Sunday, 14 January 2024

Times are hard.


Times must be hard for the fragrant Tatiana Soroka (right in photo). In her divorce from Billionaire Farkhad Akhmedev she received just £453 Million; which is obviously not enough.


I hear that she is now suing her lawyer, the infamous Fiona Shakleton (left), for £600 Million because she failed to secure ownership of her ex-husband's superyacht the 377ft MV Luna.

I know nothing of Ms Soroka but she reminds me of John Cleese when he divorced his wife Alyce. She took almost all of his money (also ably assisted by Fiona Shakleton), which prompted Cleese to say 'I can't imagine what she would have been awarded had she contributed anything to our marriage'. Her two children by a previous marriage will now inherit Cleese's fortune, whereas there's nothing left for his own children.

I wish I could remember who said "One thing I will say about my ex-wife is that she was a very good housekeeper; she kept all my houses!". Maybe that was Cleese!

I'm sure Ms Soroka can get-by on her £453 Million, but I do think that if she'd contributed 50% to the cost of the yacht, then she should have that returned. However, I'm sure she would have remembered that at the time of her wind-fall divorce.



 

20 comments:

  1. Let us pay due respect to Tatiana's lawyer. She became Baroness Shackleton of Belgravia in 2010 - presumably for services to her own bank account.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Women like this give the rest of us a bad name. We are not all greedy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree totally. I also think that Shackleton should be ashamed of herself.

      Delete
  3. I met a chap recently living in a one room bedsit who was in the middle of a divorce settlement. His wife had met a new man and finished the marriage and he was living in the family home with her. They have land, horses, daughter at the Royal Ballet school and the wife is on for 80/20 split of the family home and money all in her favour. He seemed genuine and honest. He said to me something has to change because it could not be right. I was inclined to agree with him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's been this way for a long time. There seems to will to alter anything.

      Delete
  4. Of course she must have married him for love in the first place. Nothing to do with him being billionaire.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Surprising that they didn't sign a 'pre-nup'.

      Delete
  5. Men nearly always come off badly { money wise } through a divorce. { and I say that as a woman } Women are still having to deal with equal rights but, something needs to change for men after a divorce. They really do suffer money wise and if there are children involved they don't often get very much access. Something needs to change.
    As for Tatiana .....it's all a different world XXXX

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a mind-boggling amount of money, and yet she wants more. Unbelievable.

      Delete
  6. You could show her how to live well on that amount of money.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It isn't always the men getting off worse..some, like my ex, tell lies about their income and hide a certain amount...run up debts in a joint account before it was stopped...it meant I only got ¾ of the money to look after our kids..I didn't ask for or get a penny for myself.
    So these high profile moneyed cases create an incorrect view if what is a sad situation

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, cases such as the above are the norm. If you have proof that your ex had hidden money; go back to court.

      Delete
    2. Long gone now...and he lost out by being obviously unpleasant. The kids are not fools...and I did not say anything..or have to. Neither were his friends..still my friends too as are many of his family

      Delete
  8. Divorce is ugly and costly. A friend went to trial with 4 young children in tow. She had to find a job and ended up at Bloomingdales as a sales clerk. Her attorney was crap. A neighbor, has an ex and he pays her lump sums, at 6 month intervals. He also bought her a home equal to the home she was accustomed to. She will live very comfortably for the rest of her life. His luxury lifestyle has not deviated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the UK it's usually the wife who 'takes all'. I've known several cases where the husband is left with nothing, even though all the family wealth came from him.

      Delete
  9. 453 million is not enough??? I'm astonished. How much does she need per day? and surely she can buy her own yacht with that amount and still have plenty left over.

    ReplyDelete
  10. When I divorced all I got was the kids and my furniture, he took his stuff and off he went. There simply was no money or house to be fought over. He didn't even contribute to the child care, declared himself bankrupt instead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If she'd been awarded £10 Million she would have been able to live the rest of her life in luxury. A woman to avoid.

      I suppose if there's nothing in the kitty to divide, there's not much that can be done about it, but at least he should have contributed to the child care.

      Delete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...