my 30's without employment while my children are in school all day - well, unless I was very wealthy and could go to the gym, then the spa, lounge in the pool, shop, shop, shop! LOL! But...a trust fund baby I'm not! I'm just a hard working gal.
She married a man who came from a very traditional background. His parents have been married for 40+ years (again, unheard of these days), and he was taught from day 1, when you take on a wife, you have the responsibility of taking care of the family. His mother NEVER worked, still doesn't work to this day and all of the children are adults.

When they married and she subsequently got pregnant, he told her the only thing he wanted her to do is take care of herself, the baby and the home. She had a difficult pregnancy, so she was home a lot anyway. She just stayed home. Wealthy? Not even close (lived on about 50K/yr.), but a hard working man who was raised the RIGHT way. No welfare, not even for a minute, but he did take 2 jobs for a minute when times got a little tough. He was INSISTANT that his wife NOT work, he could do it. She had to CONVINCE him that it was ok for her to go to work and it wasn't about him... then he called his dad because he felt like maybe he was failing. Believe me, we all know he's in a league of his own.
 

tuffbrk

Senior Member
I can only admire a man who makes his own rules, adheres to them regardless of the difficulty in doing so and maintains integrity. Your friend chose well. Altho - better she is now working in the event anything ever befalls her hubby the family unit can continue to thrive...tell her there's at least one Jersey Girl that's jealous!! LOL!
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top