Ioan Gruffudd & Alice Evans #224 You can’t be a mother if you’re busy being your brother.

[Ally Pally]

So technically she would be probably 7 or 8 years spousal support and she has already used up 3 going on 4 years. Not taking into account that she has received massive over-payments, possibly? 2024 is not going to be a good year for her.
When he said: "I want a divorce, here's what I offer" Her only response should have been: " Where do I sign." Not go on this batshittery of the last 3 years

I think he will claw back the money she's going to end up owing him via the pension, she thinks she's screwed him but the reality is going to bite her hard!

 

[Loveu2]

Sounds about right.

 

[Ally Pally]

How about a bit of red red wine whine ?

 

[Nixlondon]

I think he will claw back the money she's going to end up owing him via the pension, she thinks she's screwed him but the reality is going to bite her hard!

How will the law of 65 affect her?
“The Guidelines also provides for the “Rule of 65”in California which states that if the years of marriage plus the age of the support recipient at the time of separation equals or exceeds 65, then spousal support may be paid indefinitely.”
Would this, together with the presumption of a “long marriage” (ie long term spousal support,I.e half the length of the marriage), be overridden by the presumption Family Code section 4325 if Alice gets convicted of a misdemeanour or criminal charge in the remaining time period the DVRO is in force (1.5 years* left I think?)
I think Ioan is keeping his eye on the custody & financial fight, following which he will submit evidence of her recent breaches of the RO, which can then be used to obtain a misdemeanour conviction & he can then apply to withdraw spousal support. Statute of limitations for Ioan is 5 years so he has plenty of time to let her hang herself.
eta edited 3 years to 1.5 years on checking dates of dvro*

 

[Ninas purse]

View attachment 2630277

Sounds about right.

View attachment 2630279

Ioan is that you? Soundtrack to Ioan's nightmare in 2021 before he was able to make a mad dash for it.

 

[WatermelonSugar22]

How will the law of 65 affect her?
“The Guidelines also provides for the “Rule of 65”in California which states that if the years of marriage plus the age of the support recipient at the time of separation equals or exceeds 65, then spousal support may be paid indefinitely.”
Would this, together with the presumption of a “long marriage” (ie long term spousal support,I.e half the length of the marriage), be overridden by the presumption Family Code section 4325 if Alice gets convicted of a misdemeanour or criminal charge in the remaining time period the DVRO is in force (1.5 years* left I think?)
I think Ioan is keeping his eye on the custody & financial fight, following which he will submit evidence of her recent breaches of the RO, which can then be used to obtain a misdemeanour conviction & he can then apply to withdraw spousal support. Statute of limitations for Ioan is 5 years so he has plenty of time to let her hang herself.
eta edited 3 years to 1.5 years on checking dates of dvro*

I think her age at date of separation (51) plus the length of marriage (13 years?) won’t equal 65? Or will she just scrape in?

 

[welp]

I think her age at date of separation (51) plus the length of marriage (13 years?) won’t equal 65? Or will she just scrape in?

she was 52.

however it doesnt matter, it just qualifies her for the theoretical possibility, reality is then almost always different

 

[Loveu2]

How will the law of 65 affect her?
“The Guidelines also provides for the “Rule of 65”in California which states that if the years of marriage plus the age of the support recipient at the time of separation equals or exceeds 65, then spousal support may be paid indefinitely.”
Would this, together with the presumption of a “long marriage” (ie long term spousal support,I.e half the length of the marriage), be overridden by the presumption Family Code section 4325 if Alice gets convicted of a misdemeanour or criminal charge in the remaining time period the DVRO is in force (1.5 years* left I think?)
I think Ioan is keeping his eye on the custody & financial fight, following which he will submit evidence of her recent breaches of the RO, which can then be used to obtain a misdemeanour conviction & he can then apply to withdraw spousal support. Statute of limitations for Ioan is 5 years so he has plenty of time to let her hang herself.
eta edited 3 years to 1.5 years on checking dates of dvro*

The DVRO will be extended. She'll duck herself out of spousal support before long.

 

[NarcRage]

I think her age at date of separation (51) plus the length of marriage (13 years?) won’t equal 65? Or will she just scrape in?

Depends if she's using her real age or her fake age

 

[BingoFlamingo]

View attachment 2630277

Sounds about right.

View attachment 2630279

Hang on, didn’t he flounce? That lasted long!

 

[NarcRage]

she was 52.

however it doesnt matter, it just qualifies her for the theoretical possibility, reality is then almost always different

Surely if the prenup says it's payable for life, it's payable for life? Does a judge have discretion to end it early? I don't think they do...the amount may go down in accordance with the husband's earnings but won't it always be ten percent?

 

[Danica Catrick]

She might not want to but eventually she will have to if she can't make rent, refuses to work and child support and spousal support ends. The court is not going to expect Ioan to pay spousal support forever. Usually it will be until she is able to support herself or half the length of the marriage. This was not a decades long marriage. She keeps banging on about 20 years but they were only married for 12 years. The previous 8 years they were a couple will not be factored in.

So it's possible he could only have to pay spousal support for another 3 years? They were married for 12 years, and we're already half way through the 6 he would be expected to pay support for

ETA - nevermind, I've just seen other people's comments on this

 

[giogio]

I am only just catching up but wow those Perez articles are truly horrifying. That’s journalism? we know he was on Alice’s payroll but wow the hate, the incitement, the down and out lies; actually so shocked at what I just read. Someone set his laptop on fire to prevent further stories from the irrelevant piece of tit

 

[Snotbuster]

The child support is not high for raising two kids in California. And child support can go towards a lot of things that would be considered taking care of your children. People don't get to dictate to mothers or fathers, if they are getting child support, where every penny goes. Right now she has full custody. Food, clothes for growing children, shoes, after-school activities, going to movies or other activities her children do with friends, on and on. No matter what a piece of crap she is, while those kids are in her care she should be receiving child support, and $3,000 seems appropriate. Ten thousand dollars a month total seems fair until they get to court. No one can say he isn't taking care of his children and leaving them without a roof over their heads right now.

It's really not covering all of her monthly living expenses after you deduct her high rent and electric bill, possible water bill, and cell phone. A monthly food bill for a family of three is not cheap, plus a doggy. Add in car insurance, gas, and possible repairs, and health insurance for Alice, and all of her shopping for herself: toiletries, all of her online clothes, hair appointments I guess that's why ToneAlice is pissed. She wanted to be completely paid for, not have to earn a penny and stay on her fat ass. So does she have money squirreled away? Has she had even one request for a cameo since she started begging for them again? What the hell is she doing?

But the 3K isn't supposed to cover all the costs for the two girls--Alice is also expected to provide as well. And if she is unemployed, well, the court can impute income to her and use that to determine her obligation. The 3k also doesn't cover the health insurance premiums that IG pays, or other costs/fees for the girls that he may pay directly.

 

[Hiraeth]

I am only just catching up but wow those Perez articles are truly horrifying. That’s journalism? we know he was on Alice’s payroll but wow the hate, the incitement, the down and out lies; actually so shocked at what I just read. Someone set his laptop on fire to prevent further stories from the irrelevant piece of tit

I totally agree! It's making the work on the index of articles difficult because his articles are filled with misinformation and outright lies, and it gets me cranky.

On a brighter note, I just realized our Wiki has nearly 90,000 views!

 

[Loveu2]

Tone must be holding a torch for someone, or someone’s money.

 

[JoJo76]

I got a heart from @unobtrusive lurker such a blessing, especially as I don’t post much now. I really hope they are Mama G.

 

[Edna]

Tone must be holding a torch for someone, or someone’s money.

View attachment 2630816

Eternal flame? More like a dumpster fire.

 

[Citney]

Notice how IT Mafia Boss @welp totally ignores any reference to being an IT Mafia Boss. Or a spy come to that. Makes you think huh?

Alice also has to be reminded child support is not forever, only until the child is 18 or out of high school. Who knows, Ella may not be out of hs at 18, right now she will be closer to 19 before she graduates, if she graduates that is.
---

She could team up with the Harkles. Actually, that would be bloody funny - three Narcissists all trying to appear both saintly and hard done by while grifting.
---

Okay, Tone. Def Leppard fan? Do you think they’ll tour the UK, and will you go if they do? If so, you and I could end up meeting. That would be…interesting.
Well, that was a long discussion, wasn’t it? If rhis is our Tone’s new Twitter career, he’s going to be a wee bit disappointed. I mean, what can you say about music in 240 characters apart from ‘yeah, it’s my life’[which it is]? Or is this another Tone flounce/has he fallen out with AE over lies, promised but never-materialised funds and so on?
---

I correspond with another woman in the US who was given HIV by her then-husband. It progressed to fullblown AIDS within four years. She was told she was ineligible for disability when her CD4 count was down to 8 (a healthy one starts at 200), she was going blind, and in such pain that it took her literally all morning to get dressed. (She’s an absolutely lovely person, by the way, with such a zest for life.) When her CD4 count was revealed to the court and a doctor testified she was near death, the judge found her able to work. It also took her ten years to get the appropriate benefits and medical cover, by which point severe and irreversible damage had been done to her body.
Alice really does not have a chance in hell. I’m not even being malicious or gloat-y here: if they can find someone with no immune system fit for work, they’re not even going to consider that a former actress with no proven medical records re: fibromyalgia is unsuitable for work.

I looked it up and I don’t think Alice has worked enough in the last few years to even qualify for any type of disability. I could be wrong of course, I’m only going by what the website said.

 

[Tuppence]

Surely if the prenup says it's payable for life, it's payable for life? Does a judge have discretion to end it early? I don't think they do...the amount may go down in accordance with the husband's earnings but won't it always be ten percent?

I think this is correct. 10% of his earnings forevermore. He has overpaid her currently, though, so will get his overpayment back.