what is the basis for financial settlements on divorce/separation?

[elliott]

OK, trying this question again.
my db and sil are probably splitting and I realise I know absolutely nothing about divorce. Obviously, I don't really need to as its not my responsibility, but I am concerned that my db is treated fairly.
Can anyone give me a 5 minute guide to principles guiding what happens to assets etc after divorce? Particularly property and business assets? Or are there no general principles - could they basically agree whatever they wanted?
Is the best way for them to seek mediation or for him to find a solicitor, or both?

Mediation AND A good solicitor
Its a bit of a "how long is a piece of string" question.

ARe they absolutely loaded? If so, would there be enough money in tehfamily "pot" for them both to rehouse etc? Prob 50/50 in that case. If not, priority would be given to teh party who has the children.

Get him to a Solicitor ASAP

Thanks MamaG.
I think there should be enough for them both to rehouse, but it is a bit complicated (I don't know all details and wouldn't divulge them if I did )
I suppose what I'm getting at if one party has greater income and assets than the other, how does that affect how things are divided? Is it all viewed as one 'pot' regardless of how finances were arranged during marriage? And what account is taken of the children's need in terms of housing and support?

Say the husband has earned a lot of money during the marriage, but the wife hasn't worked, or hasn't worked full time, but has looked after teh children, that is seen as her "job" IYKWIM - she might have trained to be a doctor had she not had the children to look after etc.

I'd recommend he finds a solicitor through Resolution (Google em) as they are very family focused adn any lawyer who is a member of Resolution will ensure that hte children get a fair deal

oh God thats very garbled, you can tell I'm on maternity leave and have a brain made of mush!

What I'm saying is, teh main earner won't get the biggest slice of the pie just because they earned the cash

No its more the opposite way around - both have always worked but she earns more. most of the info I can find is geared towards the situation you describe, which is not really their situation (but, also they are not simply a mirror image of the 'usual', as db has been neither the main wage earner nor the main childcarer).

but obviously he needs to get advice, and thanks for the pointers about how to find a good solicitor.

just because one works harder/has a better paid job/had more assets before the marriage, they don't necessarily get more on divorcing.

in fact, if that one is the man, and he leaves a wife with his children (sorry for generalisation! ) he may well get less so she can adequately house them all, in effect. unless, as has been said, we are talking about tons and tons of money in which case there should be plenty to go round anyway.

but if they can agree, they can agree to anything they both agree on! (iyswim)

on the whole it's cheaper to agree!

ok, so it won't matter that she earns more, because as you suggested, its all one pot, in terms of the initial settlement.

generally a solicitor would argue for more capital for the carer of the children, to take into account (as you also suggested) the needs of the children.

even if the exh earns less, he would still be required to pay to support his dcs if they live with the exw. but you don't have to organise CS through the csa (always wonder why so many people do seem to - so am happy to be enlightened) so they can come to whatever arrangements they like.

i know exws with custody of the dcs who don't accept any maintenance from their lower earning exhs.

fourkidsmum - if either party is on benefits, csa are automatically involved. A lot of "bitter" wives insist on CSA involvement in my experience too

cheaper for whom??
My main concern is that db doesn't agree to something which leaves him without enough to buy a home, after 20 years of contributing to a mortgage...
There is no particular 'guilty party' here btw, just a mutual agreement to seperate. Not that that is relevant, just for the record!

she means that all db's money won't go to pay fat solicitors fees if they can agree things between them. Thats why it sgood to go to mediation ime

If they can reach agreemetn there, then take agreement to their soliciotr, he/she will advise whether its a fair agreement/settlement

MamaG, ah ok, I get that

elliott, cheaper for both! I know people who have fought so hard for a few thousand quid that they've both ended up paying tens of thousands in legal and court fees! and have ended up bitter, barely (if at all) speaking, and not managed to settle financially and move on for literally years.

if both parties are amicable and reasonable, it is possible for both to say (in effect) "I want to be big about this. I want my exp and dcs to maintain respect for me. i don't want to fight..." there will probably be areas that they disagree on, that they have to compromise on, and that they are not entirely happy with...but ime if it is possible to do it this way you end up with a better working relationship for the raising of the dcs, and for your own self respect.

but sometimes it isn't possible - obviously that only works of both parties take that stance! and generally everyone is a loser to some extent in some ways however you do things - when you divide something up, no-one gets the lot!

Both!

I started with a solicitor and MIL stepped in as mediator, it went tits up. We now have a team and it's so much easier.

ExH was the higher earner, but my inheritance money bought our house. I also had odd occasions where I would earn a lot in a short space of time, then nothing.

Thankfully he concedes the house is mine and the childrens but all the rest is very tricky.

Warn them they need all manner of paperwork, some of mine I had thrown out so needed to get copies of, tax statements, etc.

MamaG

that was exactly what i meant...my sentiments entirely, but put much more succinctly

The hardest bit for me is not the money but the books and cd's. I know they can be replaced but some of them mean a hell of a lot to me.

And photos, oh my god.

Yes, I can see that. I am sure they will both want to sort out amicably, and it should be possible. I hope.

we are avoiding the csa at all costs, but I'm lucky in that respect as exH agrees it's a bad road to go down.

agree with a lot of what MamaG says. In particular, if they go via resolution and find family lawyers that practice collabrative law then that puts more pressure on the parties trying to settle without going to court. If they then decide they want their day in Court (sadly some do!) then they will both have to instruct new solicitors as they will not be allowed to represent them in court proceedings. Not a bad idea really as it tends to focus peoples minds on settling and can keep it more amicable which is much better, particularly when children involved.

elliot

I can tell you that going to a "good" solicitor and going to the second stage of the financial proceedings will and could cost around £12k for one party - a lot of money that can obviously be doubled and taken out of the pot.

Mediation is a good way to go - get everything sorted through mediation and then written out for the courts to sign and seal.

This could if both parties are willing save around £20k.

If you want to go to the Final hearing add another £10k

Mediation is a cost but not as much as fighting in court, use a solicitor and medeation can work well.

You see that is exactly what I mean about being ignorant about all this - I'm afraid I don't understand most of what you've said ivykate

Does my db need a solicitor or not? Who is charging 12K for what? What are second stage financial proceedings and Final Hearings?
Can't they just get divorced without getting solicitors involved? Do they still have to have their financial agreement scrutinised by someone, or can they just say, 'we've agreed our finances'.

I Know Nothing. (thankfully).

Yes he does need a solicitor

he CAN do without one, but i wouldn't advise it at all. after order is approved (sealed) they cant change it

IF finances are agreed, a consent order is drafted and sent to Court for a Judge to approve (or not!)

If he approves it, tahts it, job done.

If he doesn't, he will say what he wants changing, both parties will hopefully agree and then send amended order to court.

IF they can't agree, one party will issue financial proceedings - court fees, court appearances with all the costs of solicitors involved, letters going back and forth ("my clinet wants the iron!") all costing £150-250 per hour. possibly barristers fees (1000s)

elliott technically they don't need solicitors and can act in person. If they reach an amicable agreement regarding the finances it can be incorporated into a consent order (but to be honest it would need to be drafted professionally) and this would then go before the court for ratification (approval by the Judge) if the judge was not happy that the contents were fair and reasonable in all the circumstances, he or she would not approve it and would perhaps suggest amendements to it to make it fair and reasonable.
It would be easy enough for them to act in person for the divorce itself, but really with the finances they should at least seek legal advice on any financial settlement.

elliot - always use a solicitor, but use mediation to sort out the financial side of things between the two parties.

There are three stages of the fin side of divorce.

If you can agree between you it goes to stage one and gets signed and sealed.

if not it can go to stage two then three - which cost lots

Thanks. So who does mediation? [confused emoticon]
Do they need to do any of this if they just separate?

ivykate, don't forget some people simply can't afford to use a solicitor, particularly in the current climate. There is absolutely no reason they cannot do the actual divorce itself as no need to instruct solicitors if it is all amicable and they are able to research what they need to do or get advice on here.
Ref finances, I agree it 'could' be cheaper to resolve finances in mediation, but not always. I agree if it goes to a final hearing it will costs many thousands of pounds but in reality, a very small percentage of cases go to a full final hearing on ancillary relief

another good reason to go to a solicitor is that it's easy to come to an agreement that makes sense at the time to the two parties involved BUT it may be totally naive and unrealistic in legal terms. OR it may seriously disadvantage one of the partners who may be feeling optimistic and generous at the time. It's just not that simple.

If you want some info the WHich book of divorce and/or divorce for dummies are good places to start.