I have just been to my first mediation and it was dreadful can anybody help.
Started by the female mediator in my 121 stating the last time she had a Scot she couldn''t understand a word spoken. I laughed this off.
Then she scanned my initial form. Your pension will play a large part in this she declared. I said my solicitor indicated that due to the marriage being less than 5 years that may not be the case. She replied that was wrong and a recent case involving a football player set a precedent on cohabitation prior to marriage.
Left room for ex,s 121 . Took ages and then she eventually got me back in and apologised and said we had a very long conversation trying to get legal aid but WE just missed it. I said did my partner tell you she was cohabitating with an accountant. Ex started the tears and mediator gets the hankies out.
She then asked why I was using unreasonable conduct on the divorce as it required a detailed description which upset my ex couldn''t I just say adultery with an unknown. I said there was no adultery and she said the law is an ass , adultery will not be challenged.
She asked why I ticked the box saying ex should pay. I explained she caused the divorce. Mediator said we should share to make it easier.
Then said in future sessions I would pay slightly more as I earned more.
Finished by asking my ex to wit behind to discuss how best to handle herself in future sessions. I assume was in relation to the tears.
The mediator is correct it doesn''t matter what reasons you use for the divorce and it''s best to use the least contentious. Adultery is sexual intercourse with a third party whilst still married so your wife is committing adultery now living with a new partner. There is no point arguing about the costs of the actual divorce, in the grand scale of things the cost of divorce tends to be insignificant when compared to the costs of sorting out the finances.
The duration of the marriage is only one factor, there are others in the s25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 checklist. The welfare of children is a priority and a period of cohabitation may be added to the length of the relationship to form the duration of the relationship. this is particularly true when there are children and the finances are joint rather than kept separately.
Your pension will be seen as part of the overall factors although because of your age differences and the relationship being shortish it is likely some allowance will be made for your contributions to the pension fund before the relationship.
It''s worth sticking with mediation because although the first couple of sessions can be quite stormy a mediator can defuse the situation so that constructive progress can be made. Even if no agreement is reached you should at least come away with an idea what can be agreed, what might be compromised and the issues in dispute. That can save a significant amount of money in solicitors exchanging letters.
we had six sessions of mediation and to be honest they were a waste of time. i felt bullied by my x and the mediator felt they wanted it all sorted in double quick time. We talked round and round in circles and when it eventually got sorted it was all irrelevant what had been done at mediation. Whatever is decided at mediation it is not legally binding.
The only useful thing i got out of iti was that i was able to tell my then husband how i felt and he had to sit and listen with the mediator there, didnt get any answers from him tho he just used to shrug his shoulders!