. He's gonna break down in a couple of years time again when he doesn't get what he wants.
A good solicitor could quite easily argue that they went into the marriage wanting the same thing and she moved the goal posts so to speakYeah I completely agree with this comment. You can use unreasonable behaviour for a lot of different reasons, including arguing all the time or even a lack of sex. I think a lot of couples try to use unreasonable behaviour as it speeds up the divorce process. I would guess that Jim and Tanya are legally divorced now as he is already talking about planning the wedding.My ex husband divorced me (although he was having an affair) under unreasonable behaviour because I didnāt walk the dog, I went on a trip to New York (he spent the entire time I was on that trip in a hotel with his mistress) and I didnāt have dinner on the table for him when he got home from work - I accepted this because a) I wanted a divorce and b) I didnāt want to contest it and go through court due to the financial implications. The only thing that held up ours was the sale of our marital home. He could therefore have had grounds based on him wanting a family and her wanting to go off to be a Hollywood Star
Itās currently being discussed in parliament and may come in during the autumn but not before the two years atm
No. Unless you can get a divorce on grounds of unreasonable behaviour or adultery, then itās a two year wait (if both parties agree, 5 years otherwise). All explained herehttps://www.gov.uk/divorce
Not petty if it is a fact. Maybe jimbob will do the moral thing and state his own adultery on the petition. Might affect his settlement though... wouldn't hold my breath if i were Tanya.I was wondering if Tanya would be petty enough to name Sarah on the petition. Also canāt imagine Jim being ok with the reason being his adultery!
Seems to be likely that's what the case is though!
Please can you stop trying to prevent people sharing their relevant stories.
I said it on the Jim thread but I'm pretty sure they announced their split in April and he started half-showing Sarah in his stories in May, like when they went on her boat called Sarah lol
Lawyers would consider it petty because it's extremely rare to actually name anyone on the petition. It makes no difference to the divorce proceedings and it also does not affect the financial settlement at all in England. Like you wouldn't get more money from someone because they cheated on you for example (idk if this happens in other jurisdictions though, but not here).
How are they relevant? It's off topic. We're here to discuss Tanya, not your life story. You can make the point that you don't think Jim's behaviour is weird without giving us your relationship history.
Lol so relevant on a thread about Tanya Burr. Yes. Much relevance.
āMust stay relevant. Must stay relevant. Must stay relevant.ā
They announced in March (I think the 9th..donāt ask me why I remember this), and I think he started showing Sarah even earlier than May, I think it was like late April. In the Q&A or whatever when he said how they met, he said they met before he was going to do some traveling but when he came back he realized she was just perfect and he wanted to date her. And he definitely did that travel thing within about a month of the breakup..and they met at least before that. The story with the Sarah boat was when it became clear who she was, but does anyone else remember when he used to do those weird Boomerang stories of just her hands on his chest or them sitting across a table with ādate nightā caption? Those were really in terrible taste. Not only was it literally weeks after the announcement, the sole purpose of posting them was to stoke interest in who it was.
