Discussion
Cheap shot to throw the "bitter or twisted" line, but just sharing the reality of the family law which seems skewed towards one side once applied. I will pay out a few quid yes, but I walk away a happy man once this process is done, and retain over 70% of my assets. If I had any bitterness, it would be directed at the legal profession who game this system for their own advantage.
CloudStuff said:
TownIdiot said:
You say this as if men have no agency in how they live their married life.
The law is the same for men and women.
Any life experience you'd like to share to illuminate your perspective?The law is the same for men and women.
For balance I would say that none of the divorces I've been close to have involved some of the worst excesses such as the woman accusing the man of abuse or whatever. I agree that is unforgivable
The only bloke I know who received what anyone could call a shafting probably deserved it as if his wife had wanted a proper job he wouldn't have been a happy boy at all.
lenny007 said:
Irrespective of his and hers inheritances, this is a pretty good blog on how inheritances or indeed any pre-matrimonial assets are addressed such as previous properties, etc.
https://osborneslaw.com/blog/inheritance-and-divor...
TLDR - if the inheritance or assets are used for combined or familial benefit, they can be included in divorce settlements. If they've always remained separate to the family finances and the family / wife has never received any benefit from them, then they can be successfully argued as being non-matrimonial assets.
The basic premise of the courts is that they want each party to be financially self sufficient as soon as is reasonably practical. That doesn't necessarily mean to the same standard of living as before but that will be taken into consideration if required.
Fine in theory. Except:https://osborneslaw.com/blog/inheritance-and-divor...
TLDR - if the inheritance or assets are used for combined or familial benefit, they can be included in divorce settlements. If they've always remained separate to the family finances and the family / wife has never received any benefit from them, then they can be successfully argued as being non-matrimonial assets.
The basic premise of the courts is that they want each party to be financially self sufficient as soon as is reasonably practical. That doesn't necessarily mean to the same standard of living as before but that will be taken into consideration if required.
- A pension wholly accrued before marriage... wife has never received any benefit from it yet is entitled to take half.
- The courts DO try to give the (ex) wife the same standard of living as she was used to. They don't worry to the same degree about the husband. In my case I was able to show how once settled my ex wife would have more disposable income than me despite me earning 9x her salary (because she chose a minimum wage, part time job rather than returning to her well-paid career after kids), but that didn't matter.
And I will say it again regarding the domestic abuse angle that is so often used by women for financial gain - it should not be allowed. Domestic abuse should, in my opinion, be dealt with in the criminal courts and be completely separate to divorce proceedings. And there should be the same penalties for lying about domestic abuse as there are for lying about anything to a criminal court. Until that change is made women will continue to try it on, safe in the knowledge there is no downside or risk.
And for those thinking this isn't common, I don't have the stats. However I know of 5 friends that have been on the receiving end of such false allegations in the past few years (as well as myself), out of 7 friends I know to have got divorced in that time.
The system, like many in this country, is broken.
wiggy001 said:
- A pension wholly accrued before marriage... wife has never received any benefit from it yet is entitled to take half.
But this works both ways. A husband is entitled to half of a wife's pension too. wiggy001 said:
In my case I was able to show how once settled my ex wife would have more disposable income than me despite me earning 9x her salary (because she chose a minimum wage, part time job rather than returning to her well-paid career after kids), but that didn't matter.
I'd love to see the maths behind how someone earning 9 x another person can, all things being equal, have less disposable income when measured in a divorce setting.Muzzer79 said:
But this works both ways. A husband is entitled to half of a wife's pension too.
Only if she has one, and hasn't opted out of every company pension scheme she was entitled to join. But regardless, a pension is deemed a marital asset regardless of when it was saved.Muzzer79 said:
I'd love to see the maths behind how someone earning 9 x another person can, all things being equal, have less disposable income when measured in a divorce setting.
Without going too much into specifics, benefits for someone on minimum wage are fairly generous in this country, especially when that person has a brand new shared ownership home (benefits cover the rent part and her share of the equity in the family home paid off the mortgage part). Add in her keeping our daughter's disability benefit (despite us sharing custody equally so having the same costs) and me having to service existing matrimonial debt (because that is not shared between divorcing parties if it is in only one person's name, whilst savings are) plus remortgaging to buy her out (as I didn't fancy her proposal of me sleeping on my mum's sofa!) and it all adds up to my ex having a similar disposable income to me whilst living in a similar house in the same village.Now in theory I am fine with that as it means my children should have the same standard of living regardless of which parent they are with, but it sticks in the throat a little given the relative choices that we have each made. Another example of "do the right thing and get screwed" which so prevalent in this country.
Edited by wiggy001 on Monday 10th March 15:59
wiggy001 said:
lenny007 said:
Irrespective of his and hers inheritances, this is a pretty good blog on how inheritances or indeed any pre-matrimonial assets are addressed such as previous properties, etc.
https://osborneslaw.com/blog/inheritance-and-divor...
TLDR - if the inheritance or assets are used for combined or familial benefit, they can be included in divorce settlements. If they've always remained separate to the family finances and the family / wife has never received any benefit from them, then they can be successfully argued as being non-matrimonial assets.
The basic premise of the courts is that they want each party to be financially self sufficient as soon as is reasonably practical. That doesn't necessarily mean to the same standard of living as before but that will be taken into consideration if required.
Fine in theory. Except:https://osborneslaw.com/blog/inheritance-and-divor...
TLDR - if the inheritance or assets are used for combined or familial benefit, they can be included in divorce settlements. If they've always remained separate to the family finances and the family / wife has never received any benefit from them, then they can be successfully argued as being non-matrimonial assets.
The basic premise of the courts is that they want each party to be financially self sufficient as soon as is reasonably practical. That doesn't necessarily mean to the same standard of living as before but that will be taken into consideration if required.
- A pension wholly accrued before marriage... wife has never received any benefit from it yet is entitled to take half.
- The courts DO try to give the (ex) wife the same standard of living as she was used to. They don't worry to the same degree about the husband. In my case I was able to show how once settled my ex wife would have more disposable income than me despite me earning 9x her salary (because she chose a minimum wage, part time job rather than returning to her well-paid career after kids), but that didn't matter.
And I will say it again regarding the domestic abuse angle that is so often used by women for financial gain - it should not be allowed. Domestic abuse should, in my opinion, be dealt with in the criminal courts and be completely separate to divorce proceedings. And there should be the same penalties for lying about domestic abuse as there are for lying about anything to a criminal court. Until that change is made women will continue to try it on, safe in the knowledge there is no downside or risk.
And for those thinking this isn't common, I don't have the stats. However I know of 5 friends that have been on the receiving end of such false allegations in the past few years (as well as myself), out of 7 friends I know to have got divorced in that time.
The system, like many in this country, is broken.
Totally agree the domestic abuse attack is beyond the pale and should not form part of the divorce process. But it's not the only method for making things more complex than necessary. Friend of mine ran his business from home and went out to walk the dogs on a Saturday morning. Came home to find the keys wouldn't open the door and his Wife's Sister in the family home saying he wasn't welcome.
There was some back and forth as he quite rightly wanted to know what was going on, the police were called and he was arrested. Arrived at the local station, was placed in a cell and within the hour a solicitor arrived to provide him with documentation stating to stay away from the family home.
This was all pre-arranged by the Sister in Law. He was left with the clothes he was wearing and that was it. Over the following months the solicitor wouldn't permit him access to his own Office in the home due to abuse concerns and he lost his business before finally getting access to the home to collect personal items and business items.
Ironically enough they are now on speaking terms as it became clear the SIL managed most of the process but it's not particularly friendly put it that way.
Astacus said:
I have seen dozens of threads like this on PH and it always ends up this way.
The simple message from me is
Take proper advice regardless of how amicable you think it is
Don’t take advice on divorce from blokes on the internet
Do be fair, most of the advice on this thread has been to take proper legal advice. The rest of the posts have been warnings about why that is necessary.The simple message from me is
Take proper advice regardless of how amicable you think it is
Don’t take advice on divorce from blokes on the internet
again thanks for all the replies.
as an update - hate threads that aren't updated- he's rang her and the house is getting valued this week.
he asked simple questions like how much moneys in each others accounts etc. she refused to answer? assume a brief would have to be instructed to find this out?!
said she's starting divorce procedures online, again this week.
seems like a lot of words are been said but see if any actions are taken.
as an update - hate threads that aren't updated- he's rang her and the house is getting valued this week.
he asked simple questions like how much moneys in each others accounts etc. she refused to answer? assume a brief would have to be instructed to find this out?!
said she's starting divorce procedures online, again this week.
seems like a lot of words are been said but see if any actions are taken.
av185 said:
Abc321 said:
Is it not the case in the UK if you are living together, joint mortgage, etc. then you are essentially married?
Yep effectively.Cohabitees especially if over 2 years have essentially the same financial rights as married couples as many have found out to their financial cost ££.
Also see Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents Act) 1975.
Scary stuff for sure.
It is a long standing myth that cohabitees can have a "common law" marriage.
chip* said:
TownIdiot said:
The law is the same for men and women.
Why don't you ask a family solicitors these 2 questions?- Can a guy claim a share of his wife's inheritance?
- Can a woman claim a share of her husband's inheritance?
Please report back once you have the answers, and we will see if they come back the "same".
kingswood said:
again thanks for all the replies.
as an update - hate threads that aren't updated- he's rang her and the house is getting valued this week.
he asked simple questions like how much moneys in each others accounts etc. she refused to answer? assume a brief would have to be instructed to find this out?!
said she's starting divorce procedures online, again this week.
seems like a lot of words are been said but see if any actions are taken.
In my divorce we both had to provide a year's worth of bank statements to confirm income/expenditure and savings, so your friend's soon-to-be ex might be in for a surprise if she's trying to hide funds.as an update - hate threads that aren't updated- he's rang her and the house is getting valued this week.
he asked simple questions like how much moneys in each others accounts etc. she refused to answer? assume a brief would have to be instructed to find this out?!
said she's starting divorce procedures online, again this week.
seems like a lot of words are been said but see if any actions are taken.
chip* said:
Tim Cognito said:
From a friend's experience I echo the notion that solicitors are the ones who make the whole situation much more acrimonious and ensure it goes on as long as possible, for obvious reasons.
Based on my experience, family solicitors are total scums (yes, I even express this same view to my own solicitor!)They game the system and manipulate the situation for their own benefit. My case should have been closed last summer (we agree on 95% of the final settlement via meditation with my ex!), but once her solicitors got involved, everything became an issue, attacks became personal, delay tactics etc.,Just received another £2k monthly legal bill, but the end is in sight...
kingswood said:
again thanks for all the replies.
as an update - hate threads that aren't updated- he's rang her and the house is getting valued this week.
he asked simple questions like how much moneys in each others accounts etc. she refused to answer? assume a brief would have to be instructed to find this out?!
said she's starting divorce procedures online, again this week.
seems like a lot of words are been said but see if any actions are taken.
Form E requires full financial disclosure: salary/other income, assets >£500, bank & savings accounts plus credit cards etc. Supporting info would include statements for each, pension CETVs (transfer values), etc, etc.as an update - hate threads that aren't updated- he's rang her and the house is getting valued this week.
he asked simple questions like how much moneys in each others accounts etc. she refused to answer? assume a brief would have to be instructed to find this out?!
said she's starting divorce procedures online, again this week.
seems like a lot of words are been said but see if any actions are taken.
csd19 said:
In my divorce we both had to provide a year's worth of bank statements to confirm income/expenditure and savings, so your friend's soon-to-be ex might be in for a surprise if she's trying to hide funds.
I thought the reality was that they tend to turn a blind eye if a woman submits false bank statements and accounts? However you are in big trouble if you are a man and they think you are not throwing straight dice and are hiding something.Animal said:
Form E requires full financial disclosure: salary/other income, assets >£500, bank & savings accounts plus credit cards etc. Supporting info would include statements for each, pension CETVs (transfer values), etc, etc.
Be prepared for the questioning of accounts to get very petty. I was asked to disclose a years worth of accounts for my “trading account that I regularly invest money into”. The lines on my current account statement to trigger this question were to “Demelza HSE Trd” for £8 per month. Demelza house is a charity for terminally ill children that I donate a meagre amount to every month.
Also don’t expect the judge to care about the hundreds of pounds the ex is giving to her new boyfriend in cash on a regular basis.
ThingsBehindTheSun said:
csd19 said:
In my divorce we both had to provide a year's worth of bank statements to confirm income/expenditure and savings, so your friend's soon-to-be ex might be in for a surprise if she's trying to hide funds.
I thought the reality was that they tend to turn a blind eye if a woman submits false bank statements and accounts? However you are in big trouble if you are a man and they think you are not throwing straight dice and are hiding something.
the STB-ex really is and how far they wish to chance their luck.My ex was, tbh, a wonderful woman - I have zero hard feelings towards her and we dealt with it as two honest, sensible adults. Yes, it was s
t that our relationship didn't survive quite as we'd hoped but you live you learn.I won't be getting married again.
It is possible to have an amicable divorce. My ex and I sat down and worked through everything we had (it wasn't much, we were young and there wasn't any kids involved) and presented the agreement as a done deal to our respective solicitors. I don't know what hers said but mine were fine about it. Two bits of paper were signed and a year later the Decree Absolute came through.
Not long after that I went travelling and met an amazing woman. Eighteen years later we've been married 13 years and I'm still as in love with her as I was then.
Not long after that I went travelling and met an amazing woman. Eighteen years later we've been married 13 years and I'm still as in love with her as I was then.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff