Poppy,

It is very unusual - but not unheard of for this to happen.

There are typically two elements to the clean break:
- a clean break on captial (ie assets / debts have been split once and for all)
- a clean break on maintenance (ie. a lump sum has been paid in place of any ongoing maintenance)

What is quite common is for people who have a clean break on the capital - but who still have a maintenance agreement in place - to go back to court to vary or to stop the maintenace (due to change in circumstance) and at that point the court may sometimes order a new additional lump sum payment to set aside the future maintenance obligation.

To go back to court to get more capital after a capital clean break seems very unusual.

You may find this interesting.

http://www.wikivorce.com/divorce/Latest/Second-bite-of-the-cherry.html

but later this decision got appealled...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-470774/Millionaire-wins-court-battle-unfaithful-wife- claiming-fortune--30-years-divorce.html

and in any case the original "second bite at the cherry" award was only possible because the wife had a lifetime nominal spousal maintenance order in place.

So I really can see absolutely no basis for your ex coming back for more UNLESS you are currently paying him spousal maintenance.

Not sure how this messaging works so apologies if my replies go astray.

Thanks for the last comment. I was give a £0.05 a year maintenance allowance and possession of the family home. I don't think the judge at the time thought it would be him wanting more. the man is basically a parasite who feels slighted at his inability to earn an honest living. Remarkably although he forged my name on house loans prior to the divorce he calls hiself a Personal Mortgage Broker.

Hi Poppy118,

An order including 5p p.a. spousal maintenance cannot be a 'clean break'.

My understanding mirrors that of DBNO. Have you been told on what basis and/or why he wants a redivision of capital?

YA

Hi the judge gave me the 5p incase he won the lottery, as he has never paid any maintenance of any kind. Had 4 children. I trained as a nurse to get us off social security. No idea what goes on in his head, but it doesn't boil down to honest graft.

He is highly unlikely to get anything out of your property.... try not to worry!

This is a bit of a worry. I am hoping for a clean break clean break!
My solicitor says the problem is Child M. She could always go to CSA the day after accepting capital payment. He suggests we have a nominal £1 pa CM so if she goes to CSA they will say you have CM in place nothing to do with us take him to court. The judge will throw it out because he will be able to see the large capital payment. This doesn't seem to be correct from this post?

Poppy,

I agree with this. I would be a bit stronger. A capital provision CANNOT normally be varied. I cannot see ANY
circumstances where he could make a claim with any prospect of success.

He will need leave of the Court to make the application.
I just can't see him getting it.

Don't confuse capital provision with income provision. A nominal maintenance order prevents it being a clean break.

I don't think there is anything to worry about, honestly.

Mike