Show all posts by user
This is a UK based forum about divorce and related issues. Feel free to contribute. Your experiences or opinions may help others. The link to the home page on the left leads to basic information about most common divorce questions. You can use the search function to search the forum
Re: Occupation order - 6 years ago
You don't need an occupation order so long as you remain in the matrimonial home and refuse to be bullied out of it. Take care, though. The only way your wife can get you out is if she can say that you have used or threatened violence towards her or any child of the family. In a situation like this it is by no means unknown for such allegations to be made up so make sure you are not set up iby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fdr help - 6 years ago
Well, his solicitor would say that, wouldn't he/she? If the debt is in his name then he is the one liable for it. Whether any provision is made for it when capital is divided up will depend not only upon what the debt was incurred for but also upon who can most afford to shoulder the debt. If, say, a husband had a credit card debt in his name for £10,000 and he earned £100K and his wife £10Kby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fdr help - 6 years ago
How much it costs if it goes to a final hearing depends upon whether you represent yourself or whether you use a barrister. You need a barrister rather than a solicitor at any final hearing because advocacy is a specialist skill. Barristers do this all the time. Solicitors rarely do. How much a barrister costs depends upon the seniority of the barrister. You can probably find a very junior barrisby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fdr help - 6 years ago
It is very unlikely that you would be ordered to pay your husband's legal costs. The normal rule in this type of litigation is that each side pays its own costs. The circumstances have to be exceptional for a court to depart from that rule. A without prejudice letter is one which is headed with the words, 'Without Prejudice'. The effect of those words is that the letter cannot sby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
I am not going to spend any more time on this. If your friend wants legal advice he should do so on his own account.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Help with Law/article/act regarding divorce/loan before marriage - 6 years ago
This is not a marriage of 3 years. It will be treated as a marriage of 30 years. What you have been told by different lawyers is correct. For what it is worth the principles which will be applied by a court are set out in section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act which I have pasted below. It takes knowledge of how the courts deal with these things in practice to know (as near as anyone can know)by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fdr help - 6 years ago
Both parties are expected to try to use the FDR to settle otherwise there is no point to the hearing and it is wasting the court's time. An 'open' statement is one which is not protected from disclosure in later proceedings (unlike a 'without prejudice' statement which cannot be so disclosed). At an FDR a court is entitled to know what both parties' positions are soby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
There is no formula. Ordinarily a pension with this sort of value would be regarded as trivial.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Not an easy one.... - 6 years ago
Yes, she will spin it out as long as possible but if you are the one who issues a divorce petition you are the one responsible for progressing it and it is in your interest to progress it as quickly as you can. Sitting on your hands and saying, 'Oh, she won't sign the papers' is not a sensible course of action. One way or another divorces can usually be progressed and progress in aby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
Well, the wife has a point about the loans. If the house was sold then obviously what would be available for division between the two of them would be the net equity after repaying the mortgage and the loans. BUT, and this is a big but, if the husband intends retaining the property why on earth should he not repay the wife's loan from HIS share? It was incurred for home improvements after aby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Not an easy one.... - 6 years ago
>>In this situation,will the judge take into account the short time living together and that she bought nothing financially? Yes. I am glad you posted this because it is something I see a lot of. It is VERY important that you issue a divorce petition as soon as possible. You have already left it longer than you should. The longer you leave it the more likely it is that this woman willby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
It would not normally be regarded as economic to order a pension share for a pension with a capital transfer value as low as that. The charges would normally be disproportionate. Having said that, if the pension was built up during the course of the marriage it would very likely be counted as part of the wife's share of the assets (although not pound for pound because money in a pension is nby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
No-one said that pensions acquired during the marriage were not joint assets. The questions asked have always related to dividing up the equity in the former matrimonial home. Whether pensions are relevant very much depends upon the figures. If, say the difference in the value of the capital transfer values of their respective pensions was of the same sort of difference that you have discussed inby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
Well, she can't get £30,000 because on the figures you have presented there isn't £30,000 to divide. Whether she spent her own money on whatever or whether she had affairs is irrelevant and probably whether she abused her husband is irrelevant. Those are grounds for divorce rather than having any influence upon how matrimonial property is divided. Also, you say nothing about their reby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Please guide for my divorce proceeding - 6 years ago
In that case you would almost certainly be entitled to maintenance for yourself as well as for the child. This is a long marriage and there is a big disparity between your respective earnings. As to the house, well, it is jointly owned, it is the matrimonial home and this is a long marriage. Therefore there is no doubt that you are entitled to a share of it. Your presumptive share is half butby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
If I had a pound for every time someone has told me, 'X's solicitor told X this' then I would be very wealthy. What solicitors tell their clients and what clients say their solicitor has said are often two very different things. In this case you do not have to be a lawyer to see that the figures here do not justify going to court. Any solicitor who does advise your friend to goby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Please guide for my divorce proceeding - 6 years ago
1. It makes no difference who divorces whom for what. Nor does it make any difference to the financial outcome. 2. You do not say what the current VALUE of the house is or what, if anything, the outstanding mortgage is. Nor do you say approximately what your respective incomes are. This information (and possibly more besides) is very relevant. It is impossible to give a meaningful answer to yoby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
None of this stuff makes any difference. Look at the figures. It is bonkers to go to court over something like this rather than try to settle it. Assuming I am correct that 'less than five years' means 4.5 years not 12 months, this is NOT a short marriage. And even if it were it would make no difference because of the figures and because the house is in JOINT names. Your friend is deludby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
This is not a short marriage. Or, at least, when someone says 'less than five years' they usually mean 4.5 years rather than 12 months. Also, it is just not the length of the marriage which counts. A prior period of cohabitation also counts. As to paying the deposit, you will forgive me but I did read the facts as set out in your original post which included payment of the deposit.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: A shocking decision from the judge - 6 years ago
(1) You are recounting something second hand. You do not actually know what the report said and/or what was said in oral evidence before the judge. Quite apart from the fact that judges are not bound by reports I would be surprised if the report actually said that the father should have no contact with his children. (2) You are taking one spouse's account as gospel. This is rarely sensiblby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
I suggest he thinks about the figures. The amount at issue seems to be £24,000. An equal division of that would be £12,000 each. The husband wants £14,400 and for the wife to have £9,600. Therefore he is arguing about an extra £2,400. Is it worth going to court over £2,400? No. It would be absolutely bonkers. How long do you think it would be before he ran up legal costs of £2,400 so that no mattby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Settlement help. - 6 years ago
Bearing in mind the figures you are almost certainly wasting your time seeking 60% of the equity. The property is jointly owned and it is not a short relationship. If you hope to settle by agreement you would be better off working on the basis of an equal division of the equity. If you do not then I can tell you what is likely to happen. First, you are living in the property and paying the morby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Typical wait between FA, FDR and final hearing - 6 years ago
The time scales you have mentioned are approximately correct - insofar as these things can be. There is, though, a big difference between courts depending upon how busy they are. I had a case last year where the wait between the First Appointment and the FDR appointment was nine months. That is unusual but it does happen.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Another solicitor mistake? - 6 years ago
Judges do not have time to wade through endless documents when they consider approving terms of settlement. The rules require a signed consent order and a completed and signed statement of financial information. That is it. Period. If a judge has any questions he/she will ask. How long it will take is anyone's guess. Sometimes it is a matter of a couple of weeks. Other times a few months.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Another solicitor mistake? - 6 years ago
The average time it takes to get decree absolute after issuing a divorce petition is now well over a year. There was a time when I could do it in about eleven weeks. The reason it now takes so long is because of the inefficiency of the courts. It doesn't need any solicitor to spin the process out. The courts do that themselves. And to answer your question, no, your solicitor could not reaby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Kicked out of House - Child Issue - London - 6 years ago
You should make an appointment to see a solicitor about this. It is too complicated to give a simple answer here. You need to be able to talk through the details properly. If you cannot afford a solicitor at least make an appointment to see someone at a local Citizens Advice Bureau.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Salford court contact number - 6 years ago
If you sent it to Bury St Edmunds I suggest that you contact them by email asking what the delay is in dealing with the consent order sent to them on such and such a date. It should not be for you to chase paperwork from court to court. You will soon find yourself going round and round in circles if you do that with no-one accepting responsibility. It is better to force answers from the people yoby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: New relationship after divorce protection - 6 years ago
Assuming that you have settled the financial issues arising from your previous marriage formally and finally if you do not marry your new partner then what is in your name stays in your name. That is very different from the situation upon divorce. In the case of an unmarried couple what each has in their own name stays in their own name and courts have no jurisdiction to alter those property righby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Married in Japan and UK. Divorced in Japan, not yet in UK - 6 years ago
If you were validly divorced in Japan you do not need to get another divorce in the UK. In fact you should not be able to get a divorce in the UK because if you issued a divorce petition here you would have to disclose on that petition that you have previously been divorced in Japan. That would stop a UK divorce in its tracks. No, the fact is that if you ever need to prove you are divorced (by, fby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Divorce and home ownership with parents - 6 years ago
Unfortunately for you the time the trust was drawn up tends to suggest that protecting the property from your son's wife was not the last of your considerations. What the trust says is not likely to be the last word on the matter. For instance, any solicitor acting for your daughter in law is likely to want to know (1) who was on the legal title and why, (2) why a deed of trust was not drawnby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum