Asset division and maintenance question

Probably the wrong place to ask this question - but here goes in any case.
Does anybody know where you can find out previous examples of how the assets and maintenance would be decided in court cases. I am going through mediation at the moment and would be interested to have a look at some 'real live' cases and decisions. I realise it is going to vary from case to case, court to court etc but it would be handy compare and to try to negotiate with realistic aspirations.

Fio,
What might be better may be to try to understand the mechanism by which settlements are reached - As you say - every case if different.

Add up the assets, deduct the liabilities, watch out for pension valuations (CETV isn't really its true monetary value).

Then look at circumstances - His earnings potential, your earnings potential, his working life, your working life.

Are there any special needs? disabilities?

Kids at uni? what provision for them?

If I recall correctly, you have no dependents still at home, you would earn considerably less than he would, so instead of 50:50, perhaps it should be 60:40, or 65:35.

Sadly divorce in this country is a no blame game, so although he was the adulterer, it makes little difference to the division of assets.

Spousal maintenance is usually calculated as being a third of the joint income pot - add his and your nett incomes together, divide by 3 and deduct your nett income off - the balance is the spousal maintenance figure he should be paying you.

Maybe he might want to keep his pension and will negotiate with equity against his pension, and spousal maintenance - many ways of skinning a cat!

See how you go, and if I can help, let me know

Best of luck - calculators at dawn!
Mike

mike62 wrote:

Fio,
What might be better may be to try to understand the mechanism by which settlements are reached - As you say - every case if different.

Add up the assets, deduct the liabilities, watch out for pension valuations (CETV isn't really its true monetary value).

Then look at circumstances - His earnings potential, your earnings potential, his working life, your working life.

Are there any special needs? disabilities?

Kids at uni? what provision for them?

If I recall correctly, you have no dependents still at home, you would earn considerably less than he would, so instead of 50:50, perhaps it should be 60:40, or 65:35.

Sadly divorce in this country is a no blame game, so although he was the adulterer, it makes little difference to the division of assets.

Spousal maintenance is usually calculated as being a third of the joint income pot - add his and your nett incomes together, divide by 3 and deduct your nett income off - the balance is the spousal maintenance figure he should be paying you.

Maybe he might want to keep his pension and will negotiate with equity against his pension, and spousal maintenance - many ways of skinning a cat!

See how you go, and if I can help, let me know

Best of luck - calculators at dawn!
Mike

Is that SM calculation set in stone ?? For me that works out to £253 a month ? I would be requiring double that !! My sol said he thought I was likely to get it ?

Annie - NO!

You have special needs. It is simply a rule of thumb to take a guess in uncomplicated situations.

Mike

That's ok then. You had me worried there Mike !!

sorry to jump in here, but can you clarify the sm calculation for me.
My nett income a month is £1400 my xtb brings home about £2600. I'm hoping I've got the calculation wrong but by my reckoning I'll have to give him sm! (we have 3 children all in full time education, although the eldest is at uni dont know if that makes any difference).

I think I answered a similar question yesterday There is no formulaic approach to SM and it's the overall picture that is important. Each individual case is treated separately at the discretion of the judges.

The deciding factors in most cases are the need of one party and the ability to pay of the other. Generally the more the capital settlement is in favour of the lower earner the less ability the higher earner will have to pay SM because their monthly outgoings for accommodation will be more.

It's unlikely that someone on or below average earnings will be deemed to have the ability to pay SM. Benefits, tax credits etc paid to the lower earner usually means there isn't so much discrepancy between the two incomes anyway.

When there are more than enough assets to meet both parties requirements the emphasis moves away from need onto sharing and it is now recognised that after a long marriage both parties should benefit from any surplus income eg the wife in the MacFarlane case was awarded a third (£250k) of the husband's income for life.