A well respected, award winning social enterprise
Volunteer run - Government and charity funded
We help 50,000 people a year through divorce

01202 805020

Lines open: Monday to Friday 9am-5pm
Call for FREE expert advice & service info


What are we each entitled to in our divorce settlement?

What does the law say about how to split the house, how to share pensions and other assets, and how much maintenance is payable.

What steps can we take to reach a fair agreement?

The four basic steps to reaching an agreement on divorce finances are: disclosure, getting advice, negotiating and implementing a Consent Order.

What is a Consent Order and why do we need one?

A Consent Order is a legally binding document that finalises a divorcing couple's agreement on property, pensions and other assets.


Do you need help sorting out a fair financial settlement?

Our consultant service offers expert advice and support to help you reach agreement on a fair financial settlement quickly, and for less than a quarter of the cost of using a traditional high street solicitor.


larger share of equity as only works part time?

  • veryfrustrated
  • veryfrustrated's Avatar Posted by
  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
More
10 May 12 #329848 by veryfrustrated
Topic started by veryfrustrated
My partners solicitor is suggesting due to the disparity in pensions he should offer a larger than 50% share of the equity to ofset rather than offering a pension share.
The rational behind it (if you can call it that) is that his stbx only works part time, therefore her mortgage potential is lower and therefore she needs the cash more...she has no disibility, she simply does not fancy working full time.
My partner lives with me in a home I own, of which he has no financial interest in. He feels he is in the same situation as her in regard to wanting to secure his future and wants to either buy into my property or buy something of his own that he can rent out.
Do you think he should stick to his guns and offer 50% equity and 50% pension share or do you think the courts might award her more cash simply due to her self enforced situation?

There are no dependents from the marriage as both children are over 20, as an aside we have one on the way.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

  • WYSPECIAL
  • WYSPECIAL's Avatar
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
More
10 May 12 #329852 by WYSPECIAL
Reply from WYSPECIAL
The thing with a pension is you can''t spend it now.

Court would expect both parties to maximise earnings potential.

  • veryfrustrated
  • veryfrustrated's Avatar Posted by
  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
More
10 May 12 #329853 by veryfrustrated
Reply from veryfrustrated
Thanks for the reply.

Exactly our point, why should she get the cash now and he have to wait for the pension when they both have the same earning potential, the only difference is that he works full time and she does 16 hours a week.

We feel the solicitor is just looking for an easy solution....and that is my partners solicitor.

  • Fiona
  • Fiona's Avatar
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
10 May 12 #329864 by Fiona
Reply from Fiona
It isn''t that straight forward. The solicitor may well be correct. He/she will be working day in day out with the local courts and should have experience how the judges locally tend to view matters.

Earning potential is one factor. Lifestyle, the nature of the relationship and the way the marriage was conducted are others. If the wife worked part-time during the marriage when resources allow a court may not expect her to work full time after, particularly if she is 50+ and nearing retirement.

Also the main considerations in a divorce settlement are the finances and responsibilities of the family divorcing rather than obligations to a second family.

  • veryfrustrated
  • veryfrustrated's Avatar Posted by
  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
More
10 May 12 #329867 by veryfrustrated
Reply from veryfrustrated
Thanks for your reply,It is interesting to see the different views of people on this forum.
Yes it is certainly the case that she did work part time throughout the marriage, although my partner had been asking her for years to increase her hours due to him having to take a lower paid, less stressful job due to illness.


I thought as per the previous reply that both parties were expected to take reasonable steps to maximise his/her income but now see that it is possibly not the case.

so confusing.

  • Lostboy67
  • Lostboy67's Avatar
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
More
10 May 12 #329873 by Lostboy67
Reply from Lostboy67
Hi
It is a complicated area when offsetting cash now against pension in the future, particularly if retirement is a long way off.
Typically there may be a ''discount'' so for example in exchange for £1 cash now she would give up £2 of pension share. This would be a 50% discount although I''ve seen posts where it has been higher (upto 75% discount)

LB

  • Fiona
  • Fiona's Avatar
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
10 May 12 #329879 by Fiona
Reply from Fiona
Individual circumstances are important. Pensions are considered less valuable than liquid assets because they are a long term investment for retirement and can''t be turned into cash. Therefore there may be some discounting when offsetting pensions against other assets. The closer to retirement the less any discount.

Moderators: wikivorce teamrubytuesdaydukeyhadenoughnowTetsSheziLinda SheridanForsetiMitchumWhiteRoseLostboy67WYSPECIALBubblegum11