Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My lastest offer from Ex's lawyer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • My lastest offer from Ex's lawyer

    Good evening all,

    As my negotiations are always ongoing here is the latest that I got from my ex's lawyer who is closing down her practice. I have sent in several offers to settle and this is what I get. For the equalization on my part I owe the ex $76,000. Does anyone think this is a fair offer from the ex??

    Hello Me,

    If you were to transfer the house to said ex (along with the balance of equalization by pension transfer) and then she sold it, then she would get 100% of the net proceeds. Plus, the pension transfer would be higher because it would have to add 50% of the costs of disposition (realty and legal fees to transfer and sell)

    If you were to jointly sell it, she should still get 100% of the net proceeds plus the balance of equalization by pension transfer. There is no logic or benefit in her selling it with you to give you 1/2 the proceeds. She needs the money now to build a new life, get a home, etc., as she did not have the benefit of building a great career, pension, etc., like you did. The pension is essentially useless to her right now, as she needs to buy another home and build a new life.

    It is better to just sell it jointly and give her 100% rather than incurring the costs and legal fees of paying to transfer it to her and then again to sell it.

    Let me know if you will agree to selling it and her getting 100% of the net proceeds plus the balance of equalization by pension transfer. That would be the only settlement she would be in a position to agree to at this time.

    Since it looks like we won't be able to settle this before I close, your ex's new lawyer will get in touch with you once she retains one.

    Take care,
    misleading lawyer

  • #2
    Why is she getting 100% of the net proceeeds?

    You sell, she gets half, you get half, no?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Links17 View Post
      Why is she getting 100% of the net proceeeds?

      You sell, she gets half, you get half, no?
      It looks like there's an additional equalization payment from him to her of about $76k, which is presumably around the same amount as his share of the house.

      Frankly, it sounds like the ex wants all the liquid assets immediately, and to leave him with only his pension which he can't access until retirement. The lawyer's rationale is that the ex needs it to start over, completely ignoring the fact that he will need liquid assets to start over with too!

      I would counter with dividing the applicable part of the pension in half, and divide the house asset up whatever way makes the remainder work out. Then each ex has some liquid assets now for starting over, and some pension for retirement. Nobody can argue that this isn't fair.

      Comment


      • #4
        umm, is this in lieu of child and spousal support?

        Why would she be entitled to 100% of the proceeds?

        Comment


        • #5
          OntarioMomma,

          I am still paying Spousal at 1175/mth and Child at 597, plus half the mortgage along with the taxes ect... All on a net of 3500/mth.

          As for entitlement she thinks she deserves it all even thought I sunk close to 100,000 into this house.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Canuck1965 View Post
            OntarioMomma,

            I am still paying Spousal at 1175/mth and Child at 597, plus half the mortgage along with the taxes ect... All on a net of 3500/mth.

            As for entitlement she thinks she deserves it all even thought I sunk close to 100,000 into this house.
            Well if you were married I don't see any reason she should get more than half, even if half is what it takes to do equalization.

            The money you sunk in, is sunk. That was a decision you made during the marriage when your finances were combined.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DowntroddenDad View Post
              Well if you were married I don't see any reason she should get more than half, even if half is what it takes to do equalization.

              The money you sunk in, is sunk. That was a decision you made during the marriage when your finances were combined.
              Agreed.
              I wouldn't agree to less than half of the joint assets, but also half the joint debt, or something equal to.

              But for you to just give her everything AND pay spousal is ridiculous, imo. Completely unfair deal.

              Comment


              • #8
                Is the 100% of the house equal to what you owe her for equalization? Is it more? Is it less?

                If you owe her $76,000 in equalization and that is the equity in the house, I don't think it is unreasonable, that way, but it depends on how you want things split. If it is your pension that is causing you to owe her $76,000 you have to decide if you want money now or if you want money for when you retire.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The basic question remains are the assets being split in half..

                  The NFP will tell you this.

                  Comment

                  Our Divorce Forums
                  Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                  Working...
                  X