I used to be a financial adviser - a long long time ago when the Financial Services Act was first coming into effect.
So I am very very rusty (my knowledge past its sell by date I expect).
However, where you have a contract which creates a liability with a third party (which you will be when divorced) then you can take out an insurance yourself to protect yourself in case of the death of the joint liability holder.
So what I am saying is that if your wife is worried about you dieing then she can take out and pay for an insurance on your life.
I would also say just because your new partner and her children have recently been put on your life insurance it doesn''t mean that is an indication that she has done anything wrong or that she has interferred with your marriage to your wife whilst together.
It does however, indicate quite rightly that you do not want her to benefit from any insurance payout. I do believe in any case that if you did die and your estate went through probate that the trustee dealing with it would have to ensure that pre-existing debt was paid out. I think I am right, check that out but it does make me wonder what on earth your wifes solicitors are playing at.
I cannot imagine that this opportunity no longer exists as many people enter into partnerships (there is partnership insurance) and a legal firm should be fully aware of that.
I do consider that advice and basically that threat to be highly inflamatory and totally wrong - to the point I would say grossly negligent.
Disgraceful I do believe - perhaps before I burst into flames it would be a good idea if you phoned an IFA and I think they would be able to tell you over the phone in an instant whether I am still right.
The other option is to contact your bank as they usually have IFAs available or on site.
Well I have just had a brief look at disposition of assets and what that might mean in accountancy terms.
I think it would mean that there would be a big argument if you did die regarding who was entitled to the insurance and possibly could result in legal wrangling (more legal wrangling).
Think you need to be very cautious here and ask the right questions. It wouldn''t surprise me if on taking on the mortgage (if that is what they want to happen ie she stays in the house and you stay on the mortgage debt) that they fail to mention that she is to indemnify (agree to take on the liability) of the joint mortgage debt.
I think the straight forward solution is that it is a silly idea as in any case your children are named as potential beneficiaries of the insurance and your children are currently housed in the FMH - which is the point on divorce that you want to protect your childrens interests going forward but not be a slave to a departed spouse (no matter how dear they were to you).
So, maybe the disposition should be noted in favour of your two children and in that way you satisfy your obligation to your children, you comply with your current interests in your new partner and you do not let your stbx wife stitch you up.
Well deep breath, I have put forward a without prejudice offer of/ she Kees house and 40-50k equity and 25% of police pension and Clean Break and she has 3 days to think about it. My solicitor says this us very generous and wad a bit dubious about the offer but tbh I just want her gone....
Thanks ruby, and I hear you. What I am wondering is, is this fair? Also if she doesn''t accept and it goes to court can I ask for costs? I just can''t afford this anymore and need this settled. I have a feeling she won''t accept as In questionnaire a quRter of the questions were about my new partners finances which I didn''t answer. So I think she will push this to court totry and get a judge to order her insane requests.