ex is happy but will the judge/solicitor muddy the waters?

[Bluebaron1]

My ex and i have worked out our finances and what each other are happy with. Basically we have agreed to split the house 50/50. i have a larger pension (£400K and hers is only £120k), she's happy to forgo anything to do with that.

So i will potentially do quite well by the deal but I'm worried when we file that the solicitor/judge will sit her down and persuade her that she should go after more.

We've had a long decision on it and she's ver clear what she is entitled to and we are very amicable but I'm worried this could get all nasty once its goes legal?

Thoughts?

Potentially yes because they may feel she doesn’t understand that the asset split is 75/25 because it is

but you do know and for an amicable split it is harsh. Why not give more equity

How much is the house worth?

are there no other assets, no savings accounts or cars or...

Probably, because that’s their job. You could offer to make pensions 50/50, or you could spend a fortune to argue in court.

Why is there such a discrepancy in the split?

Our divorce wasn’t 50/50, but the documentation made it clear why. No one questioned it.

Why are you not splitting the pensions 50/50?

Basically we have agreed to split the house 50/50. i have a larger pension (£400K and hers is only £120k)

If that's all there is to it, then yes, it's quite probable that somebody will point out to her that it's not a fair split. It is their job to do so.

If there is a reason that this is fair - she is getting other assets you haven't mentioned that make up for the discrepancy, for example - then as long as the documentation makes this clear and it is infact fair, you'll be fine.

We've had a long decision on it and she's ver clear what she is entitled to and we are very amicable

She IS NOT clear what she IS entitled to as evidenced by the unfair split of pensions.

Of course you are amicable you are potentially diddling her out of 50% of what she would usually be awarded based on the figures above and she is amicable because she doesn't realise this yet.

we've agreed that i can only drawdown enough from the re-mortage to cover her share, that way i can maintain the property (just) and continue to home our three older children (23/19/17). If she took more we would have to sell up and kick them out. I'm said I'm happy to take a huge mortgage and costs and support them until they are ready but obviously this is going probably going to cost me £40-£50k a year in interest charges so the pension equity would get lost in all that somewhere.

When I divorced we agreed I kept all of my pension ( ex h had never paid into one ), and the I took over the mortgage giving him a pay out that I could afford ( was worth about 30% of equity), consent order was written by a solicitor and was not questioned by the judge when submitted.

Not understanding why you can't transfer part of your pension to her as a pension.

Convenient for you!

I hope someone gives her some proper legal advice

I think as long as she has taken legal advice and that is included in the consent order, then it might be okay. The courts want the split to be fair and that doesn't have to be 50/50, but they do like to know that both sides have had legal advice and the therefore know what they are agreeing to.

Because it's potentially a shite deal for her? If she has not been able to contribute to her pension because you've worked full time, whilst she has had to raise your joint children, she's negatively impacting her retirement by swing in a much more precarious position on retirement, whilst you aren't. What's the split of child access time? Is it straight 50/50 so she can work? You (or anyone) profiting off another person by having no time taken off work to Conroy your career whilst the other person doesn't have that luxury, should be in some way recompensed, regardless of which parent raised the kids.

So you've built a massive pension pot whilst she's being doing the majority of the childcare and now you're trying to cheat her out of it?

I hope the judge penalises you. Nasty.

You don’t have to pay her the pension split in cash. You can split the pension into two separate pensions. One in each name.
sounds like at the moment you’ve convinced your ex that the children would lose their home if you split things fairly. This isn’t the case and yes, hopefully legal advice will help her to understand this.

Can you put in some spousal maintenance to redress the balance for say 10 years? Presumably the older children can pay some rent which can help you to pay it until you are in a position to downsize.

A solicitor or judge would not be muddying the waters. They would be looking at an extremely unfair deal and advising both parties that they need to look at again.

It sounds very much like she has agreed because she has been convinced that this is necessary to avoid disruption to the children, 2 of whom are adults and 1 is almost an adult.

Given there’s clearly a discrepancy in your incomes, I’d suggest a 50-50 split on the house with you buying her out and she gets your pension and you get hers. That is much fairer than what you are suggesting.

People seem to have missed that the three children will be staying with the OP, which makes this split perfectly reasonable.

@BetterFuture1985 but they are not children. They are young adults.

A court would not require a split of assets to allow them to be housed (other than the 17 year old) which could be managed by a sale of the family home and purchase of a 2 bedroom flat. There is absolutely no reason why the higher income partner should get to keep their entire pension as well as 50 percent of the value of the family home

I'm still not sure what you're saying? The house is split 50/50, but it's retained for now, and you pay the mortgage in full?

If this is right, how long for? It will have to be sold at some point.

I'm the wife in a similar position, and we're going to sell the house, split 50/50 and transfer part of his pension to mine.

Not totally agreed yet, but basically he loaded up his pension because I paid for the childcare and worked part time to raise the children. I'm not working part time, but my pension and salary won't recover compared to his.

But I'm not looking to stay in the house, although it does upset me that I have to move my teens, because I just want a clean break for all of us.

You're being shady OP! I'm not buying the story that you'll be out of pocket by 10's of thousands of pounds because you feel responsible for your ADULT children's housing. You can't penalise your wife if you want to make that choice. Sounds like a get-out clause for not going the full 50% on everything.

'the three older children' - to me, that implies there are younger children as well, but let's look at the age of those 'children' .... 23 and 19 ... plus a 17 year old.

So two adults and one who will be an adult in a year. Is that worth giving up almost 200K for?

Op can split his pension. He doesn't need to give her the value in cash.

The judge will probably refuse this initially as it is unfair to your wife, and to protect against her being coerced, or worse, into agreeing something she is not fair to her. You are not responsible for housing your two older children.

Thanks for the honest feedback.

I realise that I’m getting the better deal financially at the outset. So a bit of explaining in order:

my thought is that I can remortgage for the 50% share of equity and buy my wife out. Technically I still owe her £140k (difference between pension divided by 2)

both me and my ex want the (older) children to be supported for at least another 5 years. I will continue to pay for the family home rather than sell and buy a cheaper smaller place.

the cost of this will be around £300k excluding any repayment of the mortgage. Ie: so we have agreed to split that amount to £150k each.

so I wont be received any extra from the split. At the moment I am be paying her £1400 a month in support as she’s moved out but that will probably cease when the remortgage goes though.

on a moral point she left me for someone else not that it makes much difference legally these days but some people give weight to these things.

Why will it cost £300k to support the older 'children' for another 5 years??
How much is your home worth?
FWIW, you are absolutely shafting your stbxw and you know it.

Ok maybe my logic is off but open to feedback hence my post.

option one: sell everything give her £490k. (50/50 house/pension). Leave kids to sort themselves out.

option two: remortgage for £350k (50% equity) and pay £4000 a month on interest only mortgage of £850k.
so £2000 each in support of ‘children’ of which she doesn’t pay directly but I pay in full to effectively save me giving it to her up front and she paying it back to me each month in support (or the children) also I guess but I would struggle to get a £940k mortgage.

I guess it sounds complicated and the easy option I keep getting told it to sell up move on and let the kids sort themselves out but neither of us want that.

At the moment I’m shafted as I’m paying her £1400 a month (in lieu of the £350k) and paying £4000 a month for the family home and I’m paying into my pension/saving and building it up and she wants to sit on the whole thing for another 5 years and then take half then. I don’t see that as fair.

I know I should just take the remaining equity buy a smaller place and be done with it all but the kids are moaning everyday that they love their home and don’t want to move out. 😞