Finances on separation questions - especially if higher value of assets/ big difference in incomes

[digitallyremastered]

I've spoken to two different solicitors and been told different things.

Some key facts (I've been slightly vague to keep this less identifiable):

• long marriage - 20 years
• dc secondary school age
• he earns 250k
• I earn...very little and not enough to meet needs, working part time at home
• assets: a lot. Enough for two houses suitable for dc and leftovers
• quite a lot of the assets are in his pension. I have no pension

One solicitor said he would seek a clean break and ask for 65 or 70% vs 35/30 as I gave up my well paid career to look after dc etc. and now have a badly paid part time job but this is so i can be around for dc after school and in the long holidays. He asked me to calculate my needs but also talked about fairness and was adamant I would be comfortable.

The other said because we can meet housing needs, he would imagine the split would be more equal BUT dh would absolutely have to pay spousal maintenance due to the big disparity. Herein lies a problem.

Dh says he wants to get 50:50 and recognises the need to pay some maintenance because of our income differential BUT keeps saying he might lose his job anyway, it's all precarious etc.

Who is right and how does one protect against the ex losing his job and ending up not being able to pay anything.?
To me the clean break of me getting more assets which I can then invest to supplement my income plus child maintenance for the next few years before dc are at home seems more stable.

It's very stressful! (I had an assessment interview with a counsellor today, so l'm hoping I might learn some coping and communication strategies.)

The difficulty is that the progression of this condition is very individual - even my consultant can't say how (quickly) things will deteriorate, and one solicitor did say that courts don't like to look too far into the future :( I might be fine for 2 years or 10 years; and 18 months time is when the youngest finishes 6th form and therefore child benefit/any CM would end and the WTC situation would change.

ARGH. Too many unknowns. (Not D)H seems set on giving away as little as possible. Probably nothing will happen now until the new year. Joy :(

It's also hard to maximise your income to what dh may think it should be when you, with full agreement of dh at the time, have been a sahp for many years.

This angers me so much that two different views can be given for one set of circumstances and it is all dependent on the judge on the day.

I was married for 20 years SAHM to allow X to build up a very successful financial services company that funnily enough went into difficulty during divorce process. Was told I was a strong case for joint lives spousal as also suffer with long term diagnosed depression and receive PIP oayment in recognition also aged early 50's. Judge completely dismissed my MH condition despite being under MH team during divorce, gave me 2 years spousal because once divorce was over I would no longer be depressed and will be able to get back into full time employment. I got nothing for business and 60% pension.

I am living off benefits and using the funds allocated to me for housing to supplement shortfall. X manipulated the sale of family home and is currently pursuing a mandatory reconsideration to get CMS payment reduced.

He had been paying £65 per week for two 16 year olds despite earning £150k .

The law does not vary why is is that SM can go in and out of favour - who decides this and why do solicitors not know this is the case and why should it be based on a judges personal view - the rules should be consistent it is supposedly based on facts - there should be no dependant on the day and dependant on the judge - my personal experience has left me with no faith in the legal system whatsoever.

I want to point out, following being taken to court by a high earner, after four years and fourteen hearings, I have been left with no income and no pension. Please be aware that courts are presided over by judges who were solicitors and barristers and they discount rules to favour the represented party, who in my case were allowed to dictate hearings and evidence. To protect myself I have got all the transcripts of all the hearings so can prove the above. I only wish I had told the court this was the case, to ensure that orders and judgements were based on the true facts. When I told the court during the final hearing that I had transcripts, the judge, ex's solicitor and barrister (who are also fee paid judges) were perturbed to say the least and spent the rest of the hearings pretending they did not exist, even applying for an appeal, refusing to acknowledge the assets contained on transcripts. Be also aware that there is a list of solicitors and barristers who are also fee paid judges on a website 'what do they know'. Aldershot court advised me that this list did not exist. There was in my case an obvious conflict of interests, not declared, with the court accepting the false evidence of a fee paid judge and ignoring mine.
Do settle out of court to avoid giving your assets to these intermediaries. If you go to court advise that you are getting the transcript and therefore expect any order to reflect the hearing not what the represented party wants. It is your insurance policy against the tricks of the trade.

@Daisybarker123 - have our paths crossed before? Your post deeply disturbs me too.

I ended up Representing myself at FH despite having a solicitor who bailed out on me 6 weeks before first intended FH as I started asking too many questions and then DA barrister bailed Friday before court hearing (rescheduled)on Monday. I suffer with severe depression - was accompanied by my MH worker to get first FH adjourned -judge would not agree during telephone hearing.

My X's barrister was from judges old chambers - you would think they would need to disclose this wouldn't you - and as you can imagine I was shafted - I actually ran out court after being continuously questioned that my MH was not significant - after admitting to being suicidal - does this make it serious?

I'm interested in your transcripts how much did these cost - are you still pursuing this in any way or have you resigned yourself to it - pm me if you like - so am I right in that you are saying the barrister representing your x is also a judge and in your case lied about evidence which can be proven as false from the transcripts that you had at court and despite this the judge I'm assuming from your outcome went in your xS favour - WTF!!

I have heard about this website maybe it was you who directed me there? If not this is the second time