You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Hey long time member with new account
Our 27y marriage has ended amicably. Well it feels that way currently. I called time - no one else involved. Simply grown apart. Both 50ish. Last kid is 17. Both of us very emotional but iiwii. 🙁
From what I can see the only thing to consider is the split of assets. We have drafted up something that we both agree on. Close to 50/50 - but no quite. House is paid off.
What are out next steps? Do we go though mediation? Or is it straight to a family lawyer who can make it a legal document? Do we need one each if we both currently agree? Or do we approach one who can tell us what we have decided is sensible?
Any advice at all is very very much appreciated.
B.
Amicable is a good start
Take care and go for a bike ride when you feel able to
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Amicable is good
my OH is currently going through a divorce, its absolutely bat***t crazy... there is mediation involved but her ex is bickering over ridiculous stuff... even created a page powerpoint to argue why he was due the garden furniture...
good luck getting it done 🙂
Even though we are on good terms - it's still crazy hard. We have spent a lifetime together and now we are going out separate ways. I can't even imagine how hard it would be if there was bickering involved.
I'll start with the mediation then. See what they advise.
And even though I initiated it - I'm scared as hell.
I went through mediation with my divorce a couple of years ago and as it was amicable it was fine, no hassle. One thing they'll want to look at is the financial side of things, my ex was an accountant so she had everything on a spreadsheet which had monthly income and outgoings and as we were both in the green we didn't have to do any adjustments. I think the only thing we needed a lawyer for was finalising the divorce.
There's a government calculator for child support so be worth looking at that as well although you're youngest is 17 so may or may not have to pay for them depending on what they are doing.
Surely if all agreed and amicable you don't need mediation, just a lawyer each to sort out the legalities and make sure you both know your rights and responsibilities. You could do it with just one but they can only represent one of you, not both obviously.
The OH was told by a friend that mediation is essential. I'm not going to rock that boat. It will become plainly obviously when we get there if it was required or not. Nothing is legally binding so any financial adjustments we make will have no teeth.
The OH was told by a friend that mediation is essential. I'm not going to rock that boat. It will become plainly obviously when we get there if it was required or not. Nothing is legally binding so any financial adjustments we make will have no teeth.
Depends on the cost I guess, but if you are both in agreement, then, by definition, there's nothing to mediate?
I used the legal services from
https://divorce.wikivorce.com/
Sent them a spreadsheet with all our assets, the solicitor advised on what a fair split would be.
You also get a phone call where you can discuss this.
As long as everything is really transparent with the sreadsheet and the advice from the call then keeping the split amicable is possible, as I did. You don't both need this service as long as you are both involved, even though only one is on the phone call.
The divorce papaers may require evidence of mediation, I just put down that we had used this service.
I went to try the actual mediation services but felt that they were a waste of time, especially as you are amicable at present. They can't provide any legal advice so you could negotiate a split which the judge will chuck out as not fair, meaning you go round the process again and probably become less amicable over time.
Try and stay away from having a solicitor each - they are the only ones that win and even if there is a dispute over what would be a fair split, by the time the solicitors have charged for advice, the split percentages might have changed but the amount they are splitting would be less.
Stay calm, accept a reasonably palatable split and come out of this with as little damage as possible.
mediation is not required - the judge will need to be sure that the 'weaker' party has not been compromised in the split of assets, for example by pressure from the 'stronger' party.
By offloading the decision on how to split the assets to a third party that won't be the case, which you can highlight.
mediation is not required - the judge will need to be sure that the 'weaker' party has not been compromised in the split of assets, for example by pressure from the 'stronger' party.
By offloading the decision on how to split the assets to a third party that won't be the case, which you can highlight.
I guess it makes sense looking at it that way, mediator signs off on the agreement and then you can just file for divorce on that basis rather than 'lawyering up'?
They weren't mediators, just a solicitor looking at your assets, length of relationship, etc and then advising what a fair split would be - which will be 50/50ish for a long term relationship.
You and your partner can then look at whether you want to trade some bits around in the split, like pension for real estate, etc, which you will then suggest to the solicitor and if it remains fair they will come up with the paperwork for the final settlement.
There's no need to mediate as no-one is contesting and the solicitor will give advice - a limited amount but you can pay for more.
So I just put that process down on the divorce paperwork as fulfilling the mediation requirement.
As long as you stay patently transparent to your partner about what is going on everything should go smoothly.
The mediator I saw seemed a bit wishy-washy and didn't suggest to me that they would have been of any use really. Suggested that I need to not sell the main home until after the divorce, but I put it up for sale and sold it within a few days which made determining the finances a lot easier and wrapped it up sooner.
Ex-wife to be also helped with looking for a new house, went on holiday with her and some other friends as we already had it booked, etc.
Stickiest things were denting the bumper and breaking the wing mirror off her car whilst taking stuff to the dump.
At the dump one time were the film crew from one of those 'recycling' daytime TV programs.
On that trip we had a Phillips TV from the 50s, or 60s, so suggested that - which the presenter said that she would turn into a fish tank.
Ex-wife to be had to drive out of the dump and return so the film crew could get it, and then film the fake interviews.
Then she asked why we were dumping it, and her expression changed somewhat when we said we were getting divorced and were clearing stuff out.
Even though they took the TV they didn't use it, as the norm is to go back to the people that dumped it to show what they had done with it.