Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Great ~ About time there was something like this

Great help and a service to SRLs  - Keep up the good work

AJ :thumbs:
AJ thanks for the encouragement.The site is only partially finished. The plan is to have the following functions on line immediately with a range of functions to follow. Look forward to working with you guys further. Apart from what the site admins will comment on I would suggest you check out a range of features in the forums. We have not posted the help files yet but they are on the way. The key things in forums are the standard forum area and the personal forum area in the personal zone. The personal zone configuration area is quite large and worth a good look at.
The site admins said
 We have completed the news facility, the poll facilities, forums, chat rooms both public and private are available, instant messaging to members, and are starting to populate the community directory (Under community). We have also installed the latest ISYS 8 search engine and have around 200,000 documents indexed. The SRL's are a vital part of the community for us  :rockon: as and I am aware that the SPCA (Shared Parenting Council of Australia) has also had some of their key members involved at the front line in court. The reports back from the SPCA suggest the SRL organisations and in this case SRL-Resouces has assisted many in getting through some very traumatic times…. We expect to deliver some leading edge technology tools to allow this great work to continue with your own space within the community (under the community link) on the site. We have already allocated three forum security levels for you and as your key operational members get more involved you will be able to post your own content rather than involve us currently

Site Director
This is a great start , however I am concerned about cases involving family matters where a parent has not committed a crime but is penalised by a judge's  interpretation of legislation. If a child has 2 parents … gold diggers should not use children as leverage to extract funds from the other parent. The court should  try to enforce shared parenting where both parents want time with their children.

Access should not be denied on the grounds of gender and there should be mechanisms for the parents to work once children are at school. The court should balance this rather than have one parent pay with minimal time with children. :)

Estranged wife wants $16K weekly allowance

Estranged wife wants $16K weekly allowance
By Janet Fife-Yeomans

25 August 2007

The estranged wife of one of Sydney's wealthiest businessmen has told the Family Court she needed an allowance of $16,202 a week to maintain her "very high standard of living" including $1000 for eating out and entertaining.

In a bitter multi-million dollar divorce fight, the wife has claimed $1000 a week for clothing, shoes and accessories - and $300 to clean a swimming pool that doesn't exist.

Her husband wanted to pay her just $400 a week and told her to do some of her own cleaning and gardening at his family's 14-room mansion which she currently calls home.

While the husband said his income was $4833 a week - $3238 after tax - the wife presented articles about his wealth from a financial magazine which said his family was worth $250 million.

He has been paying her $481 a week spousal maintenance since their 13-year marriage ended two years ago and told the court he could really only afford $400.

The couple cannot be identified but the court was told the family firm, for which the man works, is one of Australia's top 500 publicly listed companies.

The glimpse into the lifestyle of Sydney's rich and unhappy reveals the couple has so far run up at least $1.1 million in legal fees between them since they separated two years ago.

In the latest interim judgment in the case, Justice Garry Watts increased the husband's weekly contribution to $1550. The wife had earlier dropped her $16,202 claim.

She has told the court her husband was the sole breadwinner and despite a lavish lifestyle, he "tightly controlled her purse strings", even refusing her cash to order a pizza. Since they separated, she said she has not been able to afford dental care for their children, cannot afford holidays for the family and even her luxury car is unregistered.

The court heard it was a far cry from their days of expensive holidays, frequent gifts from her husband including a vintage Porsche, boarding schools for the children and $15,000 spent on one child's birthday party.

She said the house she now lives in is "either the husband's parents or an associated entity".

The husband said that out of his weekly net income of $3238, he had to meet three mortgages totalling $1885.

"Counsel for the husband says that the wife should be required to do some of the cleaning and gardening," Justice Watts said in his judgment.

"Counsel for the wife points out how large the property is and the fact that was not part of what the wife had to do while the parties lived together."

Her barrister David Baran conceded the house did not have a swimming pool but told the court that the wife had been making allowance for a pool in the future when she claimed $300 a week.

The case is not yet finalised.

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
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets