Having stirred this thread up again I am conscious that I've gone quiet! This is due to unfortunate circumstances (=work!)that has stopped me finding the time to do what I intended: but I haven't forgotten!
I do have various threads I am tracking around the internet and some other info, and I'll come back with the more relevant when I've sorted them out a bit.
I haven't had time to research my own point about whether a gratuity can actually be subject to a court order, but that's on my list. Anyone who can point me to any hard evidence either way, do post!
See p12 in particular. Useful worked example on p14.
I was wrong about the terminal lump sum in this context: see p12. It is included within a pension sharing order. That doesn't mean you necessarily get half, as TMax's comment might imply, but its within the court's general jurisdiction to do what it likes, or what you jointly agree.
Note still that it is still possible to generate more capital than this by commutation, where that can apply (taking some of the pension as capital rather than income).
Also bear in mind that this leaflet predates the new provisions about a spouse taking the pension earlier than previously allowed.
I haven't yet worked out if terminal gratuity can be subject to a (lump sum) order otherwise, and I still think that in that case it can't, but I'll pursue that. This would be relevant if you were considering offsetting: e.g. you keep your pension and give me the house - if you also wanted a lump sum.
It would be really helpful to know
(a) how much that helps anybody else!
(b) what anyone still doesn't understand, or what isn't covered in the booklet that they want to understand (perhaps about how the court actually decide what Sharing/Attachment Order to make?)
(c) whether anyone has had personal experience that doesn't tie in with what the booklet appears to say
I'm bumping this up just to find out if this thread has come to the end of its useful life, or whether there is more to be said...
I'm trying to draw the main issues together as something that may be worth putting in the Library for general reference, so anyone who wants to put a point of view would be very welcome.
And if there are issues you feel are still unclear, post them up. I've found quite a helpful contact who may be able to fill any serious gaps.
Bearing in mind the AFPS says publicly in the FAQ section of their website that they can't predict the income from a pension credit nor can they predict the income from the debited pension does that exclude an AFPS pension from being shared on the basis of equalising retirement income?
hi
i have found this if it is to of some benefit to any one it is a good read it covers AFPS 75 army pension scheme family benefits .
You can also do the same for AFPS 05
I am not sure how the lose of these benefits are taken into account during a divorce but still i found it interesting .
I am not sure how to do a link but you can Google it easily and on the same page there are other useful links .
Not sure if this helps any one but may well be worth reading just to
expand your knowledge of the schemes them selves
Maggie,
An actuary can prepare a report giving the best indication they can (and assuming a competent actuary, therefore the best indication there can be) of what would create equality of income on retirement.
The actuary can't guarantee that that will actually be the outcome, because they are having to make predictions based on an event which may yet be many years away, with all sorts of economic/legal/procedural changes potentially to happen in the meantime which will change things, but so far as such a long-range calculation is achievable, they can do it.
Peter@bdm may be an interested commentator on this!
The AFPS understandably doesn't want to give any guarantee of outcomes: their only job is to administer Forces pensions, not to sort out the tortuous ramifications of pension sharing orders in divorce!
Do you need help sorting out a fair financial settlement?
Our consultant service offers expert advice and support to help you reach agreement on a fair financial settlement quickly, and for less than a quarter of the cost of using a traditional high street solicitor.