Her Solicitors made a silly low first offer with her pensions excluded.
My Solicitor is proposing a response with both pensions excluded but a 52% (Me) 48% (Her) split of the circa £780k remaining assets to account for the pension differences. I''d gain an an extra £15.5k up front by this method but would be losing out on circa £78k pensions pot which is be the balancing amount to make half of the pension pot if we split it equally.
Does this sound reasonable? at first glance it seems like a small amount to trade for the pension exclusion.
I''m looking for a settlement that takes into account giving up my career and her hugely higher salary and her future earning potential.
Overall does the suggestion sound fair. Would the figures be different if I was the wife in my circumstances?
SM: advantages you get money from your ex. Disadvantages none.
You''ll only get SM if you need it. If you can''t afford to live, pay the bills, etc. If you are dependent on your wife''s income. If you can afford to live on your own and new partner''s income then you wouldn''t be awarded SM even if you do go for it.
I would say the proposed settlement seems fair. Certainly, with this amount of assets, if she is not prepared to make a sensible offer then it''s worth making a court application.
It looks very fair to me, possibly too fair to your ex given her high rate of take-home pay. I would argue that, if you are going to ignore pensions, of which hers is significantly greater than yours, you should be looking at mroe than 52%. Given the length of marriage, your career break and comparatively low income I would have thought you should be looking at least at 60% of assets.