Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Debts after separation

Add Topic
Can anyone give me any guidance on how debts incurred (personal loans etc) secured by one party after separation (without knowledge of the other party) are treated in a property settlement. Thanks
The debts incurred can be a negative on the balance sheet in property settlements. The cause of the debt is of interest.

If an item was purchased its value could be a added-back. Any loans are to be substantiated by documentation. Failure to do so can see credibility arise as an issue. Wastage can be an issue if the money has been malspent. Money spent recklessly is added-back.

The general concept is that after separation one is able to live one's life, BUT, the financial separation does not actually occur until consent orders of trial judgement.

So there is a need to obtain a full and frank disclosure of all aspects of financial actions post-separation. Keep ALL your receipts, disclose fully and have maximum credibility should you go to trial.

When one party causes a delay in proceedings it can be argued that the consequences of the delay can be the responsibility of the causer of the delay. It is in Stage 2 of the process that these aspects are considered, as contributions, be they positive or negative. A person who attempts to affect the size of the asset pool can be called into account in 75(2) factors. As violence can be factored in.

What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha
There was no purchase item so nothing to add back on, loans were due to irresponsibility - play money
Called wastage, is added-back

There is a value used by CSA which indicates what is a reasonable amount per week for a person to live on. Beyond that requires explanation.

Also the Westpac ASFA Retirement Standard sets out values for a Modest and Comfortable lifestyle. See http://www.superannuation.asn.au/RS/default.aspx

What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha
How does this work - sorry if this seems a dumb question but having trouble getting my head around how to deal with this. Do I take it as if it wasn't wasted there would be $X more in property settlement value so I can deduct half share of that amount from any settlement amount offered.

Add-backs

kizzy said
How does this work - sorry if this seems a dumb question but having trouble getting my head around how to deal with this. Do I take it as if it wasn't wasted there would be $X more in property settlement value so I can deduct half share of that amount from any settlement amount offered.
Might be best to do a refresh and jetison the the statement above and the assumptions relied on.

If someone post-separation wastes money, that money is regarded as being still with them (even though they spent it). That is where the added-back concept is applied. So you continue to regard the wasted money to be on their side of the balance sheet (described as add-back) and so when the variation of property interests is effected that money is included in their total as having been already received.

Does that make sense to you?

What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha

A CAUTIONARY TALE ABOUT THE STUPIDITY OF ENGAGING FAMILY LAWYERS - A WIFE'S TALE

Editor said
Some minor edits done to this item and although anonymous is of interest to show how expenses can completely erode the asset pool until there is nothing left for anyone. The problem is often one party cannot see the erosion of the assets until it is to late and they are left wondering why they have such a large bill to pay which often takes many years.There are a number of Family Law Professionals, many frequent this site, who do attempt to resolve property issues early and get some agreement early on this preserving some asset pool for both parents.
They should addback the STUPIDITY of FAMILY LAWYERS by delaying, looting thefamily asset pooland seeking INJUNCTIONS to prevent the realisation of property to pay out debts, notwithstanding a falling market.

A case I know of, the Wife's lawyer, full of bluster, self importance, insecurityand bs, trying to impresshis client (perhaps was looking for a date)berated and bullied the Husband at a round table where the Husband proposed a settlement allowing the Wife to take a significant interest in the equity of the marital home.

The Wife's lawyer pointed at the husband, titted at him, chided him like a 10th class citizen, refused to speak to him, told him to listen here, then proceeded tosnub his noseat the substantial offer, that was handed tothe Wife's lawyer in writing. The nextcouple of weeks, issued proceedings with affidavits full of lies and vitriol, obviously penned by the legal monkey (quite rediculous and nothing designed to resolve matters, infact extremely provocative), save (to use a favourite lawyers"term", meaning "but for as afamily lawyer I like to flog myself") continued to run a case through the court andwas successful with a cost order and maintenance order of some stupid weekly amount that could support Princess Mary of Denmark and her children, how a Family Court judge could award the same is beyond anyone with an ounce of intelligence because the weekly negative cash flow post order was haemorrhaging at nearly $2,500 based on the Form 12 Financial Statements lodged.

Nearly 5 months since refusing the written offer, the asset values of the asset pool have fallen by over $900,000 and legal costs of $120,000 have been expended, as a result of being dragged through litigation.The bank is now calling in the loans becausepayments can no longer be funded and other investments have fallen and have large exit / unwind penalty fees.

RESULT: WINNER FAMILY LAWYER LOSER - WIFE AND CHILDREN

The Wife's family lawyer hasill advisedher and has effectively killed and bankrupted the golden goose and plundered the family estate or marital asset pool by not sensibly resolving matters, accepting a very good offer and has put the Wife and children out of the family house, and it has cost the Wife over $100,000 for his advice. This is the stuff these FAMILY LAWYER geniuses do - destroy families.

A cautionary tale abou FAMILY LAWYERS. Don't touch with a 50 foot barge pole, even at that distance they will try and pick pocket your wallet!

Last edit: by Secretary SPCA

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets