Finances not sorted at time of divorce

Careful_ly

I am posting on behalf of a friend, and wonder if anyone has a similar situation

They were married for several years and had children, husband left and they divorced 10 years ago but the house remained in joint names and she paid all mortgage and other payments. Children now adult and left home.

She now wishes to sell but needs his signature and they have to agree on how much of the capital will be his.

She has consulted a solicitor and been told that because the money was not sorted at the time of the divorce that she is entitled to a share of the house which he has bought since they split up and a share of his pension.

He thinks that he is entitled to some of the proceeds of their joint home, but that the property that he has bought since the split is his only.

She didnt realise that this would be the situation and hopes that the solicitor has given her the correct info. Does anyone know if this is correct?

Didnt know where to post this, feel free to move if in the wrong place.

Bossyboots

Yes, that info is quite correct and is the reason I am constantly nagging on these boards for people to sort out their matrimonial finances sooner rather than later.

In reality, as she has a settled home and so does he all they need to do is agree what they each want. If she wants to do the honourable thing and not claim on the new property, she is quite entitled to do that. Just because the law says she can have a share, does not mean she has to take it. The court will expect any order made to be fair to both parties and will demand an explanation if any consent order presented appears not to be but a simple letter from both parties explaining the situation usually suffices.

If they are on good terms, their best and cheapest option is to work out between themselves what they think is right and fair and for her to simply tell her solicitor that is what they have agreed. She will have to sign a disclaimer to state she is agreeing it against her legal advice but that is to cover the solicitor against a future accusation that she was not advised properly.

The reason it must all be incorporated into a consent order and endorsed by the court is to stop either of them then having a claim later on if, for example, one was to come into a substantial sum of money.