FDA Court Order for Actuarial Report

I am very unhappy with the wording on the calculations for the order. It was very one sided, all decided by my ex’s Barrister. The letter of instruction has not yet been drafted. I have asked My Solicitor to contact the Judge to ask that the following calculations are also added to the order,

a calculation for an ‘offset sum’ to equalise the pensions from cohabitation to separation as this could help negotiations between us & a calculation based on retiring at age 55 as approx 80% of my pension pot was accrued based on retiring at 55, the scheme is now closed.(although all of the pension that allows me to retire at age 55 was accrued before meeting my wife).

My Solicitor says it is too late and not possible, all we can do is request my ex’s solicitor to add these instructions, but says they will likely refuse. They also said getting a calculation for retirement at age 55 will not be beneficial and a calculation at age 66 is better. As the ex has longer to earn more pension…Is that right?

Can I insist that my Solicitor contact the Judge to ask these questions?

I have also thought that I could refuse to agree to the wording on the letter of instruction.
I could refuse permission for the Actuary to view my pension
I could refuse to pay half the costs of the report…..

But will that basically put me in contempt of court?
I have the Judges email address….Am I within my rights to contact them or there office to make this request?
I believe my requests are perfectly reasonable…..what can I do?

I feel at my wits end with it & completely let down by my Solicitor

Background
At my recent FDA the judge instructed a court order to appoint a joint pension expert to;
a. The most cost-effective way to divide the pension provision available to both parties (including state pension) between the parties so as to provide equality of pension income on two alternative bases, namely when both parties reach the age of 66.
b. The most cost-effective way to divide the matrimonial pension provision (cohabitation to separation) available to both parties (including state pension) between the parties as to provide equality of pension income on two alternate bases, namely when both parties reach the age of 66.
c. An estimate of the pension income that would be receivable by the applicant and respondent in each of the scenarios in paragraph (a) and (b) above.

This was all decided by my ex’s Barrister, My Solicitor had no input into it.
Ours was a 10 year 12 months marriage, with 12 months cohabitation, no kids, both working, me 53 her 48.
My pension is 3 times larger than my wife’s. But The pensions accrued from cohabitation are fairly similar, mine perhaps £80k more than my ex’s.

I would really appreciate any advice

The calculations are based on the funds as they are now, not future potential accrual.

The actuary provides the figures, it is up to your legal team to make the argument about excluding pre relationship pensions.

If your pension was based on retirement at 55 and any pension she has was not, the likelihood is that she would need a greater share of your fund to equalise income on retirement at that age.

Hadenoughnow

Thanks Hadenoughnow....& I certainly have!
my ex & I were both in the same scheme, geared to retirement at 55, which was then changed to retirement at 60 or 65,( you could choose). but because I have been in the scheme far longer than my Ex, far more of my pension pot was accrued towards retiring at 55, (therefore a much bigger build up rate) ....In fact all of it was, as they had already changed the scheme before I met my wife.....The issue I have is that the scheme is now closed....No more contributions can be made into it......But the pension income will be almost 40% higher at age 66 than it is at age 55......I am entitled to claim my pension at age 55......god knows I've worked hard for it!......My pension 'income' is approx 80% more than my Wife's.
As we were in the same scheme, it will always be around 80% higher than hers.....for a very good reason, I paid into it far, far longer.
However the element accrued during the marriage is not so far apart, as the scheme had by then changed to age 60,65.....(If the PAG is saying ignore that, and just divvy up everything, that is a disgrace.....why would anyone who knew this ever get married?...unless they were the poorer party...then of course they would, nothing to lose!!!)
We now have a new company DC pension scheme, which gives 18% employer contributions, so still very good!.....Will an Actuary not project the value of that at retirement age? ....which, for my wife, is 17 years away?....Her own pension scheme's will give her a decent pension....Why go after mine?....because English law allows I guess and morals & integrity don't come into it for some people.....Wish I was Scottish! much fairer all round.
Seems the PAG is open to interpretation, by the lawyers & judges..I have seen stuff saying that a 'fair' outcome certainly doesn't have to mean an equal share of pension incomes....I hope to God it's true