You will not be surprised to hear that as a divorce lawyer among the concerns that I’m often asked is, ‘when is my best time to apply for divorce in order to get the greatest settlement?’.

The reward they have in mind is their partner (or spouse’s) pension and I offer them a very basic response: the longer the marital relationship - the bigger the claim.
ruralhome.org
Take Trudy whose second marital relationship was to Eric, a wealthy residential or commercial property developer who had a few residential or commercial properties, ISAs and financial investments. To Trudy, the real prize was Eric’s pension which deserved more than ₤ 1 million.

The marriage concerned an end after 5 years, but when Trudy attempted to claim versus Eric’s pension she was devastated to be told by her lawyer that instead of the half-share that she had determined in her mind that she would be granted, she was incorrect.

Eric could, in truth, ring fence all the pension that he had constructed up prior to the marital relationship. This meant that Trudy might just claim a small percentage that had accrued during their short time together.

The judge felt that the excessiveness of Trudy’s claim was too high which the bulk of the wealth in the marriage had originated from Eric and this was shown in the settlement that Trudy received.

So while she got a capitalised settlement to show the way of life that they had delighted in together, it was nowhere near her expectations. The ethical of this story? A brief marriage equals less assets granted.

It couldn’t have been more different for Gloria, who was wed to Frank for more than thirty years. Frank confessed to having affairs with ladies who he described as ‘the hired assistance’, believing it did not actually count as infidelity. It did to Gloria. As the pensions stacked up throughout their 3 decade relationship, Gloria was able to claim half of it and was approved equality of all the pensions.

Vanessa Lloyd Platt, a leading divorce attorney, states the longer the marriage, the larger the divorce claim

Frank might not sound fence one cent of it. And thanks to the length of the marriage, Gloria received what is called a ‘Joint Lives Order’ for upkeep. Simply put, this indicates Gloria would be offered maintenance for life, although this is rare today as the majority of upkeep payments are for a set term only.

It was not assisted by the reality that Frank had not been forthcoming over the real degree of his savings and had at the last moment attempted to move funds offshore. He was provided a punitive award and Gloria benefited from a number of thousands more on her side of the divorce equation. The moral here is that dishonesty does not pay - particularly in a divorce court.

So that’s brief and long marriages - what about a longer than average length of marriage (12 years) for say 15 years?

Here the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has been accrued before or indeed, for a period, after separation.

It is always essential that a pensions professional evaluate the worth of a pension so the right figure can be determined.

Which is where Gemma came unstuck. She had a 16-year marital relationship to City broker Paul. His pension ran into numerous countless pounds. Gemma was none too troubled by the pension however, like numerous spouses I see, she wanted the security of staying in the home that she loved. So instead of claiming any of Paul’s pension she traded it off versus the worth of the home.

This is called a ‘set-off’, but as a lawyer I would constantly suggest to any client that an actuary report is obtained first and all options are thought about.

Wives in particular can come out with a lower deal when they choose this alternative. The moral here is that you might feel young and ready to start afresh, however do not be too quick to trade away your future pension.

Vanessa says that in a marriage longer than the average of 12 years, the court will equalise the capital of the unless wealth has been accrued before or, for a period, after separation

Another question I’m frequently asked is whether a mediator will take into account all of the couple’s possessions to increase a settlement.

So lots of people appear to believe that conciliators will go easy on the celebrations - and hubbies in specific - might get away with more by utilizing a conciliator, than if the matter is before the court.

This is a fallacy, as Neil found. The company director thought that mediation would imply that he might put pressure on Judy to settle. It had been a long marital relationship spanning twenty-eight years and he believed that Judy was not the brightest. He felt he might bluff his way through and hoodwink the conciliator.

What Neil had not reckoned upon was the tenacity and cleverness of the arbitrator who firmly insisted that all info be produced for the conferences. The arbitrator could see that Neil was being obstructive in responding to queries about financial deals and movement of money between subsidiary companies.

Little had actually Neil suspected that the mediator had actually been a forensic detective for HMRC, before ending up being a matrimonial mediator. After numerous sessions the arbitrator suggested a settlement figure which Neil was outraged by and insisted they go to court. Unfortunately for Neil - the specific very same settlement figure was reached in court. It deserves bearing in mind that mediation can be a far better method of fixing matters however is never a soft option.

Mediators will help the couple and advise actuaries to work out pension divisions whatever the length of the marriage. The courts are now encouraging the parties to think about options to court proceedings more than ever. Arbitration is also being motivated. All these alternatives are available in other words, medium and long marriages.

This is the reason EVERYONE is divorcing … and why your marriage is at risk without you realizing

So no matter the length of your marital relationship, I recommend all my customers not to have impractical expectations of what the last figure need to be. It’s crucial to realise that you can not penalize your quickly to be ex-partner in the courtroom. Unless you can demonstrate that the behaviour of your spouse has had a financial impact, the conduct or behaviour will be disregarded.

Let me present you now to Henry, who thought that he was being especially smart when he transferred his shares in the family company to his sibling, cashed in the capital from his pension and provided it to a buddy and bought himself a Lamborghini.

This was since Claudia, his spouse of twelve years had actually begun divorce proceedings. At the end of the litigation, the court discovered that he was deliberately trying to lower the properties readily available to Claudia and added back all the worth of the pension, the expense of the Lamborghini and the shares to his side of the equation and after that divided all of it in half. Henry’s actions were so contrived that his efforts to drain pipes the possessions totally backfired on him. Oh and Henry needed to sell the Lamborghini.

The ethical of the story when it pertains to how to maximise your settlement? Don’t try to be too clever, play fair and honestly, or run the risk of the very opposite of what you wanted to achieve. Divorce can be a minefield, and it does not need to explode for either of you if you both take reasonable steps towards resolving matters.

* All names have actually been altered to secure client identity.