Divorce settlement or Court

dontknowwhattodonext

Am trying to finalize my divorce finances, there is no house and no children involved, was married 24 years

Ex wants 10k lump sum and pension split 60/40 in her favour (my pension worth 100k more than hers)

I have offered 7.5k lump sum and pension split 50/50

She has refused and will only accept her suggestion, so looking at completing Form E and then going to court, with the court fees and stress should I back down?

I am more willing to got 10k, but really not happy with then pension split being 60/40 in her favour

I do earn more than her, solicitor thinks spouse maintenance is very questionable as to if any would be awarded to her through the court

tightauldgit

Hard to say without knowing all the ins and outs and your own attitude to stress/admin. Court fees should be no different to get a financial order whether its agreed or not - legal fees could well be if you have a solicitor represent you though.

Presumably the justification for 60/40 split on pension is to make up for your higher earning potential in future?

TBagpuss

OK, no one can say without proper disclosure BUT - its a long marraige, and you have higher income and, presumably, higher earning capacity, so it 's not unreasonable for there to be an unequal split in her favour to counter-balance those.

PEnsions - it's normal to get a prope actuarial report to ork out what the split should be to give you equsl invome in retirement. It's pretty common to require an unqual % split in favour ofa wife , other things being equal, because typically, the same sized pension fund will generate lower income for a woman than for aman, due to the fact that women, statisticall, liv longer. Obviously I can't say whether 60/40 is right to balnce this out, you could suggest getting a pensions report to find out what the correct split would be.

Also, bear in mind that if you earn more than your wife, you are likely to be able to make higher pension contributions beteen now and retirement, so it's probabe that you will be better off in retirement even if she has a higher share now. 

If you go to court then if she rrequestsit, a court will almost inevitabley order that there be a proper report to work out the necessary pension split.

Your solicitor is best placed to advise you.

It's true the spousal meanintenace is very rre, however, this is becuase courts will usually even out inequlity by adjusting capital or pension instead, which iswhat your wife is looking to do, so it looks as though she is on the right lines, although whether the specifcic numbers are right depensids on looking in detai at your and her finacial positions.
Bear in mnd if yougo down the route of courts and Form E etc you are going to be looking are fairly singificant costs so think about whether it is worth it, particuarlly as it could well be that she would end up with an order very similar (or possibly evne higher!) than what she is curently offering. She could of course end up with less but it's a gamble. 

Exodi

dontknowwhattodonext said:

Am trying to finalize my divorce finances, there is no house and no children involved, was married 24 years

Ex wants 10k lump sum and pension split 60/40 in her favour (my pension worth 100k more than hers)

I have offered 7.5k lump sum and pension split 50/50

She has refused and will only accept her suggestion, so looking at completing Form E and then going to court, with the court fees and stress should I back down?

I am more willing to got 10k, but really not happy with then pension split being 60/40 in her favour

I do earn more than her, solicitor thinks spouse maintenance is very questionable as to if any would be awarded to her through the court

Just to play devils advocate, you're also basically sticking to your guns? The couple of grand compromise is negligible when the difference she is seeking is tens of thousands (if not more) of pounds difference.

Perhaps you could think about £8.75k and 55/45 as a middle ground compromise?

I can understand the frustration with no children involved, but this comes with the territory of marriage.

dontknowwhattodonext

Thanks, I would rather do 10k and keep pension 50/50

tightauldgit

dontknowwhattodonext said:

Thanks, I would rather do 10k and keep pension 50/50

Well offer them that then and see what they say. The fact you would 'rather' it probably means they would rather not though. 

As someone else suggested you might well want to get a proper actuarial report on splitting on the pensions and what would be equal. 

dontknowwhattodonext

Thanks, we have both got our pension CET value, is this different to a actuarial report

TBagpuss

dontknowwhattodonext said:

Thanks, we have both got our pension CET value, is this different to a actuarial report

Yes, the CETV tells you how much is in the pensions ppot. The actuarial report tells you how it would need to be split to give you both simialr income in retirement based on the current value, taking into account things such as your ages, genders, the specifc funds the money is in and the rules of the differnet schemes about calulating payments.  it's much more accurate 

mark5

There’s no children involved so the usual female advantage in splitting finances during divorce doesn’t apply. 

I would go to court personally be careful not to run up massive legal bills before you get there though.

Bradden

mark5 said:

There’s no children involved so the usual female advantage in splitting finances during divorce doesn’t apply. 

I would go to court personally be careful not to run up massive legal bills before you get there though.

Could you clarify this please. My understanding is that assets are split 50/50 as a starting point. With the OP having a larger pension fund this may result in a reduced share of the property to balance against the pension. She could of course request a pension sharing order instead of a "clean break". This is not dependent on whether their or children.. it's just dividing joint assests on seperation.

jjj1980

If the wife has been working full time and there are no children involved, I don’t understand why their respective earning potentials and pension pots should even come into things. 

If she had reduced her hours to look after children or be a housewife then I would understand it but if none of this applies, surely her lower earning potential is her issue, not his?

Split assets 50/50 yes but future earnings and pensions in my opinion should be completely ignored.