{"id":476,"date":"2017-05-26T14:16:18","date_gmt":"2017-05-26T14:16:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.emmersons-solicitors.co.uk\/family-law-specialists\/?p=476"},"modified":"2018-03-12T13:42:10","modified_gmt":"2018-03-12T13:42:10","slug":"avoid-a-diy-divorce-it-could-cost-you-a-fortune","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emmersons-solicitors.co.uk\/family-law-specialists\/avoid-a-diy-divorce-it-could-cost-you-a-fortune\/","title":{"rendered":"Avoid a DIY Divorce, It Could Cost You a Fortune"},"content":{"rendered":"

Avoid a DIY Divorce; It Could Cost You a Fortune.
\nFamily Law Solicitors \u2013 Newcastle and Sunderland<\/strong><\/h3>\n

A recent report from the Association of Business Recovery Professionals*\u2013 which reported on the major causes of insolvency in men and women \u2013 identified that while the leading cause of insolvency in men is the failure of their business, family-related costs and the breakdown of a relationship are the far more likely causes of insolvency in women.<\/p>\n

The leading cause of Bankruptcy in women, based on data from 2014, was found to be \u201crelationship breakdown\u201d, followed closely by \u201closs\/significant reduction of household income\u201d (i.e. through loss of a partner\u2019s income). From a Family Law<\/a>\u00a0perspective, the significance of these events as causes for insolvency highlights the extreme importance of negotiating the right financial settlement on the breakdown of a marriage.<\/a><\/p>\n

The starting point in many financial settlements is a 50\/50 division of assets \u2013 or, to use fancy, judicial language, there is a \u2018yardstick of equality of division\u2019. The Family Courts are very clear, however, that this is only a starting point, and in certain classes of case, it is deemed necessary to give more than 50% of the assets to one spouse in order to achieve a fairer settlement in the longer term.
\nIn what is termed a \u2018needs case\u2019, for example, experienced Family Court judges will take into account a wide range of factors which would not necessarily be at the forefront of separating couples\u2019 minds. A typical example involves what might seem like a somewhat outdated, or stereotypical arrangement of \u2018Breadwinner\u2019 vs \u2018Homemaker\u2019, but statistically this remains a highly significant dynamic in the UK; in 2014 for example, 91% of single-parent families were headed by women.<\/p>\n

Consider the following situation: When Brad (the \u2018Breadwinner\u2019) and Holly (the \u2018Homemaker\u2019) married in 1990, they were both working in the Public Sector. During the course of the marriage, they had 3 children together, and Holly has long since given up her job to look after them. This enabled Brad to pursue his new career, and he is now a company Director.<\/em><\/p>\n

If Brad and Holly were to divorce, a simple 50\/50 division of assets would not do justice to Holly, who would find herself in a position whereby \u2013 if she were to re-enter the employment market \u2013 her earning potential was significantly reduced, due to her long absence from the market. What\u2019s more, she wouldn\u2019t have the benefit of having accrued Pension Entitlements over the years \u2013 i.e. the entitlements she would have accrued if she\u2019d continued working.<\/p>\n

If Holly was given 50% of the matrimonial assets, it is not hard to see how quickly her share might be eaten up by the costs of living. Brad\u2019s superior earning potential would allow him to quickly make up for any capital losses; whereas Holly would find it difficult to maintain a property and meet the family\u2019s outgoings, particularly if she were expected to continue the primary care of their 3 children.
\nHopefully, this example shows that whilst 50% of the capital assets might seem like a reasonable proposition at first, there are many other factors to consider when looking to achieve a fair settlement. The Law Commission identifies that the goal of financial orders is to enable a transition to independence in the longer term; and the law is, therefore, at least on paper, committed to ensuring neither party finds themselves on the back-foot.<\/p>\n

There are many tools which would allow the Family Court to achieve fairness for Holly, including:<\/p>\n