Tweet
I divorced 11 years ago, in the divorce consent order, I was required to pay Spousal Maintenance, however in the wording it states "should my salary fall below a certain threshold", I would no longer be required to pay it. I am in the position of retiring early, and so I have advised my ex-wife that my "salary" will drop to zero, hence I do not intend to continue to pay her. She was incredulous that she will no longer receive the maintenance and suggests my pension income should be considered "salary". I think the wording explicitly being "salary", means salary, not income. Additionally, I transferred a pension to her as a part of the consent order and the order states she can make no further claim on my pension.
So question is, is "salary" deemed to mean salary - hence no salary, no maintenance payment? Secondly is her expectation of me paying her once I have retired, technically her, making a claim on my pension (as that is the only source of money I would have)?
From what I have read the wording on consent orders is viewed as "set in stone", once agreed, so is there a likelihood she would get a decision/legal advise to challenge the wording, bearing in mind it has been in place for 11 years?
So question is, is "salary" deemed to mean salary - hence no salary, no maintenance payment? Secondly is her expectation of me paying her once I have retired, technically her, making a claim on my pension (as that is the only source of money I would have)?
From what I have read the wording on consent orders is viewed as "set in stone", once agreed, so is there a likelihood she would get a decision/legal advise to challenge the wording, bearing in mind it has been in place for 11 years?
Comment