Starting point for diving assets

[Wolbutter]

I keep reading it's best to try and agree on finances without going to court/ using a lawyer but how do you know where to start/ what you're entitled to?

We have a house, pensions (mainly his) and some shared investments. We both work but he earns a lot more than me. Is there somewhere to get a ballpark or is it best to go straight to a divorce solicitor?

The start point is 50:50

then adjusted up /down depending kn

length of marriage
needs
ages of children
earnings and earnings potential of both
ages if both parties

impacted by overall
asset pot available

Thanks - I can see those are the factors that deviate from 50/50 but I can't really find examples about how much that change might be - in our case it's a long marriage and although I work I took a very different and lower paid one than the one I was on when we married and he earns multiple times my salary. There are 2 dependent children but they're teens so won't be officially dependent for many more years. We're 15 years from state retirement age but had planned to retire in 8 years. No idea if that means I should be thinking about more (or less) that 50%.

Just seen my typo!! Dividing, not diving!!

In a similar situation, I ended up in court and the judge felt that the salary difference was irrelevant, so it was a split of everything else 50/50. But I know other people have different experiences. I suspect that with teenage children, you may struggle to claim more than 50/50 but a solicitor would advise.

I think you'll need a solicitor to be sure as it depends on the overall pot, ages of both parties and children etc. A friend of mine was in a similar position and everything was divided 65/35 (larger amount to primary parent, lower earner). She originally wanted 70/30 so 65/35 was a compromise. I think he would have wanted 60/40 but didn't want to go to court. The values enabled her to buy a house outright to house children and he paid child maintenance but not spousal.

50/50 is the starting point that hopefully keeps legal bills to a minimum. You can negotiate more cash savings for say less house equity or whatever.
The factor that usually the hardest is housing - can you raise 50% of the equity in the house so you can keep it or would you rather receive 50% of the equity and move out? Does he want the kids 50% of the time or is he like my ex and likely to move closer to his work and be a weekend dad?

Do you work full time ? You may need to look into ways to increase your income.
Are the kids at points in their education where a move would be ok? For example if one is about to start GCSEs in September then it would be ok to move now.

The main child carer will get child maintenance from the other parent, unless care is equally shared, till youngest is 18.

You see if 50/50 split of assets enables you both to move on, in terms of housing and living day-to-day. If not, then maybe adjust. But will depend on if the current house is more than is strictly needed, or not. You may each want to achieve different things, in terms of pension amounts, other savings, and housing. So there is certainly room for negotiation, even if it's 50/50, on the details. It is fairly common for the woman to get more of the house and the man more of the pension, though that's not always sensible.

It will depend on what assets there are. Eg a pot of 300k may get split in % terms very differently to a pot of 3m

it also depends on earnings, eg if you earn 20k and he earns 60k vs you earning 100k and him 200k

courts will try to get to as near to 50:50 as possible if they can

When you got married you agreed to combine your wealth in the pursuit of marriage and family life. So you have an entitlement to half of the wealth. But you may need more to move on and start over if you earn less. In most cases you can expect to have pensions equalised and equity shared to fund a new home.

Because your ability to get a mortgage or pay rent may be less than his you might need either more capital or some limited spousal support. So you might need 70% of the equity to secure an affordable mortgage. Or you could need some spousal support for a few years to restore your income potential.

With teenage children you will be expected to work full time and or claim benefits. If your qualifications mean you could get a better job that could be brought up as well.

please also not that it is net income that is compared not salary. And it is maximised income not current. Please bear in mind his net income could be heavily taxed which reduces it considerably. Your salary ratios can reduce substantially when this is taken into account.

Thanks everyone - this is so helpful!

My question really was is there any point in any solicitor if they are going to jsut say 50/50, and wondering if our case is different. 50/50 would leave me able to have a good standard of living, but significantly different to him...

Our assets are high so I am very aware this is not the position most people in the forum are in. Half would see me able to have a house or stay in the family home and have a decent pension.

Income wise it's different and I wonder if that's what soliciors look at. Before kids I earned slightly more than him (both high earners) but I enabled him to have a job when he was in the US a significant portion of the time, this was a joint decision for the family.Now I work in education (fulltime) and earn 60k on a fixed term contract, he is currently on 350k and has earned more in the past, probably will again, I know I'm materially lucky but I don't want to sell me or the kids short given that had I decided differently I might still be on a corporate exec career path. I imagine he is reasonably likely to take a new partner with a younger family and this could affect things for our kids (Uni fees, help with housing later on etc).

I think if you can evidence that your career was set back by having your joint children then you have a case for more then 50% of the assets. With his high income you may well have a case for spousal maintenance although this is rare and would likely be for a fixed term rather then ongoing. Might be worth looking into.

Do you know who will be doing the bulk of childcare? His income is over the maximum threshold for cms so might be worth setting out a maintenance sum during the court case in light of the above. Also be aware with that massive difference in income he would still owe you child maintenance even on 50/50 care.

On that kind of salary and a long marriage you are definitely in spousal maintenance territory or capitalising that and getting higher share of assets.

doesn’t mean you’ll have same income or std of living though