TAS Money & marriage

[Atticus]

First of all, the 'quote' above that you attributed to me is not anything I wrote...
Secondly, couples pooling all their income into an offset account to reduce interest is most definitely common practice.

No mortgage manager is going to insist a person MUST put their income in an offset account. To repeat, if she doesn't want to then nobody's going to force her.

 

[lostinspace]

ok. my 02c

1 You should stay out of any couples business generally
2 You say this person not only lives there, but pays no bills etc ! perhaps he is mad for getting back together, seems like a freeloader.
3 I had a similar situation, OH as you say, did not want to contribute financially, always thought somehow was ripped off, never paid a single bill on any home or mortgage, I am really happy she has gone, as most couples share the load, it is not a mans purpose to be an atm or financial slave for any OH.
4 Without knowing all the details, which none of us & even you will not know (as people conveniently leave out what they want), there is no way to see if it is 100% fair, but from your writing, it seems so, also you say they already split before and they split the proceeds in a way that outwardly seems reasonable.
5 If OH was someone who came to me, the only general advice I would give, would be to cut ties with anybody who is un co operative and resists contributing properly,from my perspective they have issues that will raise again in near future (and seems already there is issues) and they will go through all that drama again, the writing is on the wall, so to speak, if what you say is correct.


It is very normal to work together financially, in fact any couple where one is acting as a single person, I would say the one contributing more should take heed of this kind of warning bell, because I would dare say they are being taken advantage of when 1 person will not contribute.

Also, I will say this, many people are financial dummies, and I see nothing wrong with following a partners requests if they are the financial brains and offering a path to security for the couple, this is not based on sex.

 

[Tim W]

Also, I will say this, many people are financial dummies, and I see nothing wrong with following a partners requests if they are the financial brains and offering a path to security for the couple, this is not based on sex.

You being ignorant does not make another person wise.
For someone to accept what some else thinks (or, just wants)
because they are themselves too ill-informed to know,
even when you actually know that they are ignorant,
well, that's a pretty high risk way to live.

 

[lostinspace]

True that....

If OH knows they have a dummy, cut them loose is my suggestion.

If OH has a person who thinks contributing is optional or objectionable, cut them loose.

Or, assist them to find independant finacial advice, and be prepared for what seems inevidable perhaps down the road.

Now, in saying all that , I am willingly ignorant, as it may work out well too 😁

 

[resea]

Under the Family Law Act 1975, a person has a responsibility to financially assist their spouse, or former de facto partner, if that person cannot meet their own reasonable expenses from their personal income or assets.

 

[Atticus]

Under the Family Law Act 1975, a person has a responsibility to financially assist their spouse, or former de facto partner, if that person cannot meet their own reasonable expenses from their personal income or assets

It's not that simple ... First of all, that's only a small part of the relevant section of the act (see Below) .... Secondly the couple that are the subject of this thread are no longer separated according to you.

So what is the reasoning behind raising spousal maintenance in the context of this thread?

FAMILY LAW ACT 1975 - SECT 72​

Right of spouse to maintenance
(1) A party to a marriage is liable to maintain the other party, to the extent that the first - mentioned party is reasonably able to do so, if, and only if, that other party is unable to support herself or himself adequately whether:

(a) by reason of having the care and control of a child of the marriage who has not attained the age of 18 years;

(b) by reason of age or physical or mental incapacity for appropriate gainful employment; or

(c) for any other adequate reason;

having regard to any relevant matter referred to in subsection 75(2).

(2) The liability under subsection (1) of a bankrupt party to a marriage to maintain the other party may be satisfied, in whole or in part, by way of the transfer of vested bankruptcy property in relation to the bankrupt party if the court makes an order under this Part for the transfer.

 

[lostinspace]

It's not that simple ... First of all, that's only a small part of the relevant section of the act (see Below) .... Secondly the couple that are the subject of this thread are no longer separated according to you.

So what is the reasoning behind raising spousal maintenance in the context of this thread?

The reason is, I would wager, all the things I have pointed out.

This person thinks they are single and do not need to contribute and are actually looking to put their hand out. The poor sod who is stuck with someone in this headspace is probably in for a rough time, and likely it is yet again

 

[Atticus]

Under the Family Law Act 1975, a person has a responsibility to financially assist their spouse, or former de facto partner, if that person cannot meet their own reasonable expenses from their personal income or assets.

The reason is, I would wager, all the things I have pointed out.

Just sounds like the kind of half cocked one liners that gets tossed around mums groups & taken as fact. 🙄

 

[lostinspace]

I found it unbelievable (not funny at all if your involved) in how much the "girls" in my case, would share all sorts of nonsense which influences some people, who then go on to make blunder after blunder, which is fine, except the other party is dragged through the mud as they are stuck till it finishes.

The system really does have many flaws. And it seems this angle is often tried, party one decides to split thinking they will get a bunch of things, and also expects that the other party will have to fund this venture, like it is some sort of obligation. It makes me laugh, many people want to be independent, except when it comes to paying for stuff and being a responsible and productive adult.

 

[resea]

In this case wife left due to violence. Was unable to get housing so had to move back in. Is physically and mentally affected by this violence but cannot leave without risk of homelessness.