Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Walked Out Ten Years Ago, But Came Back Quick For Euromillions Win.

juvenal

By juvenal
in The off-topic forum

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
1
HOLA442
ken_ichikawa

ken_ichikawa

Posted
Posted

I never understand these uber rich people, why don't they just hire an assassin or something?

Heh Felix Dennis got it right decades ago, he said:

"If it flies, fornicates or floats, rent, it always ends up cheaper in the end."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2
HOLA443
3
HOLA444
efdemin

efdemin

Posted
Posted

I'm no expert, but how could he have had a clean break when there was a 3 year old daughter involved?

How would that work?

I think it means a financial 'clean break' rather than a moral one. :rolleyes:

So he'd still have to care for the child, and it seems like he did do this before the win, but this woman wouldn't be able to make this claim for extra money just because he's got it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4
HOLA445
5
HOLA446
Number79

Number79

Posted
Posted

Ridiculous.

I can not even begin to imagine how this is justified.

I seriously doubt that even a small number of women would consider this fair or reasonable.

I suspect that the few who do would dwindle when it is pointed out that their ex hubby could do likewise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
6
HOLA447
7
HOLA448
8
HOLA449
9
HOLA4410
efdemin

efdemin

Posted
Posted

It's the principle though. He offered her £1million straight up when he won but she was greedy enough to threaten court action to get more. £1 million to a woman who broke your heart (10 years ago!) seems more than generous to me.

It wasn't even under the pretence of child maintenance - the £2 million she's got has no strings attached as he will support the child separately!

I hope there's a clause in the settlement that she can't claim for more again in future so he can put this behind him and finally get away from her greed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
10
HOLA4411
11
HOLA4412
ccc

ccc

Posted
Posted

he won 56m.

I don't think 2m is going to break the bank...

Brilliant. A female poster just posting the exact thing I would expect. Thanks. :D

Whether 2m is going to break the bank or not is not the point. Only a female would fail to understand this.

Not your fault - your crazy minds are wired differently !!

PS I hope you are a bird !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
12
HOLA4413
13
HOLA4414
AThirdWay

AThirdWay

Posted
Posted

he won 56m.

I don't think 2m is going to break the bank...

Your right, it won't. Paying 2m to a **** who cheated on him, and then walked out with his daughter 10 years ago, that might break something....

If I were him, I'd spend another 2m to ensure she doesn't enjoy a single penny of that money, and ANOTHER 2m to ensure that my daughter wasn't impacted in anyway.

But then, I'm not known for my forgiving nature :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
14
HOLA4415
swissy_fit

swissy_fit

Posted
Posted

Your right, it won't. Paying 2m to a **** who cheated on him, and then walked out with his daughter 10 years ago, that might break something....

If I were him, I'd spend another 2m to ensure she doesn't enjoy a single penny of that money, and ANOTHER 2m to ensure that my daughter wasn't impacted in anyway.

But then, I'm not known for my forgiving nature :angry:

I suspect the bit in bold would be the worst bit, most mature people can get over being cheated on sexually in time, shit happens.

Remember, giving her a miserable life is hardly going to improve his daughters situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
15
HOLA4416
16
HOLA4417
SarahBell

SarahBell

Posted
Posted

My reasoning behind my comments is:

He could of course have taken her to court - but at the centre of this is the child they made together.

He should have given her nothing and fought for residence ... After all with money it's easy to get a good solicitor and "bribe" the child into spending more time with him. But that would be really unkind on the kid and waste a lot of money and in the end the kid might have decided that she liked her mum best even though she had no money. A judge also might not like the fighting aspect.

However as a sane and rational man he's avoided legal action which would have been horrid for the child, and avoided any futher action from her by getting the clean break agreement signed now.

His biggest mistake was telling people about the win - or at least the size of it.

If he'd told people he'd won £2M then she'd have been cheeky and asked for £100k maybe...

She is the mother of his child and although she's a cheating scumbag he's got over that and that makes him the bigger person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
17
HOLA4418
ccc

ccc

Posted
Posted

Took yourself a long time to work out a way out of that one. :)

Why not just be honest ? You came up with the standard female response to this situation. And when you read it back to yourself and were questioned on it you realised you were being completely unreasonable. Like a great number of females are. No great biggie.

And may I add I have discussions with woman about this sort of stuff quite regularly. And the interesting thing is many woman agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
18
HOLA4419
adamLancs

adamLancs

Posted
Posted

The guy was obviously a schmuck, his first mistake was getting married. His second was going public with the win. The third mistake was offering 1 million to the woman, as in a courtroom this would remove any doubt that the woman deserved any money at all, as he himself, by his actions, believed she did. The court would only then decide the amount, probably using the £1 million as a starting point. I'm sure his lawyer pointed this out to him, hence the out-of-court settlement.

Good for him though, it's a small portion of his holdings. He should enjoy his life now and remember the lessons: a) Don't ever get married. B) Don't be a show-off and c) Don't offer a woman free money unless you want her to **** you in the ***.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
19
HOLA4420
swissy_fit

swissy_fit

Posted
Posted

The guy was obviously a schmuck, his first mistake was getting married. His second was going public with the win. The third mistake was offering 1 million to the woman, as in a courtroom this would remove any doubt that the woman deserved any money at all, as he himself, by his actions, believed she did. The court would only then decide the amount, probably using the £1 million as a starting point. I'm sure his lawyer pointed this out to him, hence the out-of-court settlement.

Good for him though, it's a small portion of his holdings. He should enjoy his life now and remember the lessons: a) Don't ever get married. B) Don't be a show-off and c) Don't offer a woman free money unless you want her to **** you in the ***.

It's not about the woman and it's not about justice, it's about the daughter, my guess is that those on this thread who don't see that don't have children.

If my daughter lived with her mother and not me, (this could happen though we're still together at present!) and I had 56m quid, I'd willingly sacrifice 2m quid to the mother whether she deserved a penny of it or not, in the hope that it would improve the life of my daughter. The only exception would be in the case that she ill-treated the girl, which is unlikely, most mothers love their children after all.

Fortunately this bloke seems to have his priorities right, he's still 54m up after all....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
20
HOLA4421
ccc

ccc

Posted
Posted

It's not about the woman and it's not about justice, it's about the daughter, my guess is that those on this thread who don't see that don't have children.

If my daughter lived with her mother and not me, (this could happen though we're still together at present!) and I had 56m quid, I'd willingly sacrifice 2m quid to the mother whether she deserved a penny of it or not, in the hope that it would improve the life of my daughter. The only exception would be in the case that she ill-treated the girl, which is unlikely, most mothers love their children after all.

Fortunately this bloke seems to have his priorities right, he's still 54m up after all....

Don't have children myself. However I have known a fair few whose parents (Parent) were mega rich and kids did not want for anything.

Greatly increases the chances of the young un growing up to be a grade A spolit wee ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
21
HOLA4422
Orsino

Orsino

Posted
Posted

The guy's a fool for a number of reasons. It was particularly stupid of him to give his £235,000 house to his cleaner. No, it's not generous; it's just showing off. Every friend and relative will now see what they get in this context. How much does his best mate now think he deserves? What about his relatives? What about the postman? Surely his ex-wife, who's brought up his child for the last decade, is worth more than four times the cleaner? This settlement with his ex is probably just the start of it. I bet he's lost a load of friends already, not because they're greedy but because he's monetised their friendship. He'll soon learn that you can't by friends even with £56m - well, not genuine one's at any rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
22
HOLA4423
Darkman

Darkman

Posted
Posted

His biggest mistake was telling people about the win - or at least the size of it.

Correct.

If he'd been smart he would have kept it quiet until the daughter was of adult age. At that point he could set up his daughter for life, completely bypassing this horrible excuse for an ex-wife. The ex exploited the child and used her as leverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
23
HOLA4424
efdemin

efdemin

Posted
Posted

It's not about the woman and it's not about justice, it's about the daughter, my guess is that those on this thread who don't see that don't have children.

If my daughter lived with her mother and not me, (this could happen though we're still together at present!) and I had 56m quid, I'd willingly sacrifice 2m quid to the mother whether she deserved a penny of it or not, in the hope that it would improve the life of my daughter. The only exception would be in the case that she ill-treated the girl, which is unlikely, most mothers love their children after all.

Fortunately this bloke seems to have his priorities right, he's still 54m up after all....

Won't somebody think of the children!

Oh, he already did:

The £2million lump sum she agreed to accept is entirely hers to spend as she wishes - after a bid by Nigel to pay it into a trust for Ella was vetoed.

Wendy is also believed to have obtained a huge increase in maintenance payments for their daughter - up from £150 a month to £2,000.

Who knows he might also be planning to pay for other stuff on top of that as well. He can afford it, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
24
HOLA4425
swissy_fit

swissy_fit

Posted
Posted

Don't have children myself. However I have known a fair few whose parents (Parent) were mega rich and kids did not want for anything.

Greatly increases the chances of the young un growing up to be a grade A spolit wee ****.

Money can be spent wisely on children as on anything else. It frequently isn't, but it can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

  I accept