financial settlement reassessment

Hi, Sorry in advance, this is a long one. My husband got divorced in June 2004, 7 years ago, after 2 years separation which started in July 2002. By the September 2002, when his children were aged 3 and 7, his exwife introduced her now husband to the children, and by 3 months into the relationship he was spending christmas with the kids and his ex, and my husband son was telling his grandparents he had a new daddy. The new boyfriend, now husband was a high earner 80k plus, and had a big house in surrey. My husband was an out of work printer at the time having to live with his parents post divorce (for 3 years). He was suffering with severe stress related psoriasis and had to stop work until it was under control. Anyway to cut a long story short, he knew this boyfriend was living with his ex, because the kids had told him, but he could not prove it in court. The boyfriend still had his own house. At the divorce which had to go to the courts, his ex said she was in a relationship but not a serious one, she was living alone, and bore sole financial responsibliliy for the children. The house got split 70/30 and she also got the endowmment policy worth 80k. My ex's share was worth 43k, but in the divorce he was left with the joint credit card debt of 16k, which had largly been built up doing home improvments, which she obviously got most benefit from because she sold the house over a year after the divorce. Anyway, bringing us into the present. My poor husband, now a police officer, is fighting to keep his 2 children aged 12, and 16 from being taken to live in Oz with his ex wife and husband. She says her husbands salary has gone down from 80k plus to 60k, and they have got into debt with her parents for private school fees, and if they do not go to oz they will have to sell their 750,000k house in surrey and downsize. OK you can put the violins away now. Anyway we are fighting the case based on something called implacable hostility. My husband has had to fight since the divorce, and even with a contact order he had to secure, she always tries to minimise his contact, and is always hostile to him, in texts and emails. Anyway, in both her husbands statement and in her statement they say that her present husband lived in the family home from 2003, they also say he took financial responsibility for the children when they were 3 and 7. Now bear in mind they were 5 and 9 when the settlment was decided upon, it kind of casts everything in a whole new light. My husband had to live with his parents for 3 years. When he did buy he had to borrow 30k from his not wealthy mum and dad, and then had to get a sub prime mortgage because of the joint debt he inhertited. He did all that so he could get a flat where his kids could stay, while his ex was living in a huge 6 bedroom house in Surrey. After a year of having great times with his kids in the flat, the interest rates went up, and he had to get a lodger, so he had to go back to having his kids stay with him at his parents. It has been so tough for him. We moved intogether in 2010, in my small 3 bed semi with my 3 children (2 grown up), and we got married this July. Now she has admitted in a signed legal document that she lied during the financial settlement, backed up by her husband, can my poor hubby, who is beside himself with this leave to remove case and all the legal costs we are getting into debt to fund, reopen his divorce and get the financial settlement reassessed. Had his ex stood there in front of the judge and said she was cohabiting, in a serious relationship, with a man who took responsiblity for her children financially, who earned 80k and had a big house of his own, I do not think my husband would have got the deal he did. A deal that has left him struggling every since. I am sorry this is so long. All advice welcome. Thanks

Usually the answer to this is no, but I'm intrigued by this one. The question is, how much is he now prepared to spend on it? He would need good lawyers to represent him and they don't come cheap. How much could he now benefit from a variation of the order? If it had been say 50:50, how much would he have benefited?

Hi Jonathon, thanks for your interest, I know it was a lot to plow through. We have geustimated that if the equity had been split half and half, my husband would have got an extra 45k at that time. Then there is the endowment policy which was worth 8k at that time 7 years ago. So he would have been better off to the tune of about 50k, and he would not have had to borrow money, and been able to get a lower interest rate mortgate. What is crazy is they have admitted to lying themselves three times in a signed legal document. You would think that would count for something. If he was successful would he be entitled to interest on the 50k? How much would he be looking at in legal costs?

Thanks

Hi just to clarify, the value of the endowment was 8k at that time, but would be 80k on maturity. Thanks

So we're looking at £50k improvement. He could apply for permission to appeal out of time and cite the statements which have now been filed. However, this all needs to be put to her in writing beforehand to give her an opportunity to settle. Look at it this way, back then it looks very much as if she was committing perjury, a criminal offence which is almost always punished by imprisonment!

Thanks again Jonanthon, sounds like something to discuss with our solicitor. It is ironic that she slates my husband for not being able to provide adequate accomodation for his children when they stay here (it is a bit of a make do with 7 of us in a 3 bed house), when had she been honest we might have the money to build an extension.

Jonathon, I was also wondering, how will it affect her case that she has lied several times in the leave to remove statement, lies that we have been able to prove are lies...(eg she says my husband did not phone his children for 12 days in June, when the vodafone records showed he phoned them 5 times..etc)...is that perjury?

Thanks

Intrigued also. How does it affect the current case; if they have effectively admitted to lying in court in the past, does it not taint all testimony now?