Sanity check on settlement offer.

Hi. I'm helping a friend 'P' navigate their divorce. They are the petitioner and do not have legal representation but their spouse 'R' does. I'll refer to them as P and R, the only channel of communication is by e-mail between P, and R's solicitor.

P is seeking a simple lump sum settlement on a Clean Break, and offered a figure for settlement when pressed. The figure was an estimation based on less than 50% of the assumed equity in the marital home which is of modest value. R's solicitor has responded with a rejection and an extremely low counter offer.

This is where we need the sanity check. Is P being at all unreasonable?

Note that the marital home is in R's sole name, being bought shortly before cohabitation began. P would never wish for the house to be sold but believes that R can muster the means to resource a settlement.

Additional information as per the sticky for this sub forum:-

Your respective ages;
P 41, R 43.

The number of children you have and their ages;
No children.

The length of your marriage and any period of pre marriage cohabitation;
10 years, a rounded down figure. Preceded by 2 years cohabitation.

Your respective incomes;
P very low as on benefits. ESA and housing benefit only.
R estimated around £35k+

Your respective outgoings;
P struggles to make ends meet. All income has to be expended.
R unknown but was fiscally prudent during relationship.

Your assets - both soley held and joint;
P has no assets, no savings, lives in rented furnished accomodation. Took no share of any joint assets upon splitting up.
R retained possesion of the marital home and chattels. Savings unknown.

Your liabilities.
P has no liabilities.
R unknown but likely to be similar.

It's very difficult to comment when there are no figures in the information provided. The priority here is the housing needs of both parties. If the house is sold, how will P rehouse themselves? Can R get another mortgage to rehouse themselves? P would also need o ensure that any lump sum settlement doesn't impact on her benefits - or if it does, that s/he is able to live on the lump sum for a reasonable length of time. Are there any health issues affecting P#s ability to work?

Is it possible your friend could join Wikivorce and post directly? When third parties post on someone's behalf, invariably some of the important information is missing, or the friend ins't in possession of the full facts.

Thank you for your reply Sylvia, I am happy to answer any questions but my friend may not wish for certain things to be divulged on a public forum. Please be assured that I am in possession of the pertinent facts known to my friend P and I am posting on their behalf with their full knowledge and blessing.

There is no question of the house being sold. The house belongs to R, and P would not wish to proceed with a claim if this were necessary. P believes that R should be able to settle without needing to sell the house.

I ran some figures through the Divorce Calculator and it suggested a sum for P's share of net assets which is substantially greater than that which P had proposed for settlement. The counter proposal was roughly 10% of this and that's why we're wondering if P is being at all unreasonable.

going through my own divorce and learning the ropes P is not being unreasonable from the limited information provided, for sure she should be housed if there was enough in the house. Its having to know exactly without having half the ouse. 10 years is a mid to long term marriage according to my barrister so less than half the house does not seem unreasonable.

Thank you jenson, and sorry for being so slow to acknowledge your reply, which is appreciated.