@Feelletdown76
When we split I got a rented flat but had to give that up and move in with my sister. Let
Me be clear here, no abuse of any kind to anyone. She moved back closer to her parents but she wanted a big house and said she couldn’t get one newer where we lived. Looks like I need to approach court again.
This is my point about lack of detail.
You say you had to give up the flat and move in with your sister - which implies that you couldn’t afford to house yourself and therefore the financial order was unfair.
BUT this was two years later. How come you could afford to rent a flat at the point of the divorce but not 2 years later?
And now, when you have received your 25% equity, in the last year. Of course, perhaps there wasn’t much equity, so the absolute £cash amount was small. In which case, highlighting her 75% would be as well.
I definitely think there could be an unfair issue with her moving away. But as I said upthread, I’ve never seen a court ordered settlement where the NRP (almost always the father) was paying so much SM that he couldn’t house himself. (Think working at CAB, though it wasn’t that, don’t want to put myself!)
But going back to the moving away... I’ve also seen women move away because they desperately need help with children for the hard part - not weekends, but balancing childcare and work, doing everything in the week where it’s on a timescale (school) and costly (childcare) and they need family support because the father won’t do anything. So I’m reserving judgment on that, though my personal opinion is that parents should do everything possible to stay local to each other.
I still find your financial order... unusual, and lacking in detail.