What does "Not for consideration mean"?

Hello,

I am respondent in a divorce, sadly. We are at the stage where she has refused to talk about money for 3 years and with two weeks left she now wants to talk!! I am guessing to push me into a corner and act in desperation just to get it over and done with.

The financial side of things is my income £24K, hers £12K. Her pension CTV 8k, mine is apparently 300K!! I am wondering how hers has been calculated, if it is end of life, as mine is, or just at this moment in time.

Anyway, house in negative equity, paid over half the term.

Her solicitor has left 4 proposals, all of which state variations of: £700 a month, all of my lump sum @ £30 - 40K when I leave the RAF, and the house to be transferred to her "not for consideration"

What does this mean? Who is expected to pay for the mortgage, me or her? If half of the mortgage has been paid and the house is worth £130 - 160K surely this should be taken into consideration?

I am residing in RAF Single accommodation so therefore when I leave I have nowhere to live. And nothing in which to furnish a house with!!

Any ideas?

"not for consideration" is not a legal phrase its just what the solicitor wrote.

The CETV is the valuation by an actuary at the time of valuation, so its not what its worth at the point of retirement its the value as of now, uniformed service pensions do tend to be worth much more than money purchase pensions, 300k is on the high side though.

All you really need to know is that what a solicitor asks for does not mean its a realistic idea of what a judge would order if push comes to shove, they are often relaying what their client would like, not necessarily what they are entitled too.

The CETV that I have is the total at the end of my projected career. I have no idea what hers is, I think it is total up to now, but any official CETV statement from her is missing.

Believe me, mine is much less than most. It is the average for any Service leaver after 30 years service. Although they do give a full projection based upon death at an age of about 90, if I remember correctly.

I am disturbed by the sly and downright deceitful tactics from her solicitor; leaving just two weeks and writing to the court giving the impression we are under negotiation, simply so that her client is not ordered to pay my costs for not talking about the finances, when we have only just started talking despite me trying to address this with her for 3 years.