Pension and divorce

Tom99

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]After 29 years and with grown up children, a 50/50 split of all assets would be seen as fair.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]That should take into account the capital value of both parties pensions and other assets even if these were a gift.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The husband has offered the wife c £620k more of the house equity so even if his pension is worth £620k and the wife's nothing, that still represents a 50/50 split.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I assume they will be applying for a financial consent order and if not already part of the financial assets disclosed, the judge may well ask for the capital value of each pension to see that the split seems fair.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Whilst you are looking out for your sister, a true 50/50 split may see her worse off than the current offer. She gets to stay in the family home with no mortgage and with one adult child able to contribute towards bills.[/FONT]

happyandcontented

What proportion of a pension is the usual split in a divorce?

A friend of mine is in a similar position to the OP's sister and has virtually no pension of her own except SP at 66. Her husband has upped and left after 32 years and is being unresponsive to her solicitor re his assets as he is currently out of the country living with the other woman. Adult children also living in the family home.

xylophone

It seems to me a false economy to decline professional advice - such a decision could lead to bitterness and arguments in the future on the lines of "Your mother/father took advantage /cheated/ shafted me out of a fair share of what I had contributed over 29 years of marriage......

Do it properly or walk through a vale of tears in the future?

Tom99

happyandcontented wrote: »

What proportion of a pension is the usual split in a divorce?

A friend of mine is in a similar position to the OP's sister and has virtually no pension of her own except SP at 66. Her husband has upped and left after 32 years and is being unresponsive to her solicitor re his assets as he is currently out of the country living with the other woman. Adult children also living in the family home.

After 32 years if one partner has a pension and the other does not then a 50/50 split would be the normal starting point.

happyandcontented

Thank you, that leads me to another train of thought which I shall post as a separate thread!

enthusiasticsaver

Tom99 wrote: »

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]After 29 years and with grown up children, a 50/50 split of all assets would be seen as fair.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]That should take into account the capital value of both parties pensions and other assets even if these were a gift.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The husband has offered the wife c £620k more of the house equity so even if his pension is worth £620k and the wife's nothing, that still represents a 50/50 split.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I assume they will be applying for a financial consent order and if not already part of the financial assets disclosed, the judge may well ask for the capital value of each pension to see that the split seems fair.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Whilst you are looking out for your sister, a true 50/50 split may see her worse off than the current offer. She gets to stay in the family home with no mortgage and with one adult child able to contribute towards bills.[/FONT]

You may be right there and they are just at the beginning of the process. I guess I just find it sad that in their early twenties when my sister and her husband got together they were both in similar earning jobs. During that 29 years her career took a backward step to accommodate looking after the home and children while his went from strength to strength. Now he is earning three times as much and will enjoy a much better pension. The usual thing may be 50/50 but this strikes me as unfair in their case although I have pointed out to her that he will have to get another mortgage and start again in that respect. My view is that going forward she needs to up her pension contributions drastically to compensate for the fact her pension will be minimal otherwise.

She meanwhile will have to stay in a larger house to accommodate both herself and the children until they are financially independent and who knows when that will be and won't be able to help them with homes as we have done with our daughters and certainly wont be retiring at 58 as my DH and I have done and we have been married only about 5 years more than them. Yes, she can ask my nephew for more rent towards maintaining the bigger home but surely that will just delay him being able to get his own place. She also still has at least 2 more years of my niece being at home.

Pollycat

enthusiasticsaver wrote: »

You may be right there and they are just at the beginning of the process. I guess I just find it sad that in their early twenties when my sister and her husband got together they were both in similar earning jobs. During that 29 years her career took a backward step to accommodate looking after the home and children while his went from strength to strength. Now he is earning three times as much and will enjoy a much better pension. The usual thing may be 50/50 but this strikes me as unfair in their case although I have pointed out to her that he will have to get another mortgage and start again in that respect. My view is that going forward she needs to up her pension contributions drastically to compensate for the fact her pension will be minimal otherwise.

She meanwhile will have to stay in a larger house to accommodate both herself and the children until they are financially independent and who knows when that will be and won't be able to help them with homes as we have done with our daughters and certainly wont be retiring at 58 as my DH and I have done and we have been married only about 5 years more than them. Yes, she can ask my nephew for more rent towards maintaining the bigger home but surely that will just delay him being able to get his own place. She also still has at least 2 more years of my niece being at home.

Many women find themselves in a similar position to your sister (as did my friend I mentioned on your other thread) but aren't as lucky to have such a generous soon-to-be ex husband.

Tom99

enthusiasticsaver wrote: »

You may be right there and they are just at the beginning of the process. I guess I just find it sad that in their early twenties when my sister and her husband got together they were both in similar earning jobs. During that 29 years her career took a backward step to accommodate looking after the home and children while his went from strength to strength. Now he is earning three times as much and will enjoy a much better pension. The usual thing may be 50/50 but this strikes me as unfair in their case although I have pointed out to her that he will have to get another mortgage and start again in that respect. My view is that going forward she needs to up her pension contributions drastically to compensate for the fact her pension will be minimal otherwise.

She meanwhile will have to stay in a larger house to accommodate both herself and the children until they are financially independent and who knows when that will be and won't be able to help them with homes as we have done with our daughters and certainly wont be retiring at 58 as my DH and I have done and we have been married only about 5 years more than them. Yes, she can ask my nephew for more rent towards maintaining the bigger home but surely that will just delay him being able to get his own place. She also still has at least 2 more years of my niece being at home.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]True, but your sister has a £750,000 house and her husband is renting, that's quite a difference to make up.

[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]His high income over the past 29 year of marriage is the one that paid for most of that house but he does not have another 29 working years to make that up.[/FONT]

mgdavid

happyandcontented wrote: »

What proportion of a pension is the usual split in a divorce?

.........

not sure you've quite grasped the process. Pension is just another asset. ALL of their respective assets are valued and totalled, the starting point is a 50-50 split of the total, that doesn't mean each asset needs to be carved into two. F'rinstance one party keeps the house and t'other keeps the pension and a small cash adjustment either way to balance things out, although it's rarely that simple which is why professionals should be involved..

happyandcontented

mgdavid wrote: »

not sure you've quite grasped the process. Pension is just another asset. ALL of their respective assets are valued and totalled, the starting point is a 50-50 split of the total, that doesn't mean each asset needs to be carved into two. F'rinstance one party keeps the house and t'other keeps the pension and a small cash adjustment either way to balance things out, although it's rarely that simple which is why professionals should be involved..

In the case of my friend the house is being sold and split 50/50 as are all their other assets (if he declares them) as she has no idea what savings he has.

My point related to his pension as I didn't know if pensions were treated differently to other assets of the marriage.