<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR>Alimony: Some men don't pay out of spite
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>Problem with payment remains, even though applications by ex-wives to enforce it have fallen </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Sujin Thomas & Jessica Lim
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>
The decline in the number of applications to enforce maintenance payments could be due to women not lodging complaints because they know it can be a difficult process. -- ST FILE PHOTO
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->A DIVORCED businessman, reminded by a Family Court judge that he could be jailed for failing to pay maintenance to his former wife, promptly reached into his pocket and pulled out a wad of $50 notes.
He was then three months - $1,200 in total - behind in his payments to her.
Divorce lawyer Malathi Das recalled this case from some years ago as an example of a former spouse who deliberately refused to pay maintenance even though he could well afford to.
She said: 'This unwillingness to pay maintenance is a perennial problem, and enforcement can be a tedious process for the ex-wife.'
Though the number of applications for enforcements has fallen, the problem is serious enough that the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Vivian Balakrishnan proposed in Parliament last month the setting up of a 'matrimonial credit bureau', which would make marital history records available so divorcees' subsequent spouses can do background checks on them.
In 2006, the number of such applications made to the Family Court was 4,073.
Last year, the figure fell to 3,266.
Lawyers put the decline down to a number of factors, including the possibility that women are not lodging complaints because they know it can be a difficult process.
They added, however, that it could be that more people are complying with maintenance orders.
On Monday, the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations suggested setting up a state agency to collect these maintenance payments.
Penalties for defaults could include being named on a blacklist maintained by the bureau, it said.
Lawyers say that a number of former spouses default for genuine reasons, such as unemployment, pay cuts and retrenchment, but some do not pay up purely out of spite.
While penalties such as fines and possible jail terms are in place, defaulters play on the chance that their former wives will not pursue the matter.
Former wives who decide to apply for enforcement have to take leave from their day jobs, sometimes to the dismay of their employers, and incur legal costs which may exceed the amount of maintenance they are seeking.
Ms Das said she normally advises clients to lodge a complaint at the Family Court themselves as a first step in getting an enforcement order - as opposed to getting their lawyer to do this for them - to save on legal fees.
In many instances, unemployed divorcees who get custody of the children depend a lot on the money to make ends meet on a daily basis.
Mr Yap Teong Liang, who chairs the Family Law Practice Committee of the Law Society of Singapore, said: 'Maintenance may be postponed, but these women's daily expenses cannot be.'
Defaults on maintenance payments end up having a 'knock-on effect' in that the women run up late-payment charges when they are late in paying their bills.
But a 31-year-old divorcee who gave his name only as Azman is adamant that he is justified in not paying up his $200 every month. The cleaner, who divorced his wife in January and has not paid her maintenance for two months, called her an irresponsible parent who leaves the care for her children to someone else.
'It is not worth giving her the money. I feel she doesn't deserve it.'
[email protected] [email protected]
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>Problem with payment remains, even though applications by ex-wives to enforce it have fallen </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Sujin Thomas & Jessica Lim
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
The decline in the number of applications to enforce maintenance payments could be due to women not lodging complaints because they know it can be a difficult process. -- ST FILE PHOTO
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->A DIVORCED businessman, reminded by a Family Court judge that he could be jailed for failing to pay maintenance to his former wife, promptly reached into his pocket and pulled out a wad of $50 notes.
He was then three months - $1,200 in total - behind in his payments to her.
Divorce lawyer Malathi Das recalled this case from some years ago as an example of a former spouse who deliberately refused to pay maintenance even though he could well afford to.
She said: 'This unwillingness to pay maintenance is a perennial problem, and enforcement can be a tedious process for the ex-wife.'
Though the number of applications for enforcements has fallen, the problem is serious enough that the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Vivian Balakrishnan proposed in Parliament last month the setting up of a 'matrimonial credit bureau', which would make marital history records available so divorcees' subsequent spouses can do background checks on them.
In 2006, the number of such applications made to the Family Court was 4,073.
Last year, the figure fell to 3,266.
Lawyers put the decline down to a number of factors, including the possibility that women are not lodging complaints because they know it can be a difficult process.
They added, however, that it could be that more people are complying with maintenance orders.
On Monday, the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations suggested setting up a state agency to collect these maintenance payments.
Penalties for defaults could include being named on a blacklist maintained by the bureau, it said.
Lawyers say that a number of former spouses default for genuine reasons, such as unemployment, pay cuts and retrenchment, but some do not pay up purely out of spite.
While penalties such as fines and possible jail terms are in place, defaulters play on the chance that their former wives will not pursue the matter.
Former wives who decide to apply for enforcement have to take leave from their day jobs, sometimes to the dismay of their employers, and incur legal costs which may exceed the amount of maintenance they are seeking.
Ms Das said she normally advises clients to lodge a complaint at the Family Court themselves as a first step in getting an enforcement order - as opposed to getting their lawyer to do this for them - to save on legal fees.
In many instances, unemployed divorcees who get custody of the children depend a lot on the money to make ends meet on a daily basis.
Mr Yap Teong Liang, who chairs the Family Law Practice Committee of the Law Society of Singapore, said: 'Maintenance may be postponed, but these women's daily expenses cannot be.'
Defaults on maintenance payments end up having a 'knock-on effect' in that the women run up late-payment charges when they are late in paying their bills.
But a 31-year-old divorcee who gave his name only as Azman is adamant that he is justified in not paying up his $200 every month. The cleaner, who divorced his wife in January and has not paid her maintenance for two months, called her an irresponsible parent who leaves the care for her children to someone else.
'It is not worth giving her the money. I feel she doesn't deserve it.'
[email protected] [email protected]
