Final hearing FDR- 9 months how to stop ex from being able to still claim on my assets accrued post separation date?

[Jabbathehurt]

My ex is rinsing me of assets he has asked for 80 percent of value of house. Hasn’t yet asked for pension but likely will also want a larger share of my pension given my higher income. It is very unlikely he will settle as he lives comfortably with his parents in a 4 bed house and his brother pays his legal fees. He has no savings and only 50k in pensions. ( on purpose, he has spent all his earnings so his net worth is dropping or remaining stagnant). He’s just waiting for a windfall from me however if this goes to a final hearing the next available date is in 8-9 months. I can’t seem to get my solicitors to enforce a cut off date for all finances. We have lived separately since February, what can I do to stop him from making further demands on my accrued assets and wasting my money and time given I’m the one ending up paying for legal fees on both sides.

His brother pays his legal fees? How then are you paying legal fees on both sides? Are there dc? How long married? Why is 50:50 not likely? Who came into marriage with most and is anything in a pre nup agreement? Generality, yes, everything is on the table. You need to think about what offer you think is reasonable and get a solicitor and negotiate.

I have a solicitor. My ex contributes 5 percent of the marital assets and I contribute 95 %. He went on a spending spree to reduce his net worth. I have a lawyer and a barrister and my second hearing is next week.

My income is 3.5 times his and my pension is 7 times as big. I bought the house and own it outright. Marriage 11 years, 2 kids. I carry all the mental load, do the cooking and chores and he is not a stay at home dad. I pay for childcare. He moved out in February but it seems my income is still up for grabs even after separation and for the foreseeable 9 months as he’s not going to settle at this one. Greedy is the word to describe him.

@Jabbathehurt Let’s hope you have a good barrister then. No pre nup?

No prenup. Doesn’t hold anyway in long marriages with kids

You cannot stop your ex claiming on assets accrued post separation date. The financial order is what separates the two of you financially.

Pre nups do hold in long marriages and kids if that has been factored in to a scenario

until you are financially separated with consent order all monies are theoretically in the pot. Whether he’d be awarded any of post separation assets or not is a separate matter but you can’t ring fence

I believe pre nups show intend between the parties and in your case should have been drawn up op. Next time ……

my solicitor says the pre nupts can guide but in the UK they are not binding as needs trumps all.

Have you made an offer? What do you think is a fair settlement? The judge at the second hearing will give an indication of what is fair in law.

You probably have to rethink your view that he is comfortably living with his parents in their house. From the courts point of view he is not adequately housed. He is temporarily living with relatives with no housing security awaiting financial settlement.

The starting point in a long marriage with DC is 50:50 of all assets, including pensions.

The DC will be the priority in splitting assets and this includes him having a home to meet their needs unless there is a good reason why he shouldn’t be involved in their future care.

Let's hope his own bank accounts are scoured by the court, OP. What he's doing is disgusting.

I know that. He has spent his income - no rent no bills nothing. His net worth is less than what it was in March. He is absolute scum. I might write to the papers about this. I think the journalist who started queenagers might be interested in this. How unfair the entire court system is. He can choose to spend his money and be in debt and then try and take as much as he can from the other person.

he has chosen properties with 3 bedrooms costing 500-550k. I have found properties costing under 400k with 3 bedrooms. He has never maintained a house or paid for any repairs. In February he said he wanted me to buy him a flat. My neighbour says that he told her the plans were to stay with his parents because they had moved from Streatham 1 hour away to here for that precise reason- to house him and provide a location from which the kids can attend school. A 4 bedroom house far nicer than mine which they have bought outright.

@Jabbathehurt Yes, not binding but show what each party intended when there’s great differences between who brings what to the marriage. Your ex needs enough as presumably dc will visit? He should not be sofa surfing.

Hi Op. sorry to be the bearer of bad news but I was in exactly the same situation as you and had to split everything 50/50. They based it on the Form E that was updated just before that court hearing which was TWO years after HE filed on me.

Following with interest-I am waiting for a response to my solicitor's letter requesting financial disclosure, but my ex has already hidden an inheritance, stopped working and is on benefits.He is also likely to be running up debts, and his family own the house he lives in, so there is no equity to be split.I have stopped feeling defeated and intend to go for a share of his DB pension and ask for his inheritance to be "invaded"-which can happen if there are insufficient assets to meet the needs of both parties. I have never received maintenance, the children see him rarely and I have just lost my job due to health issues.I was grateful to be offered a council house after 2 years of renting an unsuitable, overcrowded house, but now I'm adamant that I need the best possible financial outcome to avoid poverty for my children and me when retire.

Is your solicitor any good?

Surely you need to challenge his Form E statement of needs?

He cannot claim to need a house if his parents have specifically moved to house him. Of course he can argue this but so can you. Also, you can certainly argue about the assets deliberately squandered in his spending spree.

The problem is the concept of premarital and postmarital assets disappear if it is accepted that he needs a certain amount to pursue his previous lifestyle.

I can’t argue that he needs a house since his parents are not legally obliged to house him, but I am. Hence the court will throw that argument out. Apparently I can’t argue about anything since it’s a no fault solely concerned with financial remediation, the aim is to house him and his aim is to get as much off me as possible.

@Wontbackdown You quite rightly want the best for your family but of course men do too! Yes, of course a pension should be included. Many people don’t have enough assets for 2 family homes. There has to be compromise. Area where homes are is the usual one. Someone having a flat and not a house. Earnings capacity also matters. Obviously high earners can get a mortgage more readily. I don’t think the courts like anyone deliberately making themselves poor or lavishly spending so the money goes. Any decent solicitor or barrister would be on top of this. They should also look for hidden savings too.

Why on Earth is he claiming 80% do the children live with him?

@netflixfan he claims that amount because he wants a home the same value as mine and he earns 4 times less than me and claims he can only raise a mortgage of 100k. He has the kids 40 percent of the time. His parents house and feed them all. I have absolute certainty that he will continue to live there rent free and to (if he’s got any sense at all) is to buy a flat and rent it out to get some more income for
himself. Or rent it out to pay the mortgage. Win win. I wish I had his lack of morals.

@Jabbathehurtat this is all going through court the outcome will be fair to both parties and prioritise the DC. It’s not about the wants of either party if that means the outcome is not what the court considers to be fair in law.

The starting point is 50:50 of all marital assets. You will both have had to submit a CETV for your pensions and both submit a mortgage capacity report. I suspect he is offsetting his ‘share’ of your pension for an equivalent additional share of the marital property and thus asking for more than 50% because you are some way off pension age and this is the best way he can provide a secure home for your shared DC in the immediate term. His pension income is reduced in retirement but he then owns an asset that he can sell and downsize if required to fund income in retirement.

This does not mean he is trying to rinse you even if you think it is unfair or that the court should privilege the higher earner because they have made a greater financial contribution.

I have just received his “offer” letter it states he wants 73 percent of all my assets and 450k and half my pensions. So no starting 50 50 there. He is greedy AF

I don’t understand what you mean?? Especially when you refer to all your assets. Do you mean marital assets? That includes property, investments, savings, pensions.

The court position after a long marriage of more than 10 years is 50:50. Deviation from that will depend on need. The judge at the second hearing will give an indication of what the court considers fair. This may well be less than he is claiming but more than you think is fair. The aim is to allow negotiation to avoid final hearing where you have exhausted negotiation and left the sharing decision to the court.

The court will consider mortgage capacity, future earning potential and ability to accrue pension in future and will expect both parties to maximise their income. Higher earning parties often recover from divorce financial settlement quite quickly.

The court will also expect you to have made an offer or counter offer prior to the 2nd hearing to facilitate negotiation. What have you offered?

You really don’t want to go to final hearing having made no offer or engaged with offer made or made a counter offer and with the attitude you are displaying here with regard to your DC’s best interests and viewing marital assets as your assets.

I have made a counter offer 40 percent and then we negotiate. I don’t see it being settled he is likely to take this to next hearing as he has nothing to lose. His brother has laid his legal fees of 44k so far and he lives with his parents rent free. Im just surprised he hasn’t quit his job to ensure I fund the rest if his lazy life. This is a man who earns a net income of 2.4k a month and has managed to still get into debt and not save any money.