please can someone advise after a divorce

[Curlylocks1]

Hi can anyone help me with some advice?

Someone I know has recently divorced her ex husband - he was having an affair with a younger girl (who was my friends daughters age in her 30s they have no kids together).

He dragged his feet with the divorce but she managed to do it herself through divorce online, including paying them to draft a financial consent order for him to fill his half, but again dragging his feet and it has been over a year now and no sign of him completing this form.

He has said previously he did not want the house and that he wanted to walk away debt free at the end of this (they share payments for a loan they had taken out and she was going to take on the loan herself for this to be made possible).

Now he has changed his mind and wants his share of assets divided so that it is 'fair' and I know some of you will say that he is entitled to this etc.

Would really appreciate some helpful advice on what she should/can do because she is a little out of her depth - He has a solicitor.

I don't think the law takes into consideration about who put deposits down for a property etc, it was not him who contributed to that and she has been paying for the mortgage herself for the past year.

She knows she can buy him out or sell up it just seems unfair after everything he has put her through ,it is just this easy for him to walk away with what he wants.

Hope someone out there can advise

She needs a solicitor, immediately, and she has got to let go of what she feels would be "fair." There's nothing fair about it, but he is entitled to his share of their assets. His infidelity will have no bearing on this.

Why doesn't she have a lawyer?
I'd have to write all that out to understand it.
Are their pensions in the mix?

It sounds like she could be "better" off by the time he takes equal share of the loan & has to share his pension, although maybe not after the lawyers take their share. Still, it's what he's pushed for. Make sure he has to put everything on the table for possible sharing, going forward.

When they got married they agreed to combine their wealth. All the love vows are essentially meaningless from a legal point of view. She needs to accept that.

The divorce process will then divide the assets based on needs, not contribution. Behaviour won’t be taken into account except in very extreme circumstances.

They need to list their assets, individual and marital. Then establish their needs. This will then be used to work out the split. If they earn about the same they will split things roughly 50:50.

Some assets can be exempted from the split. These are usually ones that were gained outside the marriage and where needs can be met.

Taking out what you brought to the marriage applies where the marriage is short, there are no children and both adults are healthy/can work.

She occupied the house for the year and that included his share. Paying the mortgage evens that out. Regardless they jointly own it by virtue of getting married.

Agree with PP about putting "fair" aside. most people walking away from divorce thinking it wasn't a fair split. "It's not fair!" only helps you if it makes you communicate well with your lawyer (your advocate). Otherwise it's a waste of energy.

Make him put all his assets on table for consideration, too.

There are a lot of variables - any children for example or if one is cohabiting with another person. She’s been paying off the loan and mortgage all this time? It’s likely this would be taken into account. Was the agreement written down?

The “fair” he is probably referring to, if he has seen a solicitor, is the rules of “fair settlement “ that are part of the divorce bit of the marriage act. Courts are required by law to ensure any financial agreement , whether done through consent order or imposed by court as financial order, HAVE to meet the 10 or so fair settlement criteria. Not all of the, will apply to everyone. A lot of people end up with 50:50 but this is not the starting point that gets said here all the time. “Fair settlement” always come first

use the link at top of this board to ADVICE NOW and get your friend, maybe with your help, to read through what fair settlement is, how it applied to her and what the likely settlement she could get is. She needs to refuse to discuss or agree to any consent order until her STBex has completed his full, legal financial disclosure and she has done this too. Forms E and D81. Go onto government web site agian, which she’s already used and download those forms and ADVICE NOW site explains how to use them.

once she understands the process she can go to a solicitor for tasks she needs. Ther wise her bills will start running up stupidly just to listen to solicitors telling her something she can read for herself. ADVICE NOW site and DIY guides are very good at explains what you don’t need solicitor for (eg petition itself as your framed has found out) , what you might need one for, and what you really should use one for (eg writing the legal draft of the consent order)

As I say in my more detailed response, you are missing the point about “fair” in this context. “Fair settlement” is a legal requirement that courts have to prove.
And no one walks away form divorce as well off as they were in marriage - yep it doesn’t feel fair to take a financial hit particularly if you feel it wasn’t your fault , but that’s what marriage benefits are and when you divorce you loose those. Fair settlement legally is based on future needs and nowt to do at all with the past

Please please would people stop saying 50:50 split. This is not the starting point. “Fair settlement” legally defined is
yep, people may end up with 50:50 but it is not the starting point or for many the ending point

Jeez, so much crap answers on this board. Does no one on MN ever inform themselves of how courts and law works and what the “fair” refers to legally 🤦‍♀️🙄

OP wrote one post which used the words
affair
fair
unfair

as in
"it just seems unfair after everything he has put her through"

That is the comment I was replying to, in my previous post. Not a legal principle but what "seems unfair". I heard a lot of "It's so unfair!!" from friend going thru acrimonious divorce. Because she didn't bring debt to the marriage (he did), she didn't cause damage to the kitchen in a tantrum (he did), she didn't cheat and threaten violence (he did), etc. I suppose it was all part of her grieving process, realising what a not decent person she thought he was. Legally his unfair behaviour had no bearing on rights to have about equal split of the marital assets.

I didn’t say it was the starting point. Because I know it isn’t. I specifically made reference to equality in income as a basis to split it this way.

You are not the only one with a bit of knowledge.

Why on earth does she not have a solicitor of course she’s out of her depth.

Get the best solicitor she can afford.

She’s a fool not to have got a solicitor in the first place, get one quick.

Given you make a hugely inaccurate description about the role of the court, maybe you should take your own advice.

A couple can diverge from the tests if they do so knowingly and with the correct advice. The court can approve this decision.

Actually that isn’t true - the court is legally bound to ensure that both parties have reviewed fair settlement, understand it and can reject consent orders outright if they feel one party is being denied fair settlement at the benefit of the other. They certain will go back to each party for clarifying questions even for consent orders- particularly if one of party does not indicate they’ve had legal advice. . If you read this board regularly you’ll find examples of this where couples have had to go back to adjust . Clearly if they’re aren’t enough assets to meet all criteria it is varied as least worse options, and if there are assets in excess to meet them the court don’t much care about variation provided both parties agree and both parties have sufficient to meet the main criteria .

This is because the courts aren’t doing fair settlement for the benefit of the divorcing parties, they are doing it because the government created the law to benefit society as a whole. The courts cannot agree to leave one party benefitting in excess of fair settlement whilst the other is then going to risk relying on government support . They are as required by law to check whether there is evidence one party doesn’t understand what they’re signing, under duress, or mentally incompetent

if you read fair settlement you’ll see they are fairly basic requirements to be met but do include about parties having similar lifestyle where possible - there’s a lot of flex in that one

if you think the court is merely rubber stamping consent orders you are very mistaken. Go read these boards for starters.

I didn’t say the court wouldn’t question an agreement. I pointed out that if a couple decide to knowingly not apply the rules the court can accept that decision. The court doesn’t have to apply the fair tests as you claimed when telling everyone they were wrong.

🫤🤦‍♀️

@Whiteroomjoy Thank you so much, that was really helpful x

Just for reference she filled in her half of the financial statement for the consent order but it has been with divorce online for a year now waiting for him to fill in his half. He just keeps dragging his feet and only wants to liaise through his solicitor