Do solicitors always require full financial disclosure before giving divorce advice?

[MathsGeek53]

Having separated a year ago, we went to mediation to try to resolve finances but did not come close to an agreement. The mediator couldn’t give any advice to either of us so I spoke to a solicitor today hoping for some advice on what is a reasonable way to split our finances. She said she was unable to advise until she has the “full and frank disclosure” from us both which is obviously at a considerable cost. I have no reason to expect him to have lied about his income/debts/pensions etc and I don’t want to go thru all that paperwork just to find out the figures we provided each other are in fact true. I feel like I am being encouraged to war with him unnecessarily. I just want advice on reasonable ways to separate finances. Will all solicitors ask for this? Is the system in such a state that we can’t get advice based on trusting one another?

Can you not agree between the two of you?
we didn’t do full sand Frank disclosure ( ie form e) we sat down together and completed d81 and agreed by discussion

do you have complicated assets or a major imbalance ?

I paid for a solicitor to basically answer my questions about the process.

my ExH I am pretty sure did the same.

we then came to an agreement and did it amicably.

I’m on a significantly lower wage (less than half his) and will have full responsibility for our two primary aged kids. I want to keep them in their house (decent 3 bed detached) which means buying him out. I can’t give him half the equity because I can’t afford the mortgage. I offered about 2/3 of the equity and he wants more. I literally can’t afford it. I just want to know if I am being unreasonable or if I should stick to that. He doesn’t want to go back to mediation, but wants to agree between us, which I’m happy to do, but I want some indication of whether what I’m asking is fair.

Well usually there are two major assets - the house and the pensions.

so if 50:50 of the overall assets is agreed then it comes down to trading pension for house which is more arguable.

In most cases the court will want 50:50. They’d want a good reason for it not to be. And wanting the kids to stay in the house won’t be good enough. Because children move house all the time.

Would he be able to buy a similar value/size property with 2/3 of the money. Again courts want you both to have similar amounts to set up with.

Is he not going to see the dc at all?

He has agreed to see them on a Saturday for 5 hours.

You can tell your solicitor what you like. She acts on your behalf though so not sure why you’re talking like she’s going against your wishes.

my ex and I just filled in the normal form - no need for full and frank disclosure as we knew the rough assets we had. Sure someone could hide a couple of thousand if they really wanted to but not sure what the point is. Unless you think he has significant money hidden somewhere.

God that awful. Poor kids.

You may well find a solicitor who will answer your questions on general principles the court applies and the range of hypothetical options and the process. If you want them to give specific advice about what is reasonable in your case and/or prepare a consent order then they’re going to need to see full disclosure from both of you. They’d be negligent if they try to advise you properly without this. The court will also need disclosure if you are seeking a consent order.

What a cunt

By full disclosure do you just mean Form e? Why would that cost a lot?

What’s the difference in net income monthly , are you able to claim uc top ups, plus you’ll receive cms

when you compare that vs his net mthly Is the disparity as large ?

why is he only having them 5 hours on a Saturday? Is there a backstory here?

a settlement in court would look at all assets - are there pensions and savings ?
have you maximised your income ?
can you house children in cheaper house ?
why such low child as access

there may be a case for deviation from 50:50 on a needs basis but you’d need to understand the above.

A solicitor acting on your behalf will ensure the best possible outcome for you . You say you can't afford to buy him out - a solicitor might negotiate a deal with him , say part pension claim for the house , etc. And a fair amount of CM as he is obviously not looking for 50/50 . There is so much you need to know and your DH might try to make an agreement to benefit himself only which is why he doesn't want to go through solicitors .

Op can however educate herself on the principles of division and fairness guides online to help her work out what reasonable might be and how to approach it

also cms will be calculated by cms outside of the divorce settlement

A solicitor can put your agreement into an order but they can’t advise you whether it’s fair or not or without full and frank financial disclosure.

A court would look at housing needs, and whilst you’re settled in your home, a 3 bed detached is obviously more expensive than other 3 bed house, semi / terraced etc. Assume you’re basing the fact you can’t afford it on 50-50. Given he doesn’t need to house his kids as only seeing them during the day, you may be able to argue for more than 50%, or negotiate more if stay away from his pension.

You do need legal advice, which is costly. But without it, you could end up with less.

I assume she means she cannot answer a specific question about the split of capital unless you provide her with the relevant financial information and for that to be accurate it needs to be complete.

Tbf OP you are being vague on this post with statements like his salary is twice mine. Thats doesn’t mean his income is twice as much as yours. By the sound of it she isn’t in the business of giving people speculative advice or promising she can get you what you want regardless of the facts.

There are solicitors who will tell you that. Whether they can achieve it or not is debatable.

You need to get some recommendations for solicitors that get good outcome for people in your situation.

You are a much lower earner and the fact he wants such little time with the DC implies you have done all the DC work to enable him to progress.

If you will be doing 100% of the nights how can he argue he needs an equivalent home to house the DC and you can’t get a large mortgage.

I can’t imagine under your circumstances that a 50:50 equity split (all assets including pensions) will be seen as fair! There is good argument for you having a higher share as you are housing the DC alone and have a much lower income.

No doubt he wants 50% as he considers it “his” money and your contribution of raising the DC enabling him to work as and when isn’t recognised.