Questions

I have a few questions and I hope someone can provide a bit of insight. Brief details, married for 25 years, two children one less than 18 one more than 18, both resident with me in the family home. I have taken some advice from a solicitor whose view was to avoid running up solicitors costs and try to negotiate without one until the final stages, the ex has decided to use a solicitor at all stages.

My ex's solicitor has written today.

1. Family home valuation: my aim was to buy her out of the family home, 5 valuations, average of 485, they want to settle on a valuation of 545. My view is that this relates to a price to market the property not a valuation. I am right in thinking estate agents are not considered by the court as experts in property valuation? I planned on countering the offer at 500 or alternatively suggesting we seek a joint RICS valuation.

2. We originbally agreed to instruct a pension expert to value pensions, they are complex a combination of DB and final salary pensions, my pension is worth circa 650k, hers 75k, I have 5 years before retirement, she has 13 years. She no longer wants to instruct an expert but instead wants to equalise pensions based on CETV, is this a sensible thing to do?

3. She has been recently dismissed from her employment (she has a significant drinking problem) and is seeking universal credit. I have agreed to pay circa £800/ month, while we are in reciept of rental income on a jointly owned property. I have been asked to pay this as part monthly payment and part payment for loans she has taken out in her name direct to the loan company. I assume this is to minimise her income for universal credit, I am not sure I want to agree to this, am I right in thinking any payments will be deducted from UC on a pound per pound basis? Would I essentially be colluding to defraud UC.

4. The solicitor says she intends to apply for a legal fees loan, this is depite taking out an original £10k loan to pay her legal fees, I assume she has either paid a ridiculous amount in fees or has spent the money on something else. I have no idea what a legal fees loan actually is, can anyone enlighten me?

Many thanks in advance.

Sounds like you have a sensible solicitor.

1: A property is only worth what someone is prepared to pay for it. Estate agents can value up to win business. A chartered surveyor is neutral. NB If the house is too big for your needs it may be that a sale is necessary. We'd need to know more about the financial situation to comment more appropriately.

2. I think it is unlikely a solicitor would want to advise on pension sharing in the absence of an actuary's report. You can take the capital split route by agreement but given the disparity in ages etc I am not sure this is wise.

3. You are right that SM is deducted from UC pound for pound. Could these loans be seen as a joint liability?

4. Hmm. It is possible to take out loans to pay legal fees that are repaid out of settlement - usually sale of a property. I worry that these can be a licence to rack up fees.

Hadenoughnow

I am quite happy to purchase her equity in the property at a fair value, it is three bed with myself and two children resident. Both children are in ft education, one state one private, and want to proceed to university. I pay all fees, living expenses for both children and when they proceed to university I will have to pay for the majority of their living expenses (they will only be entitled to 40% of a maintenance loan) and their mother pays no maintenance. The valuations they are cherry picking are inflated, I will ask for a survey.

It looks like the solicitor is the one asking for a pension sharing without an actuarial report. I might suggest we can proceed on that basis but if we cannot agree a fair split then we will have to jointly appoint an actuary.

I cant see how the loan can be seen as a joint liability, they were taken out after seperation for the purpose of paying legal fees, they are not in my name nor are they secured against anything jointly owned.

As for inflating costs, the form E states £750 is paid monthly in legal fees and £250 in financial advice costs, even if these were valid there should still be a balance of circa 5k, so a legal fee loan would not be necessary. I don't quite understand why I should be liable for additional costs because she chooses to use an expensive solicitor despite being offered an opportunity to negotiate a settlement at no cost in the first place.

How much is the rental income on the jointly owned property?

Half of that would be hers and reduce any entitlement to UC.

If she has more than £16k equity in the rental property then there will be no entitlement to UC at all.

I’d personally be careful of any scheme where you pay a liability for her instead of paying her the money directly in case you end up being implicated in benefit fraud as it looks as if the idea behind it is to get more UC than she would otherwise be entitled to.