To think friends STBEXH is delusional??

[Paddymcpaddy]

Friend and her DH of 20 odd years are separating - they have 2 school aged kids.

When they met they earned similar amounts but friend went PT when kids were born, earned less for 10 years but now works FT. The DH did little childcare, has a great career earns 3/4x more than she does.

The DH wants to sell the family home and spilt the equity - about £400k each- and then pay some maintenance towards the kids. But they’ll be 50/50 custody he reckons so not much.
HOWEVER his pension pot is close to £1m, friends is £300k as she earned less, went on maternity etc.

He says - we’ll be leaving the pensions out of any financial settlement. The kids will get his if he dies. She’s now worried how she’ll get a new house and mortgage on her salary even with that £400k deposit as they live in London.

I have told her she is MAD if she agrees his pensions doesn’t come into it! They’ve split all the bills 50/50 all these years, which left her without much extra and he put loads of his spare cash into pension and savings.

Should it not be assets + pension + savings added together then divided by 2??? Everything they have was earned when they were together .

I doubt the courts will allow that as a full & final settlement, especially if she'll struggle to house her dcs.

Well it might not necessarily be everything divided by two. She wo t automatically get 50% but could be that ( or more or less)

it’s not as straightforward as saying she take all equity and he keep pension. How are you valuing that? Is is defined contribution?

he can’t access that now so it’s not values 1:1 as equity which is liquid asset. He will also need equity for a deposit and to live.

she should seek advice about what a fair split could like like - potentially one with a bit more equity and some pension share rather than 100% of equity and no pension.

A judge should make sure she has enough to live off. Will take looking after children as contributing to marriage. I think wife gets the house and husband keeps pension is a tidy split where there are sufficient resources. If DC are nearing end of primary they will start to get a say -They might not want to be 50% with dad if he has been very career focused

What does he earn?

as he’s mid 50s how will he buy a house if she took 100% of equity? He needs that too to house himself for him and the kids.

if she doesn’t want big mortgage at her age why is is ok for him? Especially as he’d have zero deposit if she took it all !!

Taking 100% of equity and no pension does not seem a good outcome for either. They should look to perhaps something that gives op friend higher than 50% of equity ( 60/70%?) and some pension share ( say 30-40%). Not exact numbers as there aren’t enough details to arrive at a near 50:50 overall split of asset pot

her solicitor will help

He won't do 50/50 custody for long. Then, he won't pay maintenance. She thinks he will, he won't. He'll find a way to avoid it as many many men do.

So my advice is to get legal advice and get what she is clearly entitled to now. Otherwise she'll be struggling to pay for childcare and working full time until she's 70.

A solicitor might suggest she gets more than 50% of the house.

I bet he's told her she doesn't need a solicitor and "let's not waste our money in solicitor ", "let's do this amicably". Meanwhile he'll shaft her.

Three of my friends are divorcing, all mid fifties women. Two made the decision and one had a husband who had an affair. Two via solicitors want more money and less pension because of their immediate housing need. It’s an issue and like your friend their pensions are nowhere near as good, one did PT and one was a SAHM for 12 years. The other is very well off and owns a second home outright and has her own amazing pension so it’s fine.

It’s just all for her solicitor to get a fair and equitable deal. We are up North in a cheaper bit of the country and fees are £50 for an email/ letter and £250 per hour consultation. It’s worth it when you’re talking thousands though it’s hard for my friends to pay the fees.

She needs to go after the pension. My BIL gave his ex wife a very good settlement to stop her going after his pension. It should definitely be in the mix.

Not sure where you got that from, we are all of the same opinion!

The lawyers will sort it out. Won't necessarily please everybody though!

No, he will do 50/50, it’s a mutual decision and he was the one who didn’t want to spilt because he hated the thought of not seeing the kids everyday. I have no doubt he’ll do 50/50.
He changed roles and WFH now. Child care less of an issue as the kids are young teens and pretty independent excepting needing lifts to sports & sleepover type things.

He’s a top 1% earner… and in a much better position to buy somewhere, plus has family assets to help.He’s also able to take 25% out of the pension in the next year.
But if they have to sell the house she will of course, but would be nice for her to have enough to buy somewhere still within her work commute, support network and kids school.

I hope you're right @Paddymcpaddy but if wfh suddenly ends and things change for him at work, he may be less available.

My main message to her is get what you're entitled to now. There are no guarantees later.

It sounds from your update that her choice may be that a solicitor secure her more than 50% of the house.

Yes it should and she should go for more .
If she can prove she is the one who takes main care of the kids .
I know he is saying he wants 50/50 but if he hasn’t done any pf this while they together then it’s all just words. .

Why is he getting to call the shots and make decisions . ???

Has your friend got a lawyer involved. .
they will request pension figures from both sides.
Everything goes together. .
Friend need to go higher to get half at “least” if she has the kids )

Both sides then go back and forth from lawyers if it can’t be agreed then a judge rules . She needs to find her strength and dig deep to get what is right.

it’s usually 60/40 for the women because of the kids .

What may be worth saying to her is that even if a divorce is agreed and financial settlement is agreed it has to go in front of a judge to be approved and the judge will not approve it if it is obviously unfair unless a reason is given for the unfairness.

So if they agree a financial setttlement, get it written up and in front of the judge it can be refused as it is unfair.

It is clearly unfair to leave pensions out of it.

It's worth her pointing this out to her soon to be ex.

He may not realise it either.

Our settlement was rejected once. It's quite common.

All assets of both parties should be added together then split down the middle. If he can draw from his pension then friend can have the house and a percentage of his pension money.

She is worried it will ruin their future relationship???

They're getting divorced ffs. He's trying to fuck her over. That ship has sailed.

This is about her financial security and quality of life for the rest of her life.

What future relationship does she think she is going to have with him?

They are getting divorced - they already aren't friends.

The kids are teens so will be picking and choosing themselves which home they stay at.

It won't be long before they have left home and the only contact she'll need to have with him is at her kids' weddings.

So a relationship of politeness and low contact for max 6 years vs not getting the pension she deserves for 20-30 years or more.

It will have to be a tiny mortgage as the sole earner in her 50s.

I agree with @Octavia64 all of this will need to be declared and there is a v high chance it that such a split would not be signed off and it would be sent back. 50/50 split of all assets is the minimum she could expect and I could see it being more 60/40 in her favour

she needs to push this

They get along okay, they’re both a bit sad that they’re splitting but it’s time sort of thing.
We have mutual friends who HATE each other and it’s incredibly stressful for all of us, them and their kids. We also have friends who split and are amicable enough to come to parties with their new partners, live close to one another so it’s easier for the kids, are flexible over holidays etc.

So I think they’re hoping to be the latter and not the first lot.

This with absolute loud flashing bells on

True he wants to be amicable but n his terms so he benefits more.

This is why she needs to fight for more. "She has little savings as it was more tax efficient to keep him as the high earner and put more into his pension" was a decision made on the assumption that's equitable for them as a couple. It would therefore be completely inequitable therefore in their divorce to split the house 50/50 and him walk away with all of his pension/savings/investments. There's also the point about her contributing 50/50 to bills etc despite him being the much higher earner - so on a pro rata basis she was contributing much more and he was pocketing the savings he made into his pension.

I hope all the women who post saying they have to give up work/ go pt to raise the kids because he couldn't possibly reduce his hours or do childcare read this thread. In his head he worked hard for the pension and is entitled to it and all her caring was for nothing.