• 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.

Ex threatens to stop alimony payment.

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

pbearius

Junior Member
What is the name of your state? OR. Ex in CA.
My ex is threatening to stop paying alimony in June when he is obligated to pay for another 3 1/2 years. He has a good job and is financially helped by his family. Our daughter 20+yrs lives with me and helps with rent. For health reasons I haven't been able to get a job. I had inheritance money to help me. Can he arbitrarily stop like this legally? I cannot afford legal help. Thanks for any advice you can give.
 


LdiJ

Senior Member
pbearius said:
What is the name of your state? OR. Ex in CA.
My ex is threatening to stop paying alimony in June when he is obligated to pay for another 3 1/2 years. He has a good job and is financially helped by his family. Our daughter 20+yrs lives with me and helps with rent. For health reasons I haven't been able to get a job. I had inheritance money to help me. Can he arbitrarily stop like this legally? I cannot afford legal help. Thanks for any advice you can give.
Send him a certified letter telling him that if he stops the alimony before the court ordered date, that you will take him to court for contempt and that you will ask the judge to order him to pay your legal fees. Suggest that he consult with an attorney before making any mistakes.
 

pbearius

Junior Member
Thanks for your advice...the problem is....

Thanks for your advice...the problem is....he is theatening not to pay saying that I should be working. My health, diabetes and other deep health concerns prevent me from working. Is this a factor in stopping alimony? He said he would "moderate" payments. His moderation is to stop payments.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
pbearius said:
Thanks for your advice...the problem is....he is theatening not to pay saying that I should be working. My health, diabetes and other deep health concerns prevent me from working. Is this a factor in stopping alimony? He said he would "moderate" payments. His moderation is to stop payments.
If the alimony was ordered for a specific number of years then I highly doubt that whether or not you are working has any relevance at all as to whether he has to continue to pay alimony. Again...my advice doesn't change....do what I suggested.
 

pbearius

Junior Member
Here is his response:
Any thoughts on these issues?


> I have read the marital settlement agreement, the
> dissolution judgment, your earlier emails and have
> spoken with an attorney.
>
> I think several things need to be looked at to make
> the situation "fair". Here are some points to think
> about:
>
> 1. I think it was unfair for me to have to pay you
> 50% of my income when you had inherited $350,000 even
> before we signed the agreement. That was a big
> mistake on my part.
>
> 2. Since the agreement went into effect I have paid
> you $111,000. Though a few payments have been
> delayed, I have not missed any.
>
> 3. Paying you $1,500 per month is making it
> difficult for me to make ends meet without using
> savings most of the time. Eventually I will not have
> enough money in reserve for my own needs and will not
> be able to replenish my savings.
>
> 4. If you get a job you can earn more than you are
> receiving from me:
>
> $1500 - 33% = $1,005. This is what you told me you
> are receiving after taxes from my alimony payment to
> you.
>
> $13.00 x 8 hours x 5 days = $520.00
> $520 x 52 weeks = $27,040
> $27,040 - 33% = $18,116
> $18,116 / 12 = $1,509.
>
> After you left with your inheritance, I suggested on
> many occasions that you put your money in the bank and
> get a job. You have chosen not to get a job for the
> past six years. I don't think I should have to pay
> for that.
>
> 5. I am familiar with the language of the Marital
> Settlement Agreement. But perhaps you missed the
> paragraph in the Judgment that says:
>
> "m. NOTICE: It is the goal of this state that each
> party shall make reasonable good faith efforts to
> become self-supporting as provided for in Family Code
> section 4320. The failure to make reasonable good
> faith efforts may be one of the factors considered by
> the court as a basis for modifying or terminating
> spousal support."
>
> 6. You said in a recent email that the attorney you
> spoke with said your inheritance would make you to be
> considered to be self-supporting in spite of the fact
> that you have not worked. If you're self-supporting,
> why do I have to continue to pay you?
>
> 7. California law is controlling of the agreement
> and the marriage dissolution. If we were to have to
> go to court, you would be required to appear in Santa
> Maria for hearings. An Oregon attorney cannot appear
> in a California court. It is in our best interests to
> come to an agreement on our own.
>
> 8. I would like to have use of the money that I earn
> and money that I receive from my dad, which is now
> considered to be pre-payment of my inheritance from
> him. By paying it to you, it will leave me at a
> deficit in the future, a deficit that you have not had
> to deal with regarding your inheritance. I think that
> is unfair to me also.
>
> I think my original suggestion of paying the full
> amount through the June 2005 payment and ending it
> there is fair. However, another possibility is
> reduction over time. Here is one scenario: full
> payment through June 2005; reducing the payment to
> $750 for the next 12 months (until June 2006); then
> ending it. That would give you a total from me of
> $15,000: four $1,500 payments ($6,000) and twelve $750
> payments ($9,000). You would certainly be able to
> find employment that would be able to supply the
> amount of money I am now paying to you.
>
> Let me know your thoughts.
>
 

rmet4nzkx

Senior Member
The court makes changes, not your ex.
You can appear by telephone from Oregon and/or have your attorney licensed in CA apprear for you.
Your inheiretence is separate income as is his.
Fairness has nothing to do with this.
People with diabetes work everyday, unless you are on SSDI you may have difficulty in time using diabetes as an excuse.
If he stops the payments without court order, he can be held in contempt and may be ordered to pay your legal costs.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
rmet4nzkx said:
The court makes changes, not your ex.
You can appear by telephone from Oregon and/or have your attorney licensed in CA apprear for you.
Your inheiretence is separate income as is his.
Fairness has nothing to do with this.
People with diabetes work everyday, unless you are on SSDI you may have difficulty in time using diabetes as an excuse.
If he stops the payments without court order, he can be held in contempt and may be ordered to pay your legal costs.
Not everyone who has diabetes can work...it can be a particular problem if it came on later in life...I have a family member in that situation and he honestly CANNOT work...his doctor won't allow it. It also sounds like diabetes is not her only health issue.

I agree with the rest, but would add that she should again inform him that if he doesn't continue to pay the alimony as court ordered that she will take him to court for contempt and will ask the judge to have him pay her legal fees. If he really thought he had a winning case, he wouldn't be negotiating with her, he would have just done that.
 

rmet4nzkx

Senior Member
LdiJ said:
Not everyone who has diabetes can work...it can be a particular problem if it came on later in life...I have a family member in that situation and he honestly CANNOT work...his doctor won't allow it. It also sounds like diabetes is not her only health issue.

I agree with the rest, but would add that she should again inform him that if he doesn't continue to pay the alimony as court ordered that she will take him to court for contempt and will ask the judge to have him pay her legal fees. If he really thought he had a winning case, he wouldn't be negotiating with her, he would have just done that.
Laura,
I am not the one who uses absolutes, your are!

I qualified my statement, "People with diabetes work everyday, unless you are on SSDI you may have difficulty in time using diabetes as an excuse." That is a true statement, your friend being disabled by type II Diabetes is not relevant to OP California divorce. You however insist on putting words into my mouth even when you quote me! Please stop doing that! OP has said nothing further re their diabetes that would suggest that it is so sever and life limiting that they would not be able to work, but because of a sizable inheitence, replaces what would be considered earned income, was awarded spousal support and thus doesn't have to work. I know of cases in California where the disabled party who couldn't work, was physically and financially abused, not only did not receive spousal support after 28 years of marriage but also had to pay all legal costs. PLEASE stop using absolutes or attributing them to me. :mad:
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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