I am nearing 58 years of age and have worked the same job for 29 years. I can't quite see any judge going the "impute" route on me at this stage of the game.
This is a clear (in my view) case of unequal justice. The divorce forced me to downsize my life from a 3 bedroom single family house with a full yard to a cramped, walk-up apartment. I still have unpacked boxes in plain sight because I have no place to put the stuff. Meanwhile, the ex still lives in a 3 bedroom, single family house with a full yard and now wants to squeeze me harder because she can't afford it. No equality there.
Now, a logical mind would see this: The ex has a large amount of equity in this house, enough to produce $10,000. per year in interest at 5%. That would be near enough to pay each year's rent on a comfortable apartment. If she sells the house and invests the profit conservatively her monthly nut would be little more than the cost of utilities and there would be no yard maintenance or house maintenance to do any more. And with her health poor and in decline wouldn't that seem the obvious route for that reason alone?
Profit from the house sale would also, probably, provide enough money for her to buy a small. economical car to replace the aging, behemoth, expensive pickup truck she currently drives and about which she whines of its age and expense to maintain.
Given that, why would anybody entertain the argument that I should suffer even more greatly, to the point of entering bankruptcy or moving into the back seat of my sub-compact, so that a sick woman may continue to live alone in a 3 bedroom single family house with a nice yard neither of which she has the energy to maintain properly anymore?
###
