Save my Pension

TheConways

Reading between the lines, am I correct in assuming that your wife doesn't have a pension because she has been caring for the children as they grow up whilst you have worked?

Both of you have contributed to both the house and the pension in your own ways. You made a comment about her expensive tastes - but that matters not one jot. You were both tied together financially.

I would be asking myself how could you not justify splitting your pension with her, whilst also ensuring the kids have a home until they are 18? You final salary pension will be surely worth a lot more than 80k - that might be its cash valuem but your employer will need a lot more set aside to fund a 60ths or even 80ths pension. I assume you've been working at least 20 years because your kids are teenagers.

Marisco

TheConways wrote: »

I would be asking myself how could you not justify splitting your pension with her,

Because he's paid for it. So what most seem to be saying is, that she should get the house and half his pension as well? Op I'd go to a solicitor asap before you're left with sod all!!

GobbledyGook

Marisco wrote: »

Because he's paid for it. So what most seem to be saying is, that she should get the house and half his pension as well? Op I'd go to a solicitor asap before you're left with sod all!!

I must be missing those posts because I can't see a single one where that has been suggested.

People have only been pointing out that the house will be seen as the children's home and may not be able to be sold straight away and that the person who ends up with the financial responsibility for the children (which could be the OP or his wife) could get a bigger than 50% share.

If they have been married for a long time and the wife has been the primary carer of the children to facilitate his career then she has assisted in contributing to his pension. Look at it the other way - why should he walk away with all of the pension if it has a value well above that of the equity if she has contributed to its value?

AppleMatt

Not trying to hijack the thread, but I'm feeling like the naive 20-something I might now be

If you marry someone, and you pay a private pension from your own money, if you divorce they can claim some of that?

I'm never getting married :eek:

Marisco

AppleMatt wrote: »

Not trying to hijack the thread, but I'm feeling like the naive 20-something I might now be

If you marry someone, and you pay a private pension from your own money, if you divorce they can claim some of that?

I'm never getting married :eek:

Yes.

Good choice, just live with someone and they cannot grab your pension

AppleMatt

Marisco wrote: »

Yes.

Good choice, just live with someone and they cannot grab your pension

Ha! Thanks for an answer. I can't see how that can be fair.. pensions are individual things, I would expect my other half to nurture her own one.

Can't see how that's selfish!

maman

AppleMatt wrote: »

Ha! Thanks for an answer. I can't see how that can be fair.. pensions are individual things, I would expect my other half to nurture her own one.

Can't see how that's selfish!

It's based on the premiss that if you and your OH have children and make a joint decision for her to give up her career to stay at home and look after them then she can't 'nurture her own one'. So she gets a share in your pension which you've been able to do because she's done your share of looking after the children. She also gets to stay in the family home to provide stability for the children. What's ignored is that maybe she could have worked as well but has preferred to be a SAHM or that you could have saved more as a couple if she wasn't extravagant or that maybe even if she had worked she wouldn't have earned much so has made a 'financialy advantageous' marriage and has benefitted all round.

This may sound sexist but I've worded it this way as OP is a man. The same would apply if the gender and/or earning power was reversed.

floss2

AppleMatt wrote: »

Ha! Thanks for an answer. I can't see how that can be fair.. pensions are individual things, I would expect my other half to nurture her own one.

Can't see how that's selfish!

Not when married, they form part of the marital assets - as do any property (whether owned before or during the marriage), savings (whether accumulated before or during the marriage) and even lottery winnings or inheritances if received before a divorce becomes final....or occasionally after.

rpc

AppleMatt wrote: »

Ha! Thanks for an answer. I can't see how that can be fair.. pensions are individual things, I would expect my other half to nurture her own one.

Nothing is individual when you are married - that's one of the key aspects of marriage! "All that I am I give to you, all that I have I share with you".

My wife is currently on maternity leave. Should she have planned to save up her salary to cover personal pension contributions while on leave? Her salary, and therefore pension contributions, have been significantly reduced because she moved to part time work after our first. That was a mutual agreement (it would make no financial sense for me to work part time and her full time). Why shouldn't she be able to claim part of my pension if we ever divorce?

I am able to earn the pension benefits I am BECAUSE she has taken the hit to her 'personal' finances. If pensions were equal, there would be no need for them to be split. In our case, I have a good final salary pension (expensive, but good - private sector, fully funded, in surplus). She has reasonable provision herself, but not at the same level. So I would expect her to take some of my pension, or other assets in lieu, if we ever divorced. Which of course we will never do

NAR

rpc wrote: »

Nothing is individual when you are married - that's one of the key aspects of marriage! "All that I am I give to you, all that I have I share with you".

Why does my wife say "What's yours is mine and what's mine is my own?"