We hate each other but we can't afford to get divorced

If anyone knows of a three-bedroom flat in west London going for under £500 a month, I'd love to hear about it. Otherwise, I'm looking at a future of house-sharing with the husband I'm desperate to divorce. He's equally sick of me, but as it stands, we are trapped in our four-bed Victorian terrace together for the foreseeable.
The situation is miserable for us, and I'm certain it's equally stressful for our daughters.
I've been married to Sam, who works in the music industry, for 11 years. We've been separated for nearly eighteen months and, at 40 and 42, we're young enough to start again. But I can't imagine how I'd ever get a new relationship off the ground when my grumpy ex is cooking in the kitchen, or stomping about in the converted attic bedroom where he now sleeps.
Our marriage was always quite volatile, but when I was younger it seemed exciting and we both enjoyed the passionate making-up after the rows. But once we had the girls, that kind of relationship began to seem childish and damaging for them to witness. I realised quite quickly though that Sam didn't want to change. He was wedded to the idea of himself as 'exciting' and was terrified of domesticity and 'settling down'. As a result, he still wanted to go out most nights while I was exhausted from juggling young children and working part-time, and didn't want to spend my 30s racketing around dodgy pubs watching rock bands.
Things came to a head post-pandemic. We were already struggling financially, and it wasn't viable to pay for full-time childcare as I earned less than it would cost. Sam didn't work during lockdown at all and, after that, Brexit badly affected the touring music industry and his income dropped. He wouldn't even consider looking for another job, and we argued constantly about money and his immature attitude. In the end, we agreed we'd come to the end of the road and very sadly decided to separate. Sam was going to move out to a nearby flat that the girls (who are now aged eight and 10) could visit regularly, but that dream died when we looked at rental prices.
With our mortgage, there's no spare money. If we divorce and sell the house, we'll lose thousands in legal fees, and we'll both be left struggling to afford two tiny flats. Plus, we have damp we've not been able to afford to fix so we'd have to drop the price. It's much better for the girls to stay in their current home rather than living in a studio flat over a kebab shop. Sadly, Sam's parents aren't around, my dad's long gone, and my mum lives in a small flat in Derbyshire, so family support isn't an option.
I know the girls like having us both here, although at weekends we do things separately with them – I'll take them swimming, or he'll drive them to dance class. They know we aren't 'together', and that Dad sleeps in the spare room, though we try hard to be civil and pleasant to each other when they're around. But on the days when I'm home, I find his presence very oppressive – he'll leave his stuff all over the kitchen, as if he's marking his territory, or he'll be in his room listening to new bands at ear-splitting volume. I'm too tired of it all to row with him, but I long to have some space of my own.
We generally cook separately – I'll eat with the girls, then he'll grab something before he goes out to a gig, or if he's in, he'll take his dinner to watch TV while I read or work on the laptop. Sometimes we'll watch something as a family, but as soon as the girls are in bed, it feels too weird to continue watching TV as if we're still a couple. Very rarely, we'll cook and eat together with the kids, but when we do, all the conversation is directed at them.
As for friends, we've always had largely separate groups, so I'll have a friend over while he's out, and he'll meet his mates in the pub. We were never 'dinner party people' with 'couple friends', so we've not had that awkwardness at least.
But the fact remains – I don't love Sam any more, and I hate living with him. Our situation is a constant reminder of everything that was wrong with our relationship. I think he's indifferent to me, and I feel like a single parent with an extra teenager thumping around. I'd like to try dating, but I can't imagine what men would think about my living arrangements, particularly as there's no end in sight.
Friends have suggested leaving London and moving up North where property is cheaper, but my job (as a fashion buyer) is here, Sam's work is here, and I won't take the girls away from their dad – plus, they're happy at school, stable at home, and neither of us wants to subject them to a marital split, huge house move and change of school.
For now, we're stuck muddling along, biting our tongues and trying to pretend our ridiculous set-up is manageable. I know it isn't feasible long term, but right now, I don't have a plan. Perhaps in a year or two, one will emerge. For all our sakes, I hope so.
As told to Flic Everett
*All names have been changed
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Gizmodo

36 minutes ago

• Gizmodo

Let's Talk About the Ending of '28 Years Later'

The sequel is coming in January, so there's a lot to break down in Danny Boyle's latest zombie film. One of the few flaws in Danny Boyle's new film, 28 Years Later, is that it ends a chapter, not a full story. That's because this new zombie tale is the first film of a proposed trilogy, one that has its second film coming in January of 2026. With at least one sequel guaranteed, Boyle and his writer, Alex Garland, can safely leave several threads lingering, offering hints of what's to come. Let's break it down with full spoilers. One of the biggest shocks in 28 Years Later is its manic ending. After we watch Spike take the surprise baby back to his home, he goes back to the mainland to live his own life. This, of course, is largely due to a distrust of his father, Jamie, who hit him in the past. All of this feels on brand for the movie, but then Jack O'Connell shows up. O'Connell, best known from films like Sinners and Unbroken, leads some kind of weird, almost Clockwork Orange group of people dressed in colorful jumpsuits, who proceed to gleefully dispatch a group of zombies who are chasing Spike. Spike welcomes the help but we have to question what the deal is. Especially when it's revealed that the character's name is Jimmy. Yes, the same Jimmy from the beginning of the film, whose father was a priest, gave him a special cross, and watched his mother and several childhood friends being eaten alive. What does that do to a person? And what happened to make that scared, lonely child into this flashy, charismatic presence? We don't know for certain but there are clues throughout the movie. For example, in the first third of the movie, Spike and Jamie enter a house and see a man hanging by his feet, waiting to be infected. In that man's chest, though not acknowledged, we can see the letters 'I-M-M-Y.' We can't see the 'J,' but we assume it's there. Jimmy carved his name into this man, for whatever reason. Later, when Spike is traveling with his mom Isla, the name Jimmy is also painted on the side of a shed, like some sort of post-apocalyptic graffiti. From these clues, we can begin to discern that Jimmy and his group are not nice people. They're evil, they're savage, and they are brash. They are certainly not people Spike can trust, though he has to in that moment. At the end of the film we're also left wondering what Jamie, feeling so rejected by his son, will do to get him back. Will Jamie go after Spike? Does he even have that ability? And how will the city deal with the fact that an infected man and woman made a child that isn't infected? That's the kind of revelation that can't be ignored. Plus, who does that child grow up to be? Is her DNA from the parents before or after the infection? There's also the very important piece of information that the sequel is called 'The Bone Temple.' That certainly seems like a reference to Ralph Fiennes' character, Dr. Kelson, and the structures he's erected. Is the movie just about him? Is there another temple of bones? How will that tie into the Spike and Jimmy story? We also know that Cillian Murphy's character Jim, last seen in the original 2002 film, plays a role. How the heck does that work? Certainly, there's lots to ponder and, thankfully, we won't have to wait long to get answers. 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple, directed by Nia DaCosta, is scheduled for release on January 16, 2026.

Yahoo

40 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Hull reacts as Coldplay announces tour dates at Craven Park

In case you missed it, one of the biggest bands of all time is coming to Hull next year. Coldplay will be playing two nights at Craven Park in August next year. The band, fronted by Chris Martin, regularly sell out arena tours all over the globe, so some fans might have had to check twice that their eyes hadn't deceived them when they added Hull to their 2025 UK Tour. Known for their dazzling shows, some fans are in utter disbelief that the band are now playing in Hull for the first time. READ MORE: Take a tour around Hull's new IKEA as it welcomes first customers READ MORE: Why one Hull takeaway makes me look forward to ordering a salad Taking to social media, some people expressed their shock. Vicky couldn't believe it, saying: "How on earth did they think 'Hang on, we'll go do one of our two tour locations in Hull'. Not complaining like." Of course, some could not resist a Rover's gloat. Charlie said, "The band that sing " A Sky Full of Stars ", Will be playing at the Home stadium of the team who has a team Full of Stars". Chair for Hull Kingston Rovers, Dr. Paul Sewell in light of the announcement posted on X, formerly Twitter, said: "Thank you Coldplay. They could have gone anywhere but chose the city of Hull, Hull Kingston Rovers and ⁦ @Sewell_Group ⁩ Craven Park. I have been asked 'why' a lot yesterday, and would like to think that, in part, it was just some decent people choosing some decent people." Following Mr Sewell's post, Matt replied: "Brilliant Paul! Well done to you and all at Rovers. You've done a great deal for this city. I'm sure it's very much appreciated." In what is universally agreed to be a huge success for the city, @RLbl0gger said: "This is actually incredible! A rugby league ground hosting it is amazing let alone @hullkrofficial! Well done whoever negotiated this." The fact that London and Hull are the only two European cities in the upcoming tour has meant that plenty of replies are calling Craven Park "Wembley of the North." Hull KR Chief Executive Paul Larkin said on Rover's website, "We are truly delighted to bring the world's biggest band to East Hull. Sewell Group Craven Park will be rocking for two consecutive nights for the biggest show the City has ever seen. "We can't wait to proudly represent the whole region and North of England, as part of the only European dates announced outside of London. "The stadium is no stranger to big acts with Hull's very own Beautiful South selling out 25,000 tickets in our 2017 City of Culture year, alongside other major concerts from The Who, Little Mix, Rod Stewart and Tom Jones. "However this is on another level, with Coldplay bringing their full, and same production that will be inside Wembley stadium, nothing will be scaled back. We have a fantastic relationship with SJM Concerts, and we'd like to place on record our thanks to them for making this happen, for what is set to be two very special nights." Tickets for Coldplay's gigs go on general sale on Friday, September 27. Tickets go on sale a day early for those with a HU, YO, DN or LN postcode as 50% off tickets are reserved for locals. 10% of ticket sales will go towards Music Venue Trust to help support grassroots venues. You can find out more about how to get tickets here.

Yahoo

41 minutes ago

• Yahoo

"Friend" of Royals Says "Major Shifts" Are Being Secretly Planned for Prince William and Kate Middleton

Kate Middleton has been amping up her royal engagements over the past few months, making high profile appearances at several events including Trooping the Colour and The Order of the Garter Service: And apparently Kate's increased public profile has been carefully planned as the royal couple prepare for some "shifts" in the coming months. An anon person described simply as a "friend" tells People that "There are some major shifts coming behind the scenes," and that Wills and Kate are currently building their team as their eventual ascension to King and Queen creeps closer. As the friend put it, "They are really finessing what works and what doesn't." Speaking of what works and what doesn't, there are rumors that Kate and William are over Prince Harry and Meghan Markle having titles, and plan to formally remove them as soon as William is King. Another friend close to the couple just told the Daily Mail that "They have asked the Sussexes politely to stop using the style, to no avail, so I imagine William will simply issue new letters patent to formally remove the entire family's right to use HRH when he becomes king. It will likely be presented as part of a wider tidying up exercise to reduce, more broadly, the number of HRHs in circulation. He could, for example, say that only working royals are entitled to use HRH, which seems sensible if you are trying to modernize, or specify that only children of the monarch are HRH, not the grandchildren, which would have the added advantage of making things clearer for their own kids' families in due course." could just let Harry and Meghan keep using the titles they were given! Either way! You Might Also Like Here's What NOT to Wear to a Wedding Meet the Laziest, Easiest Acne Routine You'll Ever Try