full financial disclosure in divorce - pros and cons?

[seaweedthins]

I'm about to start divorce proceedings with Ex-P but I'm in a quandary about what to do with the financial side of things.

Basically, Ex has proposed a 60/40 split from our house (our only real asset) but given our different earnings and earning potential, I'm not sure if this is fair or not. We have a young son, who won't be starting school for two years and I am the main carer. I currently work part time, and will be happily stepping this up in time but right now, I do most of the childcare.

Historically, Ex-P has been a very high self employed earner, I earned around a quarter of his salary (me £20k, him £80k to £100k a year), but in the past two years, his business has struggled and his earnings have dropped considerably this year. He says he's hardly paid himself at all this year, and I know he has debts of around £25k. Previously we had a good standard of living, and had agreed to send son to private school but ex has now backed out of this, saying he might have more kids sad I'm currently self employed and freelance, so you can't get much shakier than that, security wise! My main issue is that his earning potential is much, much bigger than mine and always will be and he'll be in a much better position to get a mortgage than me.

I'm worried that he's chosen this year to get divorced as he looks stony broke. My solicitor has advised me to do full financial disclosure but I'm worried that actually this could leave me worse off, if his new circumstances have made us more 'equal' financially. Historically, he has form for being underhand - he took money out on a second charge on our house without telling me, and throughout our whole marriage the money side has been very difficult, with him refusing to keep me informed on his business.

So my question is, is FD really necessary? If his finances look shaky, will I end up just losing out? In other words, should I just be taking the 60 per cent and running? Can I say FD is purely part of the divorce process, see what comes out of it, and then negotiate from there? I would prefer a 65 per cent split as it would make a big difference to me and my son but obviously don't want to rock the boat if I could end up with much less.

Sorry it's so long and rambly, if anybody's got this far, I would welcome any advice. Thank you so much ps: I have posted this in divorce forum too, I wasn't sure the best place for it.

[Greengrow]

My ex husband got 60% (I earn more) and I was prepared to do that in return for a clean break ( no on going spousal maintenance for him). Clean breaks are psychologically better as you both get a fresh start but not always good for lower earners unless you think you will remarry or cohabit. However here currently his income is low anyway so it does not sound like you will get a lot of regular maintenance for you anyway.

In couples like we were financial disclosure is a waste of time and money. We both knew what the other had, I did both our tax returns and bank accounts were joint and we owned a house and had pensions worth about the same. Unless you think your ex has loads of cash stashed away and pensions you don't know about I cannot see the point of full disclosure. It will just give the lawyers more money.

We had no court hearings and although both had solicitors we reached a compromise and the lawyers wrote it up and the court sealed it.

Are you both going to sell the house? Would you rather your ex gets his share of it when your child is 18 or you remarry/cohabit?

Would your offer to him be 65% of equity to you, house sold and no further support for you (although the parent who does not live with the child will pay towards the child - separate issue)?

[STIDW]

There are number of reasons for disclosure.

Both parties are under an obligation to make a "full and frank" disclosure of all the material facts, documents and other relevant information. When the voluntary disclosure is sufficiently accurate it helps to clarify the issues early and assists negotiations to settle any differences. Without proper information no one can say whether a settlement is fair (see below).

If a settlement can be agreed a simplified disclosure form is submitted to court along with a draft consent order for approval.

When no agreement can be reached disclosure is required by the courts and no longer voluntary. There are then penalties and sanctions for non disclosure or a judge may infer an adverse decision based on the available evidence.

A judge is duty bound to ensure the final order is "fair" i.e. complies with s23 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and other law.

There are grounds to appeal and set aside a final orders if non disclosure which comes to light after the final order has been made.


As far as a fall in your husband's income is concerned disclosure is ongoing and updated so any increase can be taken into account. Potential incomes are a factor in the s25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 checklist. If your husband's income is likely to increase again it would be reasonable to base any settlement on his potential earnings. Having said that you can't get water for a stone when a business is struggling and it may be better to cut your losses in case the business fails.

[seaweedthins]

Thank you all very much for your replies. It's so helpful being able to ask questions on here and get different takes on it all. Yes, I am thinking 65% and no ongoing support after we sell our house, although I will need child maintenance. At the moment he's offering me £500 a month CM but he's so hopeless with money that I can't see that arrangement lasting much beyond 12 months I've been told all he has to do is ask the CMA to recalculate his contributions after a year, and the whole thing becomes so bureaucratic and lengthy you may as well forget seeing any money. So, even more reason why I want a good settlement now as he's very unreliable and is likely to use CM as an undermining tool. Oh, the joys of it all........

[Greengrow]

Yes, I always thing a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush and getting as much capital as possible is a lot safer than hopes of future child or spousal maintenance although I know the child maintenance is separate from the rest of the settlement. I would put to him an offer of you get 6%, clean break no more claims from you and see if you can reach agreement on that basis. It sound very reasonable to me and would save both side a lot of time and effort finding out about financials they may well both already know anyway.