Impasse on finances - comprise or carry on?

[Flyingdvds]

I'm looking for some perspective from others who have been through this.

My husband and I started the divorce process using Amicable, but that has been put on hold and we've both instructed separate solicitors. The financial negotiations have become adversarial and we're at an impasse.

My husband is entrenched in his position without much legal basis. I therefore don't feel I can show any willingness to compromise yet, as I'm concerned it will simply encourage him to dig his heels in. He’s quite difficult and for want of a better phrase is a bit of a bully.

I could probably take a much harder line. My solicitor believes I have a very strong position and I can the best possible outcome for myself. The trouble is that I'm battle weary.

I work full-time, we have two young children, and I'm finding the legal fees increasingly difficult to fund. I'm considering taking out a litigation loan. Part of me thinks that if I'm going to take on that cost, I should fully pursue my strongest case. Another part of me just wants an end to the conflict and to move on with my life.

My biggest concern is settling because I'm exhausted, only to look back in a few years' time and wish I'd fought harder for a fairer outcome. Equally, I don't want to spend months and money fighting over every detail.

We're both relatively high earners, although he earns significantly more than I do. We have a reasonable asset base and two young children.

Has anyone else been in this position? How did you decide where the line was between fighting for a better outcome and keeping your sanity?

Do you regret compromising, or do you regret continuing the fight?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

You ask yourself the question "Can I live with it".. whatever amount the "it" is.

Is it enough to house yourself and any kids? Are you protected in retirement? Is your income enough to support you.

Mine was opposite scenario I had all the income and assets he was a parasite. I could have fought as hard as possible. But I could live with compromise. Both financially and mentally.

I still hate it. I still believe he wasnt entitled to half as much as I gave. But I can live with it. With my kids in my house that he cannot come near.

Human nature is you’ll bi want to walk away with as much as possible
if your both good earners the spli should be relatively equal

My solicitor believes I have a very strong position and I can the best possible outcome for myself
They always do...not as much as truly believing as being quick to tell you they do. Try family mediation first.

Please bear in mind that the solicitor has a financial motive. The more you fight, the more they get.

Only you can decide what degree of compromise you can tolerate. But a peaceful life has a lot to be said for it.

I was in a similar position to Moose, I don’t think I was well advised and I’m hugely regretful that I didn’t take a tougher stance. It’s hard to stand up for yourself when you feel exhausted but you might regret it later if you don’t think you gave it your best shot.

When I was going through my divorce I initially tried to fight for slightly more than half, based on knowing he would never attempt to house himself alone (I knew he’d find someone to cocklodge with asap) plus I knew he’d never pull his weight and I’d end up with the kids 100% of the time). I dragged my feet a bit (we’re talking months tho, not years) hoping he’d settle/compromise as I thought he’d get desperate for his share of the cash. But I was wrong. He didn’t settle or compromise. Tbf, my lawyer was completely upfront with me and told me the likely outcome would be 50/50 on finances and she didn’t believe it would be worth spending lots on legal costs trying to get more. So my strategy was: make an offer, step back, and try and wait him out. In the end I settled at 50/50 because i was stressed and anxious at the constant threats from him to move back in and make life difficult for me.

in the end it was for the best as the peace of mind it gave me once I bought him out of the house was priceless. I was right tho. He moved to the other end of the country, moved in with his new GF, and sees his kids once a month 🙄

I think it depends on what you’re asking for, why you think that’s warranted, what ££ you are fighting over, vs the costs ( both financially and emotionally ) to continue the fight .

I didn’t worry about the fight - I had enough to manage and just getting free was worth so much to me

I think you have to take the line ‘what will each of our lives look like in (x) ten years time?’ On the face of it, at the time, I got what I thought was fair. But as the years have passed, his salary trajectory way outpaced what I could ever hope for, and although I’ve done my best, I am way way poorer than him. I know it’s all based on a snapshot in time and looks backwards (eg pension to x date), but I wish there was a way to build in the opportunity cost of salary lost when I took an extended maternity break, stayed at home, missed out on opportunities. For him, the divorce was a financial blip, and the child maintenance is what he would have been paying into the family pot anyway, but there’s no way I could ever make up the loss of earnings, pension, promotions missed, etc, and ten years on, I wish I’d advocated for more.

Thanks all for taking the time to comment. I would be happy with less than 50% for peace of mind. He is offering lower than that. The solicitor thinks I'm being generous by asking for less than 50%. DH knows I would be OK with under 50% but he's not budging from a very hard stance even tho there's no basis for it. I think he's just trying it on as it's all he can do. It all feels quite tactical and it's taking time. I want to bring things to a head but worried about negotiating against myself.

My exh was very difficult and we ended up going to court as we couldn’t agree on anything. If he could have compromised even a bit I would have been willing but he would not and he came out of it way worse than me. It was worth it for me financially but he has made my life difficult in the years since. I believe he would not have been happy if he had had 50p less than me so I suppose it was worth the fight though I would understand if you were not up to it as it is extremely stressful.

God don't take less than 50%!

I fought, because I was enraged by his unwillingness to give me a fair share of assets - he was also a v high earner and I was a sahm, and he was also offering less than 50%.

Fighting it wasn't a pleasant experience, but I'm very glad I did.

Would you consider a private FDR Hearing? That's what we did - a Judge basically goes through your case and advises what he would rule in court. It's legally non-binding, but often hearing it from a Judge is what these men need.

I ended up with more than 50% and spousal maintenance - what I gained was way more than what I spent in legal fees. So totally worth it for me. ExH agreed and signed the financial agreement then and there. Seemed he had to hear it from a Judge.

he did have the option to not agree, and take all the way through court, but he's not stupid. He knew the court Judge would say the same, and he'd spend a load more on legal fees for the same result. The pFDR Judge made that very clear.

If he's the higher earner, no Judge will award you less than 50%, so fight for at least that.

If he isn’t willing to accept your under 50% offer then it’s back to the 50% position

It’s not correct that judges don’t award less than 50% where there’s a high earner. They absolutely do!

but again it depends on the situation, assets available, earnings, needs, length of marriage etc etc and how far apart you are in your proposals and whether they are based on legal principles

it sounds here that he perhaps is not ….

Thanks all - this is amazingly helpful to hear about your experiences. Private FDR / third party male telling him what to do may be the only option. I may need to take a litigation loan to do this though which is frustrating - especially when I'd be prepared to accept a lower settlement but he will not hear of it at this stage. Has anyone taken a litigation loan?

Why do you need legal representation if you aren’t asking for more than 50% of known assets? Unless there is a specific issue that requires expert argument it is questionable what benefit legal representation will have. If he is the bigger earner he is the one who needs to spend money arguing for more than 50% of assets.

I didn't have a litigation loan - I was lucky enough to have access to savings. I did spend a fair whack on legal fees though (I considered them well worth it).
It depends on your ex... My ex brought in the big guns lawyers, who tried to make all sorts of legal argument as to why I shouldn't have, and didn't need, 50% - they tried (and failed) to invoke Standish - our case wasn't remotely comparable to Standish! And we weren't arguing about millions. We both had an inheritance, both entered the matrimonial finances many years before the divorce - but he thought he should get his back. The Judge was having none of it.
My solicitor got me a fantastic Barrister to argue my case. She wasn't as expensive as his Barrister, but she was worth every penny.
So if your ex is likely to pull a similar stunt, then yes, I would say get legal representation, because you need to make legal argument. I'm pretty sure you have to have a Barrister for a private FDR - but I could be wrong.
Good luck, whatever you decide. Just remember the golden rule is not to spend more on legal fees than you stand to gain in a court hearing.

Don't take less than 50%. You have young children and will (I assume) be left with the lion's share of parenting them and paying for them. In addition he will find it far easier to build a larger pension if he isn't caring for the children and is the higher earner.

Hang on in there, he is definitely trying to bully you. Less than 50% of the assets is certainly not fair - why would it be?

You have the rest of your life to regret this, it will be worth a tough year or so to get the best possible deal. Tell him you'll see him in court as you can't agree. The judge is very unlikely to award you less than 50%, particularly if you are the main carer.

I wish I had fought for more 😥

I think the first answer is right - what can you live with - realistically and emotionally. Sometimes the peace of mind from not fighting is absolutely worth it, but not if you're always goign to be regretting it becuase you don't have enough m oney or you have to give up the house you love or whatever.

Good point...I'd not thought about representing myself before. I will give that some thought.

I read somewhere that women sometimes accept less than they should to end the pain of the process. Having recently gone through the nightmare of divorcing, I totally understand that; at times it was so awful that I wanted to accept any old settlement, whatever he’d say, just so it could end. But I didn’t. I’d been married over thirty years. I’d EARNED that money.
Good luck x