Living with My ex-Husband, Once a Year

Photo by Asad Photo Maldives on Pexels.com

Q:        My friend has a timeshare with her husband 14 days every 2 years. They are filing for a divorce. They’ve separated and he lives with his new girl in a different state now. My friend made reservations for 6 days at their timeshare and asked me & my man if we would like to go with her. Between the 3 of us we agreed that since she has the timeshare that we will pay for the rental car, food, & round trip airline tickets. It’s all set and we’ve taken off work for the vacation and everything.  When her husband heard we were going to use the timeshare with his wife he flipped. Now he is harassing his wife almost every day by email. He says he will cancel our reservations unless we pay the going rate to rent this timeshare for 6 days.  But his wife is the one that invited us as guests.
My concern is can he do this? What are her legal rights as 1/2 Owner of Timeshare? Can she go to jail for doing this? I’m sorry but I didn’t see any wrong doing here. We thought we were doing the right thing by purchasing everything else to help out and this way we all can have a nice vacation. Well not if her husband has any say in this. Help PLEASE!

Signed,

Ready to hit the Beach!

Dear Ready,

Until the court officially divides the property of the parties, it is still owned jointly by both of them. The problem is that your friend acted without the permission of the co-owner of the timeshare (who happens to be her husband) and without a court order.  If anyone owes you the time or money back, unfortunately it is probably your friend and not her husband.

That said, the husband could be nice about it, or could be a jerk about it. I am sorry for you and for your friend that he is not choosing to be nice about the timeshare.  I suspect it will be one of many petty disputes between the two of them.  My best suggestion to you personally is to stay as far out of it as possible.

If you all have time and money set aside for a vacation, take it anyway – just don’t go to the disputed timeshare!  There are websites where people let you rent out their timeshares for below cost.  Do a little more research and you will all still get to have a fun vacation together, leaving the angry ex behind!

What We Love: As bad as this woman’s situation might be, she is lucky enough to have friends who want to go on vacation with her.   Divorce can be hard; a relaxing trip with good friends is always a great idea!

Divorce Equals Division

Photo by Kaboompics .com on Pexels.com

Did you ever notice how the words “Divorce” and “divide” both start with the same three letters, the same root?  Divorce can be seen as a time to “divvy-up” assets, debts, photo albums, relatives, and even friends.  You can almost picture a black jack dealer with a green eye-shade laying the “alternate weekends” card in front of dad, and the “pool club membership” in front of mom.

That’s really not the tricky part.  Taking what you want, or need, and leaving the rest where it is – well, that’s something most of us learned (or should have learned) in kindergarten.  If two adults can’t do the dividing themselves, the judge will step in and divide it up for them.  Usually it is just a matter of simple math.  The house has $300,000 in equity. If we sell it, each party can have $150,000 to go buy a condo and start again.  Easy math. Predictable outcome.

But, what if the house is worth more to the parties than the $300,000 in equity? What if giving up my right to $150,000 is nothing compared to my need to stay next door to my neighbors who have protected me during this awful ten year marriage, for example?  How would you go about quantifying that for a judge?

Or, what if there are two drivers and three vehicles? What if one is the jalopy we keep in the garage in the hopes that enough tinkering will someday bring it back to life as a classic?  It might only be worth $75 to a judge’s balance sheet; but it might be worth thousands to the people who saw it as an investment in their someday retirement.  While a judge could arbitrarily assign it to one party or the other, allocating a $75 dollar offset somewhere else; the owners might want to see it through to completion before relegating it to a junk heap.

The division of divorce is simplistic. It is the multiplication which can be elegant, and beautiful.  Instead of seeing each asset and person as a dividend to be chopped into smaller equal shares; consider looking at them as opportunities to multiply.

Here are some quick examples.  Two parents have a marital residence and a time share vacation home.  Even if they decide to sell the marital residence, they don’t have to give up the vacation time share.  It might be transferred to the children.  In the case of minor children, the transfer would be in name only. In the case of adult children it could be an acceptable conveyance by the terms of the management company. The children get a week at the time share and mom visits them there for the first half of the week and dad shows up for the second half. The kids go from vacations with two unhappy parents; to separate vacations with one happier parent. A larger, not smaller, outcome.

People who are worried that the friends will choose one spouse or the other can use the same multiplier logic by demonstrating in advance that they will be comfortable in each other’s presence.  No one needs to choose sides. No one has to pick which spouse to invite to a dinner party, if the dinner party will go just as smoothly with both people there.  Even better, showing that you will accept each other’s new boyfriend, girlfriend, husband, wife, will go a lot further towards helping your friends keep all of their invitations wide open.  Now you have gone from keeping half of your friends, to keeping all of your friends, and the new people as they come into your lives. Multiplied.

The family boat does not have to be sold if the parties can agree to sharing the use and costs of maintaining it. In fact, not only do you get to keep using your boat (on alternate weekends, maybe) but now you are only responsible for one-half of the upkeep.  So, you have multiplied the part that you like, while dividing the burden.  A better outcome, all around.

Of course, no judge would order a couple to share custody of a boat. That can only come from people who are willing and able to work together.  Trained mediators, professionals who practice collaborative divorce, and even marriage therapists can sometimes help identify opportunities to multiply instead of divide.

WHAT WE LOVE: There is almost always another way of seeing what is directly in front of you.  You just have to be willing to look for it.

Who Do These Agreements Benefit?

I have clients who are in a hurry to finalize their divorce agreement, even though the date of their hearing is months away.  I also have clients who are avoiding me rather than have to commit anything to paper yet.  I have clients who want to know the details of the spouse’s financial picture before completing their own financial affidavit, and others who bring me everything I request promptly, clearly, and in a completely organized fashion.

You might want to guess that the people who are most compliant are doing so because they are the ones with the most to gain financially. It might seem obvious that my stragglers, or my suspicious clients, are the ones who are likely to get raked by the end of this.

Ironically, if anything, it is usually the opposite case.  I have a man right now paying his wife about twice as much as he should be paying her while the divorce is pending. He does not want to be paying her anything, but when I ask him to sit down with me to sort out the financial picture he gets agitated and hangs up the phone.  Then he sends her another check, because he does not know what else to do.

A client’s level of cooperation is more typically a reflection of who they are than what they want.  People who have spent their lives balancing their check books, watching the interest rates on their credit cards, and checking their credit scores are people who want to know their financial picture.  It might be that they are going to be worse off at the end of the divorce than they are now, but if they can be told, for example, “you will be living on $500 a week until you get a better job,” then they know how to start planning.  It might not be what they want to hear; but at least they know what they are up against.

It is similar to the feeling of relief when the doctor diagnoses your mysterious pain.  Once you find out that the sharp pain behind your eye is a sinus infection, you can stop worrying that it might be a brain tumor.

On the other hand, there are those who find a mysterious lump while taking a routine shower, and become too terrified to go to the doctor.  “What if it is cancer?” they ask, and decide they do not want to know.  They would rather live with a fear than risk learning the truth.  They can themselves that the fear is just hypochondria.  Once they have a diagnosis, though, that safety net disappears.  Too often we hear stories of people who ignored a lump – hoping it would go away, hoping they were just over-reacting – to their own detriment.

The ostriches of the legal world are not much different than the ostriches of the medical world.  My clients are afraid that once we all get a clear picture of their financial situation that things are going to get worse quickly.  Maybe they think of a divorce decree as similar to a terminal diagnosis.  Instead of fearing the sentence, “it is inoperable,” they fear the sentence, “all of your earnings, for the rest of your life.”

So, although an agreement might ultimately benefit the payor spouse, that is not who is always the most cooperative. And even if the ultimate agreement will set the payee spouse in a comfortable situation, that is not always the one in a hurry to settle.

Who is most likely to get it done quickly and cleanly?  The person who wants to finish the divorce and start a new life.

WHAT WE LOVE:   The diagnosis is usually much less severe than what your imagination creates.

It’s Called EnFORCEment for a Reason

Photo by Designecologist on Pexels.com

Enforcement means forcing someone to do something they do not want to do.  Just because a judge rules that your ex-wife has to treat you with respect in front of the kids, doesn’t mean she is going to do it.  A judge who orders alimony payments does not show up at the husband’s house and take money out of his wallet.  Although, it would be pretty awesome if she did!

There are state agencies in place that will help enforce child support orders, because the 1970s era “deadbeat dads” impacted more than just the kids who were not getting child support; they arguably affected our entire economy. Kids who do not have enough money for food and clothes are not good students, tend to drop out, have fewer marketable skills, and may become drains on society whether it is through under-employment, unemployment, or crime.  It is in the state’s best interest to make sure that child support gets enforced.

But what about all of those other orders judges make in divorce cases?  The state does not have a direct interest in every case.  If a husband is ordered to pay a percentage of his annual bonus, or make timely alimony payments, or kick in for half of the doctor’s bills, and doesn’t.  Then what?

If a Mother is supposed to deliver the kids dressed and fed in time for church every Sunday morning, but always manages to blow it, one way or another (a ripped dress; a sandwich in hand, fifteen minutes late for a 30 minute Mass) whose job is it to straighten her out?

Unfortunately, this job falls to the one person in the whole world who is proven to be the absolute least qualified to bring out positive behavior from the forgetful or offending spouse – the ex-spouse.  Crazy, right?  But, true. Want your child support payments on time? Go to the professionals. Want your child’s face washed before a big event? You are on your own.  

There are, of course, some avenues of recourse through the court system.  You can ask the Judge to find your ex spouse in contempt for failure to follow the court’s orders or the Separation Agreement.  But, it is difficult to rise to the level of contempt that a judge will notice.  If alimony is always late, sometimes by a week, and sometimes by only a day or two; a judge is not likely to get involved.  If the visitation schedule is respected; but the kids just aren’t dressed nicely, a judge will not want to hear it.

These are the situations in which you and your ex-spouse really have no choice but to find a partnership.  You can try enforcing by being tough, as in, “Late alimony from you means no weekly bonus phone call from the kids,” if that is what works.  Or you can try being generous, “I bought Suzy a new dress, and here is a gift card for you to buy yourself something as well, can she wear the new dress to church next week?”

If nothing works, maybe you just need to adjust your expectations, and limit your own disappointment.  Maybe a matter which would not rise to the level of court intervention should not be something you care about, either.  If alimony gets paid every month; just late – then know that it comes late and don’t look for it on the first of the month.  If punctuality is your hang-up, always offer to be the one who picks up the kids, instead of waiting for them to be delivered to you.

The divorce isn’t truly final until all of the court orders and rulings are complete.  How you live in your divorce world depends in large part on how you choose to live in it.

What we Love:  Enforcement is an opportunity for re-thinking the dynamic between you and the person to whom you are no longer married.

Bad Start Turns Happy Ending

Photo by Elle Hughes on Pexels.com
https://www.pexels.com/@elletakesphotos

A Former Client called today.

 

Her ex-husband, from whom I divorced her about 10 years ago, passed away.  Frankly, he lived a lot longer than I would have guessed.  While we were going through the divorce process, I never expected him to make it to the next meeting or court date.

 

The poor man had a serious alcohol and drug problem.  Not the glamorous Phillip Seymour Hoffman, millionaire by day/junkie by night kind of problem.  He had a 1920s hobo kind of problem.  He came to court with the tops of his shirt collar frayed and holes in the bottoms of his shoes.  He looked 25 years older than his age, and was not above drinking absolutely anything that might produce a buzz.  I believe he sniffed gasoline and glue when he could not access alcohol.

 

Sadly, he almost never had a problem accessing alcohol.  While they were married, in a gesture of goodwill, his wife helped him purchase a bar.  It was the local dive where he spent most nights drinking, and they were able to get it for a good price.  She thought that they could make a go of it, since he was always there, anyway.  She would cook food and manage the finances; he would manage the bar.

 

In retrospect and from a distance it is easy to see this as a bad idea.  Do not give your diabetic uncle a bakery, either.

 

It turned out to be an even worse idea than you might have thought.  They lost everything – the bar, their house, their credit, their life savings, their relationship, and ultimately, his liver.  The divorce was short and painful.  He promised to look for work, she promised to keep their kids functioning.  They have stayed in touch all along, and she made sure that the kids always visited him when he was in a position to see them.

 

This is the part of the telephone conversation that made me smile.  It turns out, she followed the best piece of advice I ever gave her.  I told her to keep a life insurance policy on him.  She told me today there were months when she had to decide between the $50 premium payment and using that money for groceries, but she always followed my advice, and maintained that policy.  She said she heard my voice in the back of her head, saying, “He cannot help you while he is alive.  Give him the dignity of helping after he is gone.”

 

So, she called today to tell me that after all of these years, and everything they have been through, her Husband is helping her pay off some debts and buy their daughter a used car.  It’s not much, but it is more than he has been able to do for them since I met him; and I honestly believe it would have made him happy to do it.

 

What We Love:  If your lawyer gives you good advice, follow it.  If it works, let your lawyer know.

 

Don’t Take Your Ex’s Word for Everything

D-College-CostsI received a call this week from “Tony,” a fictitious name for a man I represented in 1998, when he and his first wife had a 3 year old son together.  He has been a generous and involved father to his child from that marriage for the entire 15 years since his divorce. He paid child support on time and in full even when he was diagnosed with Leukemia and had to take a medical leave of absence from his job for two years. He never missed a payment. In fact, he was never even late with a payment.  He has since remarried and has an 11 year old son with his current wife.

We’ll call the first son John and the second son Jacob.  John came on every vacation with Jacob and their dad and his wife.  John has played as many sports as Jacob, he has gone to as many ball games and concerts and family picnics with their dad as Jacob has.  The dad never lost his connection to John, never let the new family exclude John. John and Jacob know that they are half-brothers, but they feel that they are brothers.

In all his years of paying more than the court ordered by staying current with child support, and adding whatever extra-curricular activities he could, of making sure that John and Jacob both had health insurance, glasses, braces, cleats, and haircuts, Tony and his second wife always knew that once John turned 18, the child support payments would end.  The love, and care, of course, will never end.  But they were able to budget their lives knowing that in July of 2013, they would essentially get a pay increase.

Imagine Tony’s surprise, then, when he received a phone call in August from his ex-wife (let’s say “Tina”) telling him that he needed to start paying for John’s college tuition room and board.  Tony and Tina both have copies of the same divorce agreement they signed in 1998.  They both read the same words.  Tina saw it and read, “Tony has to pay one –half of full tuition, room and board at a state University.”  She figured that meant that if those costs are now about $12,000 per year, that it was time for Tony to start paying her $6,000 per year.  If John goes away to college, or stays home with her should not influence (in her interpretation) how much money Tony owes her.  She figured she could take $6000 from Tony, and have John take out student loans for anything else he needed.  She just saw that paragraph as another pay day for her.

Luckily, Tony called me.  I have to admit that I could not at first recall the specific language of the agreement.  When we discussed it by phone and he said that he was obligated to pay half of John’s college, I thought that might be true.  But I asked him to bring me a copy of the agreement anyway, so I could read it myself.  It seemed like a bigger commitment than Tony would have made.

I told him that because of his illness, if necessary we could move the court for a modification, but that is a last resort.  Remember, if Tony had to pay me to represent him in court, and Tina got an attorney, too, all of that money would be directed away from John’s education and into lawyer fees and court costs.  The worst possible scenario, if you ask me.

Sure enough, he brought me the signed agreement and court orders and as soon as I had a chance to read them, I could see the confusion.  The agreement is that both parties will help John get as much financial aid as he can get, and then the two parents will pay equal shares of what is left; but not more than the cost of a state college. If Tina pays $5000, Tony has an obligation to match it.  But if John only needs $5000 from his parents; then Tony is only responsible for half of that amount.   The best part, to me, and to Tony, is that none of this money will go to Tina.  John will continue to have his dad helping him get through life and do what he needs to do; but all of Tony’s money will be going directly to John’s benefit, not by way of Tina – and not to lawyers’ fees.

What We Love:  It is always worth having an attorney read a legal document for you.  It might cost you an hour of the lawyer’s time, but it could save you thousands of dollars in mistakes.

Whose divorce is this, anyway?

D-familylawI had a surprising phone call today with an old friend.  He has been in the divorce process for almost a year, and could not see a way to conclude the process and get on with his life.  The reason, sadly, is because his wife won’t let him.  After all of these years of letting her call the shots, he is still thinking that what he needs to do is follow her orders and she will cooperate with him.

He is mistaken.

When the wife told him that she wanted a divorce, he hired a mediator and filed the papers.  They went through the financial discovery process and decided what the state guidelines would most likely order him to pay on support.  The wife told him that the number was too low, so he increased it by $500 per month.  Then she told him to move out, and he did.

So, the situation became a perfect one for the wife:  her bills are paid, she does not have to live with her husband, but neither is he free to move on.  Every time the two of them have been scheduled to appear in front of a judge to report on their progress, the wife has declined to attend.  When the husband has tried to encourage the wife to go to court, to meet with mediators, or to sign an agreement, she has declined.  When he insists, she threatens to hire a lawyer.

Now, we all know why he would rather not push her. Hiring an attorney is an expensive and daunting  proposition. The only thing worse than hiring your own lawyer is paying for the opposing party’s lawyer.  So, out of fear, he backs off.  And stays married.  And pays more than a judge would likely order.  Because he is waiting for his wife to act reasonably.  For the first time in 20 years.  I told him I thought that it was an unlikely scenario.

The truth of the matter is that sometimes the good guy just has to be the bad guy.  It is not fair to my friend, or his children, or even his wife, for their divorce to drag out this long.  They are living in a state of perpetual limbo and no one is truly happy.  I walked him through a little of the procedure for what he needs to do to get in front of a judge, without lawyers, and ask for a divorce.  My friend is looking for a reasonable breakdown of assets and liabilities, and – frankly – so is the judge.  The court is not trying to punish anyone.  In a no fault state, the job of the judges is to help everyone who needs a divorce get the most fair and equitable divorce possible, in a reasonable time frame.

I hope my friend uses the advice I gave him as an opportunity to take the power away from his wife and let the divorce finish.  He will be happier, and so will his family.  He will have to wait a very long time if he wants to wait for her approval.  I just don’t think it is coming.

What We Love –  The laws are in place to protect society’s interest in everyone getting a fair and equitable outcome in their divorce, as much as possible.  You do not have to wait for your angry spouse to come to her senses.  There is a court system in place to do that for her.