Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
In Touch Weekly
Rachel Lindsay’s Ex Bryan Abasolo Borrowed Money From Parents to Fight ‘Bachelorette’ Star in Divorce Court
By Ryan Naumann,
13 days ago
Getty (2)
Bachelorette alum Rachel Lindsay‘s estranged husband Bryan Abasolo revealed in court that he has had to borrow money from his parents to fund his divorce battle, In Touch can exclusively report.
In Touch obtained the newly filed income an expense declaration submitted by Bryan, 44, in court. Last month, the court awarded him $13,000 a month in temporary spousal support from Rachel, 39. He asked for $16,275 a month and Rachel proposed around $10,000. The judge ended on a number in the middle.
In his declaration, Bryan, who works as a chiropractor, said he earns $1,341 per month compared to Rachel’s alleged income of $62,019 a month. In addition, he said he brings in another $300 a month in rental income.
Bryan said he has around $10,000 in bank accounts/investment accounts and another $1.7 million in real and personal property.
Mireya Acierto/FilmMagic
His monthly expenses include $7,850 owed on a mortgage, $100 in health care costs, $1,500 on groceries, $1,000 on eating out, $500 on utilities, $250 on his cell phone, $250 on laundry and cleaning, $500 on clothes, $125 for education costs, $2,500 spent on entertainment/gifts/vacations, $400 on auto expenses, $2,500 is put into his savings along with various other expenses.
Bryan said his monthly expenses total $24,569. He currently owes $245,000 on student loans and $7,000 on a credit card. He noted that he has paid his lawyers $6,935 so far.
The payment was made by borrowing $5,435 from his parents and the rest came from his bank account. He said he owes his legal team more than $60,000 for work done on the case.
As In Touch first reported, Bryan is asking the judge to grant a motion allowing him access to $35,000 of community property funds. He said he needs the funds to pay for professional fees. He said he cannot pay the divorce lawyers without the additional funds.
Bryan said, “Rachel has $88,500 in our Charles Schwab accounts and Rachel had $259,207 of community property funds in her Bank of America sole proprietor account upon separation, all of which is community property. This does not include the $250,000 that Rachel already paid out of our Charles Schwab accounts to pay our 2023 estimated taxes.”
Cindy Ord/Getty Images For NYFW: The Shows
“For six months, my attorneys have been asking Rachel for a reasonable contribution to my attorney’s fees and costs so that I can level the playing field, but she abjectly refuses. I am not able to use my forensic accountant, Anna Leh, because she will not work without being paid,” he added.
Bryan added, “Rachel believes she has an exclusive right to access our community property funds to pay for her professionals. Rachel also believes our community property home is all hers.”
He also accused Rachel of sending him a “highly offensive” text after making her first temporary support payment. Rachel had been ordered to pay $13k per month split into two payments.
Bryan said Rachel text him, “BofA: Glender Ruth LLC sent you $6,628.50 for ‘Temp Leech Money,’ the part that he found offensive being “temp[orary] leech money.”
He also asked for sanctions against Rachel. He said, “From day one, I have been committed to working cooperatively with Rachel and her professionals to amicably resolve this case, but Rachel continues to obstruct the process while spinning false narrative about her ‘cooperation’ to the court. She continues to instigate confrontation, just as she did prior to my filing for divorce.”
A judge has yet to rule on Bryan’s motion for additional fees.
Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
It’s essential to note our commitment to transparency:
Our Terms of Use acknowledge that our services may not always be error-free, and our Community Standards emphasize our discretion in enforcing policies. As a platform hosting over 100,000 pieces of content published daily, we cannot pre-vet content, but we strive to foster a dynamic environment for free expression and robust discourse through safety guardrails of human and AI moderation.
Comments / 0