Without such findings, we cannot determine whether the court analyzed each party's net disposable income, based on all legitimate financial obligations, or whether the court even considered Mr. Primus' ability to pay the $500 monthly amount. See Singer v. Singer, 623 A.2d 1226, 1228-1229 (D.C. 1993) (trial court "did not on the record indicate upon what evidence it relied and how it concluded that $500 per month was the proper alimony award under the particular circumstances of this case"); see also Moore v. Moore, 391 A.2d 762, 771 (D.C. 1978) (remanding award of child support for further proceedings because "[w]e cannot discern in the trial court's findings . . . a sufficient determination of Mr. and Mrs. Moore's respective abilities to pay"). The trial court's statement that Mrs. Primus "will need assistance to continue to live in the family home and meet her debt obligations" does not provide us with any indication of how the court arrived at the $500 figure.
FERREN, Associate Judge: We grant rehearing of our decision in this divorce case, see Singer v. Singer, 623 A.2d 1226 (D.C. 1993), because we no longer can say to the required certainty that the proceeds of the sale of the house in which the Singers lived were distributable as marital property under D.C. Code ยง 16-910(b) (1989). The parties became engaged in 1973.