Devastated after FDR hearing awarded me a third despite my sacrifices

[FancyPearlCrab]

This isn't a question more of a rant. I had my FDR hearing yesterday. The judge hadn't read the bundle we sent because he didn't log onto the FDR portal. He took a few mins to skim through everything. He wouldn't hear arguments of equality or that I sacrificed my career to be a SAHM so my ex could work long hours, didn't take my son's health condition into account. Believed my ex's version of events and awarded 33% of the total pot to me and the rest to my ex. It was devastating as my ex cheated on me and then proceeded to move money and lie on his Form E and didn't answer our disclosure questions. I feel like I've been completed reasonable and transparent throughout and I've just been punished for not being sneaky and awful.

I’m so sorry, that’s rubbish, what grounds were there for not giving 50;50?

The judge just said you come come out of the marriage with what you came in with. It was a 15 year long marriage. He got very angry when my barrister argued about 50/50 and wouldn't hear it.

That's the risk of going to court. How old is your ds OP?

Did your ex come into the marriage with assets/wealth?

I didn't want to go to court, my ex took me to court and wouldn't do mediation or work through solicitors. I didn't really have any options. My ds is 10 and I am the primary carer.

No he built them through the marriage, we were at the same wealth going in. He claimed a different date of separation, and said he accumulated the majority post separation. He then put everything in untouchable shares. His version was believed despite be having evidence to the contrary because the judge at FDR doesn't look at evidence.

Are you going to go with the FDR decision though? What did your barrister advise? You could ask for a proper hearing presumably but it’s obviously a bit of a gamble.

We did discuss going to the final hearing. My barrister said the outcome would likely be the same. And also after spending £32k to get to the FDR, going to a final hearing would be this again. I'm a teacher I just can't afford this emotionally or financially. So I'm going to have to settle.

What a bastard. I’m sorry. Still, you’re free of him now.

Yes, that's the silver lining. I told my son today that we'd be moving house as I can't afford to buy him out. He cried a lot but was really good about it.

Bastard. I bet he’s gloating to everyone. I truly believe there are no material advantages to playing fair.
Morally however, that’s another thing. Scant consolation now, but you know you’ve done the right thing, and it is important to be true to your values. I’m so sorry for you and your son but you will be the winner in the long run through your relationship with your DS.

Hang in there. My ex took me to the cleaners, because I didn’t dare fight over money. He threatened to take my children abroad permanently if I disputed his creative maths. I got a lot less than the OP - 14k and no part of his (then huge) pension pot. He got a 400k house, a 30k holiday home and everything else that we’d built up over 20 years as savings. I developed my career and pension pot after we divorced.

Twenty five years later, I’m living a comfortable retirement. He’s ten years older than me, but can’t stop work because he and his next wife (who doesn’t work) spend money like water. He cashed in his pension and used up what had been ‘our’ savings years ago to fund their lifestyle.

i occasionally see him at things to do with our children. We don’t talk money, of course, but I know he cheated me financially, and he knows I know. The moral high ground is very pleasant.

Why does your barrister think that there wouldn’t be any change if you go back to court? Do you need a new barrister?

That's awful OP, I'm so sorry.

It is a scary and unpredictable process - I was warned countless times about "getting a bad Judge" and my barrister said FDR outcome is at the whim of a Judge, and you just can't tell how it's going to go. I won through in my case, but it just goes to show how risky it is - and yet you don't really have a choice unless you can reach an amicable agreement (impossible in my case).

You have your lovely son with you - dress up the house move positively to him - a new start, new bedroom etc - it's a new start for you too, without your toxic ex.

Op - this sounds v familiar to my FDR. Both had barristers and I felt utter frustration at how little input I had and how so much was overlooked by the judge. I realised I had nothing to lose by going to a final hearing as ex was pushing hard for me to be awarded a sub 50% share despite him being in a vastly stronger financial position and me being primary carer.

I self represented at final hearing as just felt I knew the case better than the barrister did and couldn’t justify the expense. Learned from the fdr and focused on documenting key info in the statement. Seriously prepped, researched and learned court procedures. Got my submissions checked by solicitor. Had a far more experienced judge at that hearing (this is normal apparently esp. with self representing parties). I got to properly present my case (kept it v child focused, focused, factual) and the judge pulled everything my ex said apart. Saw through it all. I walked out with a mesher order to stay in the house until the kids finished A levels, got 50% joint pension pot (so pso’s in my favour) and a much higher share of equity. I thank the heavens I pushed through to that final hearing and did not cave at FDR. Kids and I would have been financially skewered. Do not give in. You have nothing to lose. Literally no judge is going to give you a worse deal than that. 50% should be the absolute minimum you get. I would expect more if needs based and primary carer.

If you Can self represent it’s worth a go to appeal if you can? That being said I do think judges are starting to see through the whole “I sacrificed my career” argument as it diminishes what the other person has worked for. Just remember the judge is highly likely to be a man with a long standing career himself ……If your child had gone into childcare and then before/after school care then both of you would have sustained your careers. And as a teacher a year or two out of the workplace would have had little to no effect? With one child who is now age 10 then time out of the workplace would/could have been 3 years or so……any more than that is a choice depending on your child’s health condition obviously?

dont get me wrong if he’s hid money and lied then that’s absolutely wrong and he sounds like a bit of a smug bastard and maybe appealing is worth a go but focus on the lies and inaccuracies in his information not you “supporting” his career

I had a judge like this at the FDR. It was a Monday morning, first case and he clearly hasn’t read any of the papers /was bored and totally biased in favor of my exh who had blatantly lied/offend and laundered money.

Some of these posts show total lack of insight into what happens.

The FDR is a hearing not a trial - the judge doesn’t make any awards/ judgements, but they do make recommendations based on a quick read through of what each of you say.

they are not testing the evidence. It’s worth noting that to you what seems blatantly obviously a lie is not necessarily that in court until tested in trial

you can choose to ignore their recommendation and ask for trial. Maybe suggest that as a warning to your DH - you can still negotiate and pull out prior to trial

as someone above says maybe you should consider going to full trial but be a litigant in person, and have a barrister who you pay on a direct access basis (cut out the solicitor - that’s where the vast expense is).

what sort of pot are you arguing over? That also makes a difference

What’s the pot of assets ? That would determine if I pursued to full hearing , possibly as people have said upthread at LIP

are you both relatively young ( ie 30/40s) so as a teacher you have time to build very good pension ?

That being said I do think judges are starting to see through the whole “I sacrificed my career” argument as it diminishes what the other person has worked for.

This is simply not true. Judges are not "seeing through" anything - it is very well established in UK law and case law that financial and caring/domestic contributions are to be considered equally valuable.

It is more likely the case (as PP stated) that the first FDR hearing did not test the evidence, and the ex has lied/ not disclosed fully.

This is inspirational! Awesome stuff.

Which judge is that? I’m the breadwinner and my husband was the one with 5% of all marital assets (he has only 60K in pension) and he managed to get 55% of my pension and 60% of my assets (350k of house value 550K) with various tricks like trying to inflate the value of the house and including the kids ISAs under my net worth…….

How did you sacrifice your career? Lots of couples both work full time with children.

Well done

Lots don’t though. My ex used to write “away” across bits of the calendar and I was expected to back fill all of that.

When we divorced he said he wanted 50/50 care and was astounded that he couldn’t just carry on with the “away” business and I’d pick up the slack at the cost of anything I wanted or needed to do. He kept saying things like “So you think I should be doing the school run?” Yes, my prince. At least half of them.