So here\’s a dreadfully sexist question

Does this man have any money?

\"qtip\"

He is 51. She is 29.

The property tycoon jailed for refusing to reveal his finances during one of Britain’s biggest divorce battles has described his punishment as ‘ridiculous’.

Scot Young, 51, a one-time ‘fixer’ for the super-rich, has claimed he ‘lost’ his £400?million fortune and insists he is penniless and unable to pay maintenance.

Clearly, none of us has any idea about the truth here at all. But what is our opinion?
Mine, dreadful sexist pig that I am, is that he just ain\’t penniless. This is his current, post-divorce, girlfriend.
He\’s got cash in my opinion.
BTW, has \”fashion designer\” replaced MAW as the designation of choice these days?

 

15 comments on “So here\’s a dreadfully sexist question

  1. I can’t believe I’m locked up with killers and rapists over a matrimonial matter

    You’re not, you idiot. You’re locked up for, as the man (possibly woman …) in the wig said “a ‘flagrant and deliberate’ contempt of court”. Stop treating the judge as you have been treating the ex-wife’s lawyers and you might be let out.

  2. If his wife did the family stuff, raised the kids, while he went out to work, it’s absolutely right that she should get some of the cash, Andy. He couldn’t have done what he did without the wife, which is why the courts make these awards.

  3. I’m sorry, why should he pay? She was raising her own kids. And of course she chose to stay at home and not work.

    Sorry, I fail to see entirely why she should get half. Maybe a backdated nannies stipend but no more.

    Never get married.

  4. Interested (#7) said “Where does it say she was getting half?”

    If you’re talking about the scruff in Tim’s picture, it’s a British divorce so 50:50 is the default position.

  5. Andy – Strictly speaking, she ain’t getting anything. The court’s 2011 award of £27,500 a month was on account of his two daughters. It may seem a lot, but presumably the court took a proportionate view given his considerable wealth.

    He hasn’t complied with the court’s order, claiming that he’s since lost his entire fortune, although his lifestyle continues on a lavish basis – £155,000 for rent and £151,000 for “other items” financed, he says, by generous friends.

    He is of course free to disclose his financial situation to the court (and indeed is under order to do so), but so far he has declined to do so on the grounds that he thought that the relevant officials might have been private detectives hired by his wife.

  6. For a 51 year old male with his looks (and clothes) (and personal grooming) to end up with a woman who looks like that on his arm, he’s got to have potloads of money stashed somewhere.

    I can personally testify to the fact that big bosomed, tight bottomed, bleach-blond breeder bunnies do not naturally gravitate to unkempt, plain-faced, 50-something males. If they did, I’d be spending some of my personal fortune on Viagra.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>