Looks like it’s going to go to final hearing

Hi wonder whether there is anyone on here that would be able to help :-

We Split Oct 2017

Went to court for fdr in August - proposed to take on mortgage and an amount for a deposit off setting the martimonal pension only.
He wouldnt agree - court ruled that should be whole pension pot but he only offered larger portion of house but the difference being taken off pension - not equality!
Rcved final hearing in Feb 2024 - order says that we needed to put open offers in 3 weeks after court i tried but been getting no response off his solicitor.
Our wages are hugely different and i represent myself with ad hoc legal
advice.

Getting no where and costing for final hearing is £7.200


Need help as don’t want it dragging on any longer and worried it will now go to final hearing which is not until next Feb

It is impossible to give any meaningful answer to this because there is just not enough information. For instance, all of the following is potentially relevant (and there may be others):-

1. How long you were together and how long you were married.
2. Whether there are any dependent children and, if so, how old they are.
3. How old you and your husband are and how much you each earn approximately.
4. What the matrimonial home is worth and what the outstanding mortgage is.
5. What the value of any pensions are and how much of those pensions were built up before you were together and after you split.
6. Whether there are any other significant assets or liabilities.

@David am posting here as my query is related to this individual, so visibility on my situation may be of interest.
My pFDR did not settle. We had countless proposals but didn’t align. My solicitor feels we may be able to settle still over the next week.
Should we be putting forward an ‘open proposal’ or ‘proposals without prejudice’? Is there a difference… It was commented to me that both parties would submit open proposals next. Now the dust has settled from the pFDR I have worked up new proposals that I have confidence may be accepted. One is conceding to W’s last proposal at the pFDR and the other is one we didn’t even address at the pFDR but which may be received very favourably.
My play would simply be to email them one, or both proposals and try to gain acceptance and conclude this matter but I of course allow my legal representation to do this. I have a concern that the overly formal nature of how they are operating is not moving this forward. Also, both side's solicitors have nothing to lose by this process dragging on and this worries me greatly.
We really can’t afford to drag this to a FH as the costs are already at >£150k and likely to be similar to the FDR. The stress is breaking everyone too as it’s been going years.
Do you have any advice on what I should be directing and expecting from my solicitor to ensure these proposal(s) are put forward in an effort to wrap things up? ‘Open’ proposal just sounded so formal and like a one off that couldn’t be reneged on.
I negotiate for a living and honestly would be emailing them myself to lay out what I’m offering and when it expires, but it seems everything in this process is overly controlled, slow, inefficient, and getting no one anywhere… What do I do?

>>Should we be putting forward an ‘open proposal’ or ‘proposals without prejudice’? Is there a difference

Yes, there is a difference and either or both should be put through your solicitor. You could get into a hell of a mess if you emailed either the other side or the court direct. I once attended an FDR where we were putting forward reasonable proposals on behalf of the husband only for the judge to say, 'What about these emails he has been sending the court?' Those emails cut the ground from under him.

If you stop to think about it the purpose of an open proposal is obvious. It is what you will be arguing as your position in court at a final hearing. You cannot go before a court and say, 'We are not going to tell you what our position is'. You have to spell out what you are arguing for. That is the purpose of an open proposal.

A proposal without prejudice is one which cannot be referred to in evidence. The purpose of such proposals is to try and reach agreement by negotiation without those negotiating positions being revealed at a final hearing and so influencing the court. A without prejudice proposal is one in which you can safely make your best offer (although such negotiations do not usually start with absolute best offers).

This answers my question thx. I will speak to my council about the proposals without prejudice. Praying to get a settlement and avoid another 9 months of hell

Just to clarify something here - any emails from my solicitor to hers framed as without prejudice can not be used or referenced against us further down the line or at a final hearing?

The context is, I am writing an email on behalf of my solicitor to go to the wife's. Of course, my solicitor can make it their own but I will lay out the template response. I want to frame the proposal we're making as if it's the solicitor's idea and they are advising me to do x or y. The reason is that any proposal needs to be seen to not come 'from me' - my wife will say no to anything she thinks is my idea.

I don't want though the wife's solicitors saying in 3 months time, look, even your own solicitor wanted to give x or y and now you say different...

Does that make sense?

>>I am writing an email on behalf of my solicitor to go to the wife's.

Don't do it. That way lies utter confusion. You have a solicitor. All correspondence like this should come from your solicitor. It is far too easy to get this wrong.

thanks the question though was not about whether I send an email. My solicitor manages this. The question is more to clarify that these email proposals will not be resurfaced later down the line.

I want my solicitor to be seen to be the one making this offer and advising me. It's my idea but for reverse psychology reasons with my wife I won't go into, any offer needs to appear it's not from me. She'll reject anything that appears to be my idea.