We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Pension sharing and divorce?

:eek: Just gone through a divorce recently and whilst coming out the otherside relatively unscathed, (Although still feeling quite bitter and raw) am a bit surprised to see that as regards the pension sharing, the time period taken into account includes the six years prior to me marrying my ex-wife (And indeed living together)...I thought that it would only be the percentage earned during the period we were married, not the six years before?

Have spoke to the pension people and this apparently is correct as it is based on the percentage of the whole amount earned up to the point you divorce...this I find appalling and hugely unjust and unfair, anyone else had experience of this?:eek: :mad:

Comments

  • Are you in England? - Sorry i wont be able to comment.
    In Scotland it is only for the time you are married.
  • andy.m_2
    andy.m_2 Posts: 1,521 Forumite
    madness...

    And Women wonder why everyone hates them!
    Sealed pot challange no: 339
  • NickyBat
    NickyBat Posts: 857 Forumite
    andy.m wrote: »
    madness...

    And Women wonder why everyone hates them!

    Oh right, so it womens fault not the law!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You idiot
  • NAR
    NAR Posts: 4,863 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Yes saulhudson this is correct. The financial settlement was based on all financial elements being put on the table for division - in this case your total pension pot.
  • saulhudson
    saulhudson Posts: 47 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10 Posts Combo Breaker
    :mad: Yeah I am in England, (Unfortunately by the sound of it) and I just think that this is grossly unfair really, in essence a person counld have been paying into a pension say from agae 16 or whatever, twenty years later marry, five or ten later divorce and yet his ex would be entitled to all his pension pot?

    Sorry...this sucks big time and is yet another example of how heavily biased divorce is towards the woman, I have become divorced through my ex's money 'problems' and her constant debt issues, and here she is sitting pretty after taking half of everything and more?.....sorry just so damned wrong.:mad:
  • Person_one
    Person_one Posts: 28,884 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    saulhudson wrote: »
    :mad: Yeah I am in England, (Unfortunately by the sound of it) and I just think that this is grossly unfair really, in essence a person counld have been paying into a pension say from agae 16 or whatever, twenty years later marry, five or ten later divorce and yet his ex would be entitled to all his pension pot?

    Sorry...this sucks big time and is yet another example of how heavily biased divorce is towards the woman, I have become divorced through my ex's money 'problems' and her constant debt issues, and here she is sitting pretty after taking half of everything and more?.....sorry just so damned wrong.:mad:


    I think the law is actually gender neutral.

    The reason women seem to 'benefit' is that they are far less likely to be in high earning jobs and have good pensions etc. in the first place.
  • SandC
    SandC Posts: 3,929 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    Too true, my cousin would be retired by now if she hadn't have had to share her pension with her ex husband. It does work both ways but if there is a big difference in earnings one party usually takes a hit.
  • andy.m_2
    andy.m_2 Posts: 1,521 Forumite
    NickyBat wrote: »
    Oh right, so it womens fault not the law!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You idiot

    Because the law affords you the right to do something you do not have to do it you know?
    Your arguement is flawed.

    Some people are allowed to graze sheep across London bridge, doesn't mean they do it.

    What possible justification can there be as to taking a proportion of someone's retirement fund from before you even met them?

    The fact you needed to add an insult just means that you knew the stupidity of your case and wanted to deflect from it.
    Sealed pot challange no: 339
  • jetta_wales
    jetta_wales Posts: 2,168 Forumite
    It's no different than if you got married with a large sum of money in savings you bring it with you into your legally binding marriage and all your assets become essentially jointly owned. If she had a pension it would be the same too.

    If however she is as crap with money as you say then if her share of the pension is say £8k, offer three thousand in cash instead and I bet there's a good chance she'll take it. Make it clear there is no counter offering it's that or nothing take the pension and know you can't do a thing with it till your retired or take the cheque but something shinny and hands off your pension.
    "Life is what you make of it, whoever got anywhere without some passion and ambition?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.6K Life & Family
  • 259.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.