'I'm not a gold digger' says woman after judges rule husband should support her for life

A woman who blew a six-figure divorce payout on a string of “unwise” property deals claims she isn’t a gold digger after judges ruled she should be supported for life by her ex-husband.

In a 2002 divorce settlement part-time beauty therapist Maria Mills, 51, was awarded a £230,000 lump sum and £1,100 a month in maintenance so she could buy a house and look after their young son.

Her and ex-husband Graham Mills, who were married for 13 years, agreed that Mrs Mills should receive all their cash assets in order to buy herself a house, while Mr Mills, a surveyor, could keep his business interests.

Judges heard that she “unwisely invested” the money, plunging her into debt and leaving her “unable to meet her basic needs”.

But following a two-year legal battle the Court of Appeal last week ruled in her favour, increasing the payments to £1,441.

Mr Mills, 50, told the Standard of his “anger and frustration” after the ruling and has called for a time limit on maintenance payments so that divorced couples can “move on”.

However in an interview with the Mail on Sunday, Mrs Mills defended her position.

She said: “I feel like I have been through a character assassination, both at the hands of my ex-husband and the public.

“They’ve said I’m a gold digger. It’s not true. I’m nothing of the sort.

“I genuinely believe women get the rough end of the stick after divorce. They have to juggle working and bringing up the family. Whereas men can just focus on themselves and their career.”

Mrs Mills revealed that she had no wish to go court, but it was her husband who brought the initial action when he sought to reduce his maintenance payments so he had more money to spend on his new wife and child.

This was despite the fact the part time beauty therapist claims she got a bad divorce settlement following poor legal advice.

After they married in 1988 the couple set up a joint company, the successful surveying company Mr Miller still runs today, each owning 50 per cent.

She said: “I should never have allowed myself to let go my directorship, shares in the company, pensions and life insurance.”

She also dismissed claims her financial situation was the result of a series of poor business decisions.

She told the Mail on Sunday: “Just look at the figures. In the years since my divorce I bought a home in Weybridge in Surrey in 2002 for £345,000 and sold it in 2006 for the same price.

“I bought another in Wimbledon in 2006 for £323,000 that I sold a year later for £435,000 and I paid £520,000 for my final home in Battersea.

"I sold it two years later for £580,000. Do these figures look like someone who made 'poor financial decisions' or 'unwise' property investments? I didn’t make a loss on any of them.”

She added it was a "whole series of problems" including her own poor health that devastated her finances.