Yahoo Finance Divorcee Graham Mills given consent to fight the settlement granted to his ex – but he needs £39k
The man at the centre of one of Britain's most-followed divorced battles is still almost £40,000 short of the cash he needs to take the fight to the highest court.
Graham Mills, 50, has raised £11,000 in "crowdfunding" through the Just Giving website as he bids to overturn a ruling that he says turns men into "human cash machines".
That leaves him £39,000 short of the £50,000 he says he needs to meet the cost of taking his case to the Supreme Court, which last week granted permission to pursue the appeal.
Mr Mills divorced his wife, Maria, 15 years ago, with a settlement that saw Mrs Mills receive £230,000 and £1,100 a month in maintenance payments.
Two years ago Mr Mills tried to halt the payments via a court hearing but in February this year judges sensationally ordered him to increase maintenance to £1,441 a month.
This was despite the couple's son being aged 23 and Mrs Mills making a series of poor investments with the lump sum she was paid in 2002.
Lawyers claim the decision has reopened the debate about how well divorce settlements reflect the reality of modern life.
Mr Mills argues the latest ruling completely absolves his former wife from any responsibility over how she spent the money given to her as part of the settlement.
"If they're saying I should be taking responsibility for someone's financial decisions, I really ought to be in control of their spending," he said.
"I have no control over her spending, which is perfectly reasonable, but I am being held accountable for the mistakes she's made.
"What happens if she spends her way through that and then comes back for more? I'm left picking up the tab."
Mr Mills, who founded and runs a successful conveyancing firm, said many of the people who have donated so far were women.
"There is no doubt some women have been affronted by this. They think that the case puts feminism back twenty years. Some think it's an affront that a woman should look to a man to look after her – it goes completely against equality."
The order stipulates that Mrs Mills will receive the payments for life, causing Mr Mills to have to rethink his own retirement plans, he claimed.
"When I'm 85 I'll still be paying her £1,441 a month. I can't see myself ever retiring because of that commitment", he said - though he wouldn't reveal how much he earned.
Rosie Schumm, a partner at Forsters, a law firm, suggested Mr Mills could struggle to convince the court to overturn the Court of Appeal's decision. The latest case hinges on whether the court did not sufficiently take the original lump sum into account when considering Mrs Mills' current housing costs.
"Given that Mr Mills had agreed to the joint lives term initially, and could well afford to pay the sum required to meet the shortfall between Mrs Mills’ income and basic needs, and that Mrs Mills had suffered adversity in her health and had not - as the judge found in the Court of Appeal - mismanaged her finances, the outcome in the Court of Appeal seems to have been absolutely sound," she said.
Mr Mills said he has already spent £50,000 of his own money and would have to borrow more if he doesn't reach his funding target for the new case.
He is one of a growing number of people crowdfunding legal action. He used Just Giving, a company normally associated with charity fundraising, while sites such as Crowd Justice have been set up specifically for the purpose. The terms of websites differ, with some requiring the full amount requested to be raised before realising any cash to the fund raiser. Others take a big cut on funds raised.
Ciaran McClean, a Green Party member, is currently raising money to fight the Tories and DUP's coalition agreement. She argues it breaks the terms of the Good Friday agreement and has so far received over £65,000 through the site.
