Re-posted from divorce board for traffic. NB I'm referring here to collaborative law here, not mediation which has so far been entirely unsuccessful, sadly.
Trying, very unsuccessfully, to sort out our divorce financial settlement between me and my stbxh. Basically, he is refusing to budge an inch and whining that "it's not fair" whenever I refer to the law on divorce settlements. He has provided some but not all financial disclosure, claiming that certain things are "not relevant" in his view (for example, I still don't know how much his pension contributions are). We were doing this with a mediator, but it just seemed a lot of money for not much - or indeed any - progress.
Court is starting to look inevitable, but it's so expensive and such a long, drawn-out process and I just want this over. I have no financial security at all at the moment even though we are a relatively wealthy couple. Looking back, there were probably elements of financial abuse in the marriage but decree nisi has already been granted so I guess that's a moot point. Suffice to say I want to get on with my life and stop worrying about all this. And I believe we have enough money that we could both be comfortable.
So, I've been looking for alternatives to court and wondered about collaborative law? I think if my stbxh would just accept what the law says instead of what he "thinks", we could possibly make some progress. We are literally having discussions where I will say something like: "the law says this and my solicitor has advised bla, bla, bla.." and he will respond "I don't agree with that". No reason given, no countering "my solicitor said something different", just he doesn't agree, as if that settles things. I wondered whether having his own solicitor sitting there when he acts this way it might be helpful? That said, he's so cagey about his own legal advice that I suspect he is just ignoring what he doesn't want to hear. He's on to his fourth solicitor now, as apparently they are all obstructive and rubbish!
I've only ever asked my solicitor about a "reasonable" settlement, not a good one, let alone a generous one. But we're miles apart with stbxh suggesting, for example, a 70:30 split in his favour even though I am the one with the children 100% of the time and with a substantially lower income, because stbxh thinks that's "fair".
(The children barely see him by their own choice. DD1 is old enough to be viewed as an adult, but the younger one saw a child mediator and explained that she didn't want much contact with him and why ,and so she now sees him every other month. Stbxh is arguing about that, too as he "didn't realise" that would be the outcome of her seeing a child mediator, even though he was the one pushing for it in the first place.)
My solicitor suggested collaborative law, saying that they often have people (typically men) who start off telling everyone how things are going to go. And then (she tells me), you sometimes see their faces changing when you have two solicitors both telling this person: "well, that's not how it works, the law says (whatever the law does indeed say)". Surely even someone as stubborn as stbxh will have to accept at some point that he will have to accept what the law says, regardless of his own personal views? Won't he?
Anyway, I would be grateful for any input from anyone who has tried this approach - or indeed any other thoughts or advice. Negotiation between solicitors? Private hearings? Arbitration? I just want this over with. As I said, we've tried mediation and we've tried sorting it out ourselves and got precisely nowhere.