Can I Stop Spousal Maintenance for ‘’Life’’?
Spousal maintenance is always a thorny topic, in many cases the person making the payments thinks that they are paying too much and for too long and the person receiving the spousal maintenance thinks that they are getting too little, taking into account child care responsibilities, lifestyle during the marriage or lack of qualifications or career experience over a long marriage.
A husband and wife locked in a Court battle over maintenance payments after their separation in 2012 hit the news after a Court of Appeal ruling. The couple, William Waggott and his former wife, Kim Waggott split up in 2012, after a 21 year marriage. Mr Waggott was ordered to pay his wife a lump sum of nearly 10 million and spousal maintenance for life at the rate of £175,000 a year. The one thing that the husband and wife were agreed on was that the original Court ruling was unfair; the husband thinking that spousal maintenance for life gave Mrs Waggott no financial incentive to get a job and the wife thinking the amount was too low and needed to be adjusted by the date of the Court of Appeal hearing to take into account cost of living increases and Mr Waggott’s income.
The battle lines were drawn with Mr Waggott applying to Court to stop the spousal maintenance for life and Mrs Waggott asking the Court for more maintenance. The Court of Appeal has ruled that Mrs Waggott’s spousal maintenance payments shouldn’t continue for life but instead end in three years’ time. The Court has also said that the amount of maintenance won't increase. As well as losing her spousal maintenance in three years Mrs Waggott also faces substantial legal costs.
Reasoning behind the Court decision
Mrs Waggott argued that her former husband's earnings capacity had been created during their 21 year marriage and that it was only right that she should continue to share the fruit of the marriage as her ex-husband's ongoing income was still a ‘’matrimonial asset’’.
It was also argued, on Mrs Waggott’s behalf, that she should not have to invest some of the near 10 million she had received in 2012 to generate an income for herself, instead of getting ongoing spousal maintenance. It was said that would mean she was using her share of the capital of the marriage to live off when the 10 million was her entitlement to the family assets generated during the marriage.
Mr Justice Moylan ruled that the former husband's future earnings capacity is not a ‘’matrimonial asset’’ and accordingly it doesn’t have to be shared with Mrs Waggott and that the wife could invest some off her lump sum and live off the interest or get employment.
The Court is always keen to achieve what is known as a ‘’financial clean break’’ to sever the money ties between a husband and wife as soon as possible after a divorce. That will be achieved in the Waggott’s case in three years’ time when the maintenance payments stop.
[related_posts]
What does the ruling mean?
In the press the Waggott Court of Appeal decision has been hailed as a victory for bread winners and the end of ‘’the meal ticket for life’’ of spousal maintenance.
Does the decision mean that? The leading judge was careful to say that he acknowledged that long term maintenance can be required as part of a fair outcome in a divorce . There is therefore a danger in saying that the Waggott decision means there will be an end to spousal maintenance for life.
In Mrs Waggott’s case she had received nearly 10 million and both she and her former husband had bought new houses for about 2 million each. That meant Mrs Waggott still had capital and, as importantly, had previously enjoyed a good career and so she could, in the judge’s opinion, adjust to the termination of her spousal maintenance payments without undue hardship.
That won't be the case for many families where the economically weaker spouse has used all of their capital sum to pay for a new house, perhaps with a mortgage, and therefore doesn’t have the option of living off interest or the prospect of getting a well-paid job that will pay enough to cover the mortgage and bills.
The frustrating thing about family Court decisions is that whilst they lay down principles of law the principles can't be applied rigidly to every family situation. Each Court decision is based on the individual’s personal and financial circumstances. That is why it is so important to get objective legal advice on what a ruling might mean for you and your family. Why? Because there is normally a range of Court orders that a Court could reasonably make in a given family situation rather than one ‘‘right answer’’. That’s why Court litigation is such a lottery as there is always a risk that you could be a loser in a Court battle.
In light of this decision many breadwinners will want to review whether they should apply back to Court to stop their spousal maintenance payments for life and others will want advice on how to negotiate a clean break figure following the Court ruling. Equally those receiving spousal maintenance will need legal advice as Mrs Waggott’s case is a clear reminder, to both husband and wives, of the risks and costs of Court litigation.
For help with any aspect of divorce and family finances or changes to an existing spousal maintenance order please contact us.
Robin Charrot
Apr 12, 2018
·
5 minute read
Do I Have to Divorce in my Partner’s Country?
The race to start international divorce proceedings
Most people assume, especially as we are currently part of the European Union, that if a couple decide to separate and get divorced it doesn’t matter which country they petition for divorce in as a ‘’divorce is a divorce’’.
Well that response is both right and wrong. My apologies for giving a stereotypical ‘’on the fence’’ lawyer’s answer but whilst a husband or wife may achieve a divorce as a result of the decision to petition for a divorce in country A it may mean the husband or the wife's financial settlement is a lot less compared to if they had started the divorce proceedings in country B.
The Court of Appeal has been hearing a case involving a German financier Oliver Thum and his wife, Catja, to decide whether to stop the divorce proceedings issued by Mrs Thum in London and to allow Mr Thum’s German divorce proceedings to go ahead:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5504825/German-financier-estranged-wife-divorce-battleground-dispute.html
This scenario of a family with more than one divorce country to choose from is surprisingly common however when a husband or wife are separating they often don’t realise at that stage the financial significance of their decision to start Court proceedings in a particular country or they don’t have the means to challenge an estranged husband or wife's decision to commence the divorce in country A rather than B.
In the Thum’s case it is agreed that Catja Thum started her divorce proceedings in London before her husband had issued proceedings in Germany. The question for the Court is whether her delay in sending her divorce petition to her husband should mean that her divorce petition is dismissed? That is an issue that the Court of Appeal judges are considering.
It certainly won't be the last time this scenario comes before the Court for adjudication for whilst London is perceived to be ‘’the divorce capital’’ for large financial awards there will be always be a natural attraction for the economically weaker spouse to start Court proceedings in England. I am often asked to give preliminary advice where there is potentially more than one divorce Court jurisdiction and if advice is needed from an overseas lawyer as to whether it would be preferable to start divorce proceedings overseas then I can easily arrange this as I am a fellow of the International Academy of Family Lawyers, the world’s leading organisation of expert international family lawyers.
[related_posts]
Always seek expert advice
If there is the potential to start divorce proceedings in more than one jurisdiction it is vital to get expert legal advice as quickly as possible on your options so that you preserve the ability to start divorce proceedings in the country of your choice. Sometimes people are reluctant to take the step of seeing a lawyer but an initial consultation doesn’t commit you to anything but gives you information to help you chose the right option for you. If that option is a divorce then early advice gives you the opportunity to choose the ‘‘right’’ country to initiate the Court proceedings in.
For help with international divorce proceedings or financial settlements please contact us
Robin Charrot
Mar 22, 2018
·
3 minute read
Enforcing Family Court Orders
Pilot faces a £600,000 payment and a freezing order after losing his Court battle over the enforcement of a family Court order.
Whenever a divorcing couple end up in Court with a family judge making the decision on how their assets should be divided or how much spousal maintenance and child support should be paid there is always a risk that either the husband or wife or both of them may be very unhappy with the outcome of the Court proceedings and their Court Order.
The dissatisfaction with a family Court judgement and financial order can lead to appeals against the decision or to orders being deliberately flouted in the hope that an ex-husband or wife won't want to launch further Court proceedings to enforce the original financial Court order.
Sometimes financial Court proceedings can take on a life of their own. The media has recently highlighted the case of Richard Wilmot and his ex-wife Viki Maughan who have been engaged in a 16 year battle over payment of child support, with paternity of the youngest child being in dispute despite DNA testing.
The Court has ruled that just shy of £600,000 should be paid to the ex-wife, consisting of child support arrears and legal costs. Importantly the Court has also made a freezing order freezing property, money in bank accounts as well as pension and insurance monies.
The Court decision to freeze assets shows just how far family judges are prepared to go to make sure that Court orders are complied with.
A read of the Court judgement emphasises just how exasperated the judge was by the ‘’utter folly’’ of the ex-husband’s actions resulting in him being ordered to pay nearly £600,000 when the child support arrears only amounted to about £115,000 with the rest of the monies being legal costs and the costs of specialists employed by the ex-wife to trace and recover the money.
The case highlights the financial and emotional costs of engaging in a long drawn out Court battle but, perhaps more importantly, shows the long arm of the law, in this case over a 16 year period to enforce the payment of child support .
[related_posts]
In my view this unhappy Court saga reveals why it is so vital to try and reach an out of Court financial settlement that both an ex-husband and ex-wife can live with to avoid enforcement Court litigation and costs. That isn’t always possible. If a financial Court order has to be made by a judge it is important to take legal advice on appeal options and, if necessary, enforcement options to avoid the costs of the Court proceedings getting out of hand and ultimately, as in the case of Mr Wilmot, dwarfing the amount in dispute between husband and wife.
If you need help with the terms of a financial settlement or a Court order please contact us.
Robin Charrot
Mar 19, 2018
·
3 minute read
Jail for Breach of Family Financial Court Order
When I read that an 83 year old had been jailed for 14 months I assumed that he had been sent to prison for a very serious criminal offence. Reading on I learnt that the businessman had been incarcerated for breaching a family financial Court order.
The case of Mr and Mrs Hart highlights that family law judges do have the power to enforce financial Court orders although it remains very rare for a family Court to jail a husband or wife for contempt of Court.
What led to the incarceration? In 2015 Mr and Hart got divorced and Mr Hart was ordered to pay his ex-wife 3.5 million of the couple’s reported assets of 9 million. The Court order involved the transfer of shares in a property company from the ex-husband to his ex-wife. Mrs Hart complained that her ex-husband had breached the financial Court order and she wasn’t able, as a result of Mr Hart’s actions, to run the property company. Those difficulties led to an application by Mrs Hart for Mr Hart’s committal to prison for contempt of Court. When sentencing Mr Hart to custody the judge highlighted the attempts made by Mrs Hart and her lawyers to avoid pursuing the committal application but ultimately, in the judge’s view, there was no option other than a prison sentence to ensure the original financial Court order would be complied with.
Can all financial Court orders be enforced? A lot depends on the precise wording of the Court order. That is why, in my opinion it is vital to make sure that Court orders are written in a way that if either a husband or wife doesn’t comply with what they were ordered to do that the Court order can be enforced. In some situations it is important to anticipate difficulties and to therefore make sure that the family finance Court order gives a tight deadline for the transfer of property, or sets out exactly how a family home will be sold (for example recording the mechanism for agreeing the sale price and the choice of estate agent) and, where possible, providing for the sale of an asset if a transfer of property doesn’t take place by the Court imposed date.
The other important thing to bear in mind is to try and keep financial Court orders as straightforward as possible, subject to the nature of the family assets. Sometimes an ex-husband and wife want to continue to co-own a property or a company together after a divorce but that type of financial settlement, even if incorporated into a Court order, can lead to difficulties and enforcement applications. That is why if there is a simple financial solution the family Courts often prefer that type of Court order to achieve closure and avoid the cost of bringing enforcement action.
[related_posts]
Can financial orders be varied? If a family judge has made a final financial order then normally most aspects of the order can't be changed save for the amount of any spousal maintenance. However depending on the precise wording of the order the Court could be asked to extend time to make a payment or to change how a property is sold. That is why it is important to get specialist legal advice when sorting out a financial agreement so that both an ex-husband and ex-wife know where they stand if they want to vary the financial Court order or they need the order to be enforced.
For advice on enforcing family financial Court orders or to discuss divorce financial settlement options please contact us.
Robin Charrot
·
3 minute read
Protecting Money From Parents to Buy a House
According to the BBC news a couple of days ago, the number of first-time buyers relying on mum and dad for the deposit to buy their first home or to climb the property ladder has reached a record high https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39381157 This is not surprising, given that house prices are, on average, seven times salary. The problem is a lot worse in London and the home counties.
As a specialist family finance solicitor, with many years experience in dealing with divorce and cohabitation breakdown, I have seen plenty of examples of where parents have helped their son or daughter to buy a property, only to find that when their son or daughter’s relationship breaks down, half or even more of that money goes to their ex.
Why is mum and dad’s money vulnerable? Many people assume that just because the money has come from their family, or just because the house is bought in their son or daughter’s sole name, the money is protected. This is not true. Partners and spouses can make financial claims over property, even if their name is not on the title deeds and even if they have not paid the mortgage or the bills. Marriage makes the family money even more vulnerable because normally the divorce court will completely ignore the source of funds used to buy the house.
Many people assume that just because the money has come from their family, or just because the house is bought in their son or daughter’s sole name, the money is protected. This is not true. Partners and spouses can make financial claims over property, even if their name is not on the title deeds and even if they have not paid the mortgage or the bills. Marriage makes the family money even more vulnerable because normally the divorce court will completely ignore the source of funds used to buy the house.
Increasingly, I am being asked by clients how they can protect the parents’ money from relationship breakdown. There are a large number of ways of doing it, and they each have their pros and cons. However, the key message is that whatever way you choose, it needs to be agreed and properly documented at the time the money is provided by mum and dad.
The different ways of protecting mum and dad’s money
A loan from mum and dad
Mum and dad co-owning the house
A gift of the deposit
Putting the gift of money into a ‘trust’. The trust can then lend, or give money to the beneficiary of the trust fund to buy the house, or even co-own the house with the beneficiary
Mum and dad own the house completely, but let their son or daughter occupy the house
The best option will depend on the family’s circumstances. That is why it is important to get specialist advice. For example, if parents are wealthy and know that they have a lot of capital that they won’t get through in their lifetimes the option of a gift or trust fund might be the best way to help the family member get on the property ladder and save on inheritance tax. A record of the gift will help evidence it for the tax man and will also help if the son or daughter later starts to live with a partner at the property.
If a family is not wealthy then a loan agreement may be the best way forward. The key to a family loan is that it can be prepared to meet the family’s needs over when the money is paid back and if the loan will charge interest or not.
You need a cohabitation agreement (or a pre-nup)
Whatever option you choose, it is highly advisable to have a cohabitation agreement (or a pre-nup, if son or daughter are definitely going to get married) before the property is bought, which explains what will happen to the house and the money if the relationship does not work.
[related_posts]
A cohabitation agreement or pre-nup are absolutely essential if mum and dad are going to gift the money to their son or daughter because it is not being protected in any other way (e.g. a loan or co-ownership).
If you ask most parents whether they need a written agreement over giving or lending money within the family they say that raising the topic would make them feel uncomfortable. My own view is that it is the parents’ money, it is perfectly reasonable for them to want that money to stay in the family, and it is therefore perfectly reasonable for the condition of that help to be a cohabitation agreement or a pre-nup.
Cohabitation agreements and pre-nups are flexible and bespoke to the couple entering into the agreement. The agreement could say that the non-owning partner won’t have any claims at all on the property or it could say how the joint owners will share the equity in the house if they split up. For example, the agreement could say that mum and dad will be paid back their loan first, with interest, or that the partner whose parent’s provided the deposit will get a bigger percentage of the equity. The important point is that if the options on how to give or lend the deposit are explored and the options of how the couple will own a house are carefully considered and recorded there is far less chance of the family falling out with their son or daughter or their in-laws.
Contact us
If you would like to ask any questions about pre-nup or cohabitation agreements, please contact us. and take a look at our prices online.
Robin Charrot
Mar 30, 2017
·
5 minute read
You Can Get an Extra Financial Order in the UK After an Overseas Divorce
International families are becoming increasingly common as the world reopens to travel after the global pandemic. Nowadays it isn’t uncommon for a couple to get divorced in a country where they are living and for a husband or wife to then want to see if they can get a divorce financial settlement in England.
In this article, international family lawyer and divorce financial settlement solicitor, Robin Charrot, looks at when you can get a divorce financial settlement in England where you got divorced overseas.
For expert Divorce and Financial Settlement advice call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.
Financial settlement claims after an overseas divorce
Even if you got divorced abroad you may be able to ask the court in England for a financial settlement as part of your divorce. This may be the case whether you got a foreign financial court order or you got no divorce financial settlement overseas.
The law on divorce financial settlements and foreign divorces
The law on divorce financial settlements after foreign divorces is contained in part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984. The law allows some people to bring a financial claim in England even though their divorce took place overseas.
The law is designed to protect spouses whose partners have rushed to start divorce proceedings in a country where they know that their husband or wife will get a reduced financial settlement in comparison to what an English court would order.
Can I apply for a divorce financial settlement after my overseas divorce?
You can only apply for a divorce financial settlement in the UK if you got divorced abroad and the foreign divorce court either made no financial court order or it was not sufficient. In addition, you must satisfy these three eligibility criteria:
You have sufficient connection to England
Your divorce is valid legally
You have not remarried
If you satisfy these three eligibility criteria you need to make a court application for permission to pursue an application under the 1984 Act.
[related_posts]
Sufficient connection to England
Sufficient connection to England is the eligibility criteria that raises most questions and where disputes over an application under part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 tend to focus.
Sufficient connection with England can be demonstrated by one of:
You or your ex was domiciled in England at the time of the overseas divorce or at the time of the application
You or your ex was habitually resident in England for 12 months before the date on which the overseas divorce was finalised or for 12 months before the date of the application
You or your ex has an interest in a property in England that was the family home or matrimonial home. You do not need to be the legal owner of the property to make a claim but if court jurisdiction is based solely on the existence of an interest in property your claim is limited to the value of the property
Domicile and habitual residence are complex legal concepts and whether you are domiciled or habitually resident in England will depend on your circumstances. For advice on jurisdiction to bring a claim after an overseas divorce call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.
How does the English court decide on a divorce financial settlement after an overseas divorce?
The English court has discretion to make a financial settlement once you have leave to make your application. To succeed in your application, you need to be able to show that you tried to get reasonable financial provision in the foreign country and you either received no divorce financial settlement or the award was unreasonable.
The court can order the transfer or sale of property, a lump sum payment, spousal maintenance or a pension sharing order.
Sometimes when a couple have agreed a divorce financial settlement overseas, they need a UK pension sharing order to implement the pension share of an English pension scheme and this can be achieved using the 1984 Act.
Foreign divorces and divorce financial settlement claims are not easy and that is why you need specialist legal advice from a family law solicitor with expertise in international family law.
For expert Divorce and Financial Settlement advice call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.
Robin Charrot
Feb 10, 2016
·
4 minute read
How to Offset Pension Claims on Divorce?
Pension claims on divorce are always a tricky issue because pensions are not the same as any other kind of asset. This is because a pension cannot be fully accessed straight away, whereas all other assets usually can. One way of dealing with them is to split the pension in two (called 'pension sharing'). However, this kind of solution has never been very popular since it was introduced over 15 years ago, partly because the person with the pension tends to have an emotional attachment to it, partly because the person without the pension wants cash (or another asset) instead of the pension, and partly because to achieve a fair split you need a report from a financial expert, which normally costs £1500-£3000 in extra fees. So most people resolve the pension issue by 'offsetting' the value of the pension against other assets in the matrimonial 'pot'.
For expert help with your Divorce and Pension call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.
Comparing the Values of Pensions
However, this leads to another problem: How do you compare the value of a pension against the value of another asset? Until now, the way this was done in most cases was to take the cash equivalent value ('CEV') of the pension and then lop off a bit (non-scientific i know!) to reflect the fact that it could not be fully accessed straight away. This approach has a number of difficulties, partly because a CEV can underplay the true value of the pension (particularly with final salary schemes) and partly because the 'lopping off' figure is not scientific.
A change of approach is in the case of WS v WS [2015] EWHC 3941 (Fam) 11 December 2015. In this case, the 'offsetting' involved was actually between two different kinds of pension; a money purchase scheme held by the husband, and a much larger final salary scheme held by the wife. The other wrinkle was that the husband and wife were already retired. However, I think the principle could apply to offsetting between a pension and any other kind of asset. Instead of using the pension CEV, the court looked at the projected future income from the larger pension (always a more reliable indicator of the true value of the pension), worked out what part of that the husband should have, fed that figure into a 'Duxbury' calculation (the calculation usually used by family courts to capitalise spousal maintenance payments) and the resulting capital figure was the value of the cash payment to the husband to offset his claim against the wife's pension.
How Do Pensions Claims Work?
Applying this guidance to a 'real world' example:
Husband and wife are both 50 years old. Matrimonial home with equity of £500k. Husband has pension with a CEV of £500k and projected future income at age 60 of £20k p.a. Wife has no pension. Husband wants to keep his pension and wife wants more equity in the house to 'offset' the pension. Before any offsetting, wife would otherwise be walking away with £250k from the house.
Wife's fair share of the projected pension income is £10k p.a. from age 60.
Duxbury calculation says that the capital payment which would produce an income of £10k p.a. from age 60 is £160k.
Discount applied for accelerated payment of the £160k (under a pension sharing order wife's share of pension would only start to be paid in 10 years). This is still going to be an arbitrary figure. Say 25% = £40k
So the offset figure for the pension is £120k and the wife therefore takes £370k from the house, and the husband takes £130k from the house and keeps his pension.
It is going to be interesting to see whether pension liberalisation changes the courts' views of pension offsetting any further. We previously had an indication that the courts will treat pensions more like bank accounts from SJ v RA [2014] EWHC 4054 (Fam) but this is an over-simplification, given the tax consequences of unlimited withdrawals from a pension, but the case of WS v WS demonstrates more enlightened thinking.
[related_posts]
For expert help with your Divorce and Pension call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.
Robin Charrot
Feb 08, 2016
·
4 minute read
Can Bad Behaviour Affect a Financial Settlement on Divorce?
When I first see a client regarding their divorce, one of the questions they will most often ask me as a Manchester divorce solicitor is ‘can my spouse’s bad behaviour impact our financial settlement on divorce?’ Often, the desire to apportion blame for the breakdown of the marriage and divorce can result in a husband or wife wanting the financial settlement to reflect this, for example when a spouse has had an affair, and the affair has involved some level of dishonesty.
If you are separating or divorcing and have questions about how your husband or wife's behaviour will affect your financial settlement then the Manchester divorce solicitors at Evolve Family Law in Whitefield can help you. Call us or complete our online enquiry form.
Our solicitors are approachable and friendly, providing pragmatic expert divorce and financial settlement solutions.
Divorce proceedings and unreasonable behaviour
A spouse’s bad behaviour can be very relevant to the actual divorce proceedings, because under the current law ‘bad’ behaviour always has to be used for a divorce which is started less than two years after separation. The direct financial effect of this ‘bad’ behaviour is usually an order for the ‘bad’ spouse to pay the legal costs of the divorce proceedings (normally about £1,500).
The link between ‘bad’ behaviour and division of finances is less definite, and a spouse will very rarely get less of the family money because they have had an affair. However, a spouse’s behaviour during the marriage must be considered by a court (the court refers to it as ‘conduct’) when it is deciding what would be an appropriate financial settlement.
Is the behaviour gross and obvious?
The court’s view is that a spouse’s conduct will only affect the financial settlement if it is ‘gross and obvious’, and so serious that it would be unfair for it to be ignored.
Whether a spouse’s conduct has been serious enough to be classed as ‘gross and obvious’ will be a highly subjective decision. From the point of view of an experienced Manchester divorce solicitor, I know it when I see it!
What is classed as bad behaviour?
There are a number of forms of bad behaviour or ‘financial conduct’, as it is called in legal terms. It is always easier for the court to change the financial settlement if there is a direct link between a spouse’s conduct and the family’s finances, for example:
If a spouse has needlessly stopped working, or recklessly overspent, or gambled away a lot of the family’s money;
If a spouse has physically assaulted and injured the other spouse so that their ability to work and earn money has been affected;
If a spouse has been found guilty of a financial criminal offence, e.g. fraud.
[related_posts]
Other types of financial conduct – during the divorce
Dragging out the divorce proceedings, or running up needless and excessive legal costs: This isn’t usually reflected in the financial settlement. Instead, the court can order the guilty spouse to pay some or all of the other spouse’s legal costs;
Hiding assets or lying about your financial situation and not giving proper financial disclosure: This commonly happens, the most high profile example being the Supreme Court cases for Alison Sharland and Varsha Gohil. Rather than changing the financial settlement, the court can do one or more of the following:
Assume, when making a final financial decision, that the guilty spouse is much more wealthy than they say they are;
Order the guilty spouse to pay some or all of the other spouse’s legal costs;
If the lying is discovered after a final decision, setting aside that decision or financial court order and starting all over again.
Examples of non-financial conduct
It is less easy, but not impossible, for the court to change the financial settlement as a result of conduct which does not have a direct financial effect. The fact that one spouse has had an affair, or the usual arguing and name calling that often accompanies marriage breakdown will not normally be considered serious enough to be ‘conduct’.
Examples of non-financial conduct which have changed an award are:
violent or sexual assaults on the spouse, children or close family members;
refusing to move in with a spouse after marriage;
continued serious harassment of spouse’s new partner;
Inability to give spouse respect and affection.
How much does conduct change the financial settlement?
The impact of the conduct on the financial settlement will vary greatly, and entirely depends upon the particular circumstances of the case. Often, the person guilty of the conduct will already be in a bad position, for example in jail or having lost their job. However, even in those cases, the court can decide to reduce or even ignore that person’s financial needs because of their conduct.
Manchester divorce solicitors
Manchester divorce solicitors at Evolve Family Law in Whitefield are experts who offer a friendly and solution focused family law service. Call us or complete our online enquiry form.
Robin Charrot
Oct 26, 2015
·
5 minute read
Should I Sell the Family Home Before or After my Divorce?
Taking the decision to separate may mean you want to ‘hunker down’ and not make any decisions about divorce financial settlements and the family home. Others may want to get the family home on the market and sold so they can make a fresh start, unhampered by the memories associated with the property.
In this article, divorce financial settlement solicitor, Robin Charrot, looks at the options of selling the family home before or after your divorce.
For expert Divorce and Financial Settlement advice call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.
Selling the family home – getting the timing right
The important thing is to not rush into making decisions about the family home as whilst your instant view may be that you want to move because of the marriage breakdown, or you want to stay because the children’s school is nearby, feelings and circumstances can change over time.
There is no right or wrong answer about whether to sell the family home before or after your divorce. A lot will depend on your circumstances. For example, if you are in a six bed property with grounds and the children have grown up and left home, the separation may be the push to sell the family home and to do it now rather than wait until after the divorce.
Your views on the timing of the sale of the family home may be influenced by whether you think the property boom will end or not. If you are in the camp that thinks the UK is heading into a recession and a housing market crash, you may believe it is better to sell up now, rather than wait. Waiting may not be in your best interests if you will end up downsizing in a property slump.
A divorce financial settlement solicitor can help you look at your options to try and work out which one suits you best.
[related_posts]
Things to consider about the timing of the sale of the family home
There are loads of things to weigh up when you are debating about whether to sell the family home before or after your divorce. Here are just a few:
If you sell up, will you buy another house straight away or rent? Is renting a more expensive option or is it best in your situation as you will then be chain free when you find something else to buy
If you get off the property ladder by selling the family home, do you risk pricing yourself out of buying the house you want if property prices continue to rise?
Is the family home mortgaged? Is a preferential mortgage rate due to expire? Can you transport an existing mortgage to your new property? Will you be able to get another mortgage if you have recently started a new business or because of other changes in circumstances?
Is it too early to sell up until you know the value of all the family assets, such as pensions or the family business? You may prefer to stay in the family home by offsetting the value of other assets
Until you have more information about your partner’s income and your earnings capacity you may not know if you can afford to stay in the family home with your anticipated income and the potential for spousal maintenance payments
If the family home is owned in joint names, or your sole name, your ex-partner could refuse to cooperate with the sale of the family home until a financial court order is made. If the house is owned by you, your ex-partner could place an objection at the land registry to prevent a sale or remortgage. Alternatively, they may only agree to sign the sale paperwork if you both agree that all or a percentage of the net proceeds of sale are retained in a solicitors account until you have reached a full divorce financial settlement when the sale proceeds will be divided in accordance with the financial court order
Sale or delay
Sometimes people are anxious to sell up because they cannot cope with continuing to live with their ex-partner at the family home as the divorce financial settlement process is taking too long. A divorce financial settlement solicitor can:
Advise on whether you have the grounds to apply for an injunction order so you can stay at the family home until the court decides if the family home should be sold. This is known as an occupation order or ouster injunction
Help you understand the range of financial settlement court orders the court could make in financial settlement proceedings to assist you in reaching an agreement in family mediation or by through solicitor negotiations
For expert Divorce and Financial Settlement advice call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form
Robin Charrot
Oct 19, 2015
·
5 minute read
Can't find what you're looking for?
Getting in contact with Evolve Family Law could not be easier.
We put a lot of legal information on our website and if you have a single question about your situation, you should find an answer in our blog here.
If you need a greater level of help, please use this form and one of our team will call you to make an appointment. Please note that we cannot offer Legal aid.
Unfortunately due to the level of single question enquiries we receive, we cannot guarantee to provide written answers to individual questions posted via this enquiry form.
1
Call us on 0345 222 8 222
2
Email us at info@evolvefamilylaw.co.uk