Splitting Assets - What's Fair

I'm currently in discussions over splitting assets, long marriage, 25 years, wife hasn't worked for 23 years though has some capacity to work (can do something), children over 21 and left university, main asset ignoring cars (both under £10k) is the the Former matrimonial home, after mortgage repaid is worth between £1m-£1.2m, assuming we can sell it with Brexit around the corner. I originally put about £14k from my apartment into the house originally but I expect that may not be relevant due to the elapse of time over the marriage. She wants 56% and me to have 44%, in other words about £600k verses my £475k, her legal fees are horrific leaving her about £550k and for me about £450k. Given the length of the marriage, is this fair as we have both contributed, me financially and her managing the family, is this split considered fair? And where would a court go at a Final Hearing on the equity split in such circumstances?

The first consideration would be need. How much would it cost to have a mortgage free 1-2 bed property of a quality similar to the former marital home?

If you can both be housed mortgage free then a 50:50 split seems fair enough. There may be some adjustment to allow her an emergency repairs etc fund. Some of the equity could be seen as capitalised spousal maintenance.

The split you have described could well be considered fair depending on what else she is getting in the way of spousal support and pension share.

Hadenoughnow

Given the discrepancies in incomes I'd take it if it were me.

What about other assets though? Presumably with your salary you have a hefty pension pot?

What about savings etc?

Yes, to complete the picture, we had a pension report from an actuary, the pot is £1.12m, currently she would receive £40k more than the report recommends, done on CETV equate to £580k to her and £540k to me.

The house would be split under the current proposals 56/44 in her favour on assets valued at £1.1m net, giving her net about £550k (she has horrific legal costs) and me £450k net, a £100k difference after costs or £125k difference before costs. Coupled with the income previously indicated.

Is this a fair deal or should I go to a final hearing, if I got 50/50 equity split and £20k annual spousal maintenance to pay that would make me about £75k better off after costs, assuming another £30k for legal costs at he final hearing.

The variants at a Final Hearing is how the court would look at the length of the marriage, her limited working time since the children were born now 21 & 23, though everyone has some capacity to work in determining a percentage split on the assets. Her needs are estimated at £1,400/month, offered £1,666/month at FDR increased to £2,000/month to get towards agreement. No other savings, only two cars each sub £10k.

Any views would be appreciated.

Any further views?

Team Wikki, Can you explain how the discrepancy in incomes affects the equity split, please? The difference in value of this 44/56 split is £160,000.

I am going to have to pay £2,000 per month in spousal maintenance for 11.5 years until I’m 65 and an extra £40k over 50/50 in relation to the pension pot.

Incomes are all part of the picture. Division of finances on divorce is about ensuring you are both adequately housed and have an income now and in the future. Lifestyle is also part of the equation. Generally speaking there is some reduction in living standards after divorce but it should not be one sided.

If one party earns a high income and the other has been a home maker, their contributions are still considered equal.

It follows then that, once you are both housed and your respective basic income needs are met, it would not be unreasonable for there to be some concessions towards lifestyle if the money is there to support this.


Hadenoughnow