I was divorced a few months ago, no assests apart from my Police pension, (was in a police house.
At this stage no solicitors have been involved at all.
I divorced her due to adultery with a named person who acknowledged the petition.
No child issues.
I have been advised to seek advice from a pensions actuary to get a "realistic" value of my pension. The CETV figures dont really help at the minute.
Anyone got any recommendations or know where i can find a pensions Actuary specialist?
I just want to get her out of my life and sort things once and for all.
You Police Pension is likely to be worth a reasonable amount of money. The standard valuation or starting point is a Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV). It is an acceptable valuation but it tends to significantly under value the pension.
This puts me in something of a dilemma! Your ex could be entitled to 50% of your pension. A valuation done by an actuary will provide a fair valuation, but it will be a good deal more than the CETV, that you can get free from the scheme.
Which begs the question as to why you would pay out your money to get a valuation that is likely to work against you?
It may be inevitable, but it seems to me that you might do better to wait until your ex or her lawyers insist on an actuarial valuation.
Thanks for the advice, i know its going to sting sometime soon.
I will wait to see what comes my way before the next step.
She wont discuss a figure, as she has it in her head that the CETV largest figure is what she should get half of, which is ridiculous.
Police officers today are retiring with about 80k commuting their pensions, whereas she is expecting a payment of about 50k in her hand! which i cannot afford to pay out
Do you know who gets to choose wether its a payment or pension sharing order etc or lump sum.?
She states she gets to choose and i would have to obtain an unaffordable loan to pay her off, obviously i would rather do it by other means.
The method of dealing with the pension – sharing, attachment or offsetting is for the parties to “agree” amongst themselves. My understanding is that if no agreement is reached the Court will make the decision on what is fair to both parties. pension sharing is the “preferred” option as a basic starting point as it has the potential to achieve the likely aims. I provides a “clean-break” and (if properly handled) it can be fair to both parties. However, if the value of the pension is small, the costs of making a pension sharing order can be disproportionate, in which case offsetting is probably the next choice.