Divorce and pensions – full and frank disclosure

Wake Smith Solicitors 24 September 2018

Pensions have never been a more important consideration for divorcing couples.

The family home is often considered to be the most valuable asset, but pensions can be a forgotten income and potentially the second biggest asset in the relationship.

Head of family law at Wake Smith, Lindsey Canning, clarifies the facts about divorce and pensions.

“I recently read with some concern an article in a broadsheet newspaper as to pensions. The article itself made reference to a report from Age UK saying that divorced women should be shown the value of their husband’s pension.

“At present the Court can order the spouse with the pension to disclose the value of the said pensions, however if there were an appropriate change in the Law, an easier route could be made for the pension providers to produce the information directly to the Court.

“There may follow on from this other issues as to privacy, confidentiality and Data Protection but nevertheless, it can be a problem for a divorcing spouse whose partner has refused to provide the pension fund details.

“The remainder of the article went on to say:

  1. Women are not made aware of their legal entitlement to husband’s pensions
  2. For divorcing couples who agree their finances away from the Court, there is no automatic right to know the pension benefits and;
  3. The Government must act quickly to make consideration of private pension wealth a proper part of the divorce process.

“When negotiating any financial settlement within divorce a process should be undertaken called “full and frank disclosure” whereby each party should provide documentary evidence in support of their income, capital, liabilities and pension provision.

“If this is carried out voluntarily and an agreement is reached as to pensions then the Court can make an appropriate “Consent Order” within the divorce proceedings reflecting the agreement.

“The comment as to the Government making consideration of the pension wealth as part of the divorce process, I find bizarre because this has been in place for many decades either as:

  1. Ordering additional capital to make up for the loss of pension. This was at the time when this was only way a pension could be taken into account: this is still an option and it is called “pension offsetting”.
  2. The Law later developed into “pension earmarking” whereby the Court could directly instruct the Pension Trustees to pay a share of the pension lump sum and a share of the monthly/annual income directly to other spouse. There were a number of issues with pension earmarking, not least that technically the share of the monthly/annual income was “spousal maintenance” and so would automatically terminate upon the receiving spouses remarriage. In other words the spouse was not getting a share of the pension built up during the first marriage as of right but rather as “maintenance”. This arrangement was far from fair.
  3. The later development, and the one which we have at the moment, is that the pension funds can be split now and shared now so that the husband and wife are able to have their own pension funds and they can retain those pension funds irrespective of future marriages. This is a “Pension Sharing Order”.

“Pensions therefore have been considered by the Government within divorce proceedings for decades.

“The report that women are not made aware of their legal entitlement to the husband’s pensions I find the most concerning.

“I do not know why this is the case. In my job as a solicitor I advise every divorcing client that the value of the pensions should be disclosed and, once the values are known, dealt with in the appropriate way either way of pension offsetting or a Pension Sharing Order.  Frankly, I do not know why anybody going through a divorce would not be made aware of their entitlement to a pension, save for the fact that person has chosen not to take independent legal advice.

“The article was correct in stating that the average pension fund for men between 55 and 64 is approximately £125,000 being three times as much as women of the same age who usually have pension funds of just over £42,000.

“I know from working as a solicitor for over 25 years in Family Law that people have a reticence seeing solicitors and understandably have concerns as to legal costs but the cost of taking independent legal advice when compared against the cost of the loss of pension rights is very small.

“It also has to be remembered that, as we are as a nation living longer, the cost of the pension rights can readily be for 30 years in retirement and, if it relates to a private pension, that the pension funds may be drawn down upon any time after the age of 55.

“In summary, Age UK is wrong about invoking the Government to act to make a pension part of the divorce process because it is and has been for many years.

“My deep concern is that Age UK may be right as to the belief, usually by the wife, that the pension cannot be touched.

“It is vitally important that within divorce, whether it be husband or wife, that independent legal advice is obtained because pensions are frequently, after the value of the house, the second largest asset of the marriage.”

For advice on family law, including divorce and pensions, contact Lindsey Canning at [email protected] or on 0114 266 6660

Tags

Archive

November 20242October 20246September 20245August 20245July 20243June 20243May 20245April 20242March 20247February 20242January 20248December 20236November 20232October 20233September 20232August 20234July 20232June 20235May 20237March 20234February 20235January 20233December 20225November 20224October 20224September 20223June 20221May 20227April 20223March 20223February 20223January 20224December 20214November 20213October 20214September 20216August 20212July 202111June 20218May 20216April 20212March 20218February 20218January 20219December 20208November 202013October 20208September 20208August 20203July 20208June 202016May 202011April 20206March 202016February 20208January 202011December 20199November 20199October 201911September 20195August 20194July 20196May 20198April 20196March 20193February 20195January 20194December 20186November 20185October 20182September 20185August 20184July 20189June 20184May 201810April 20185March 20184February 20184January 20183December 20175November 20178October 20177September 20179August 20175July 20176June 201710May 20175April 20178March 201711February 20176January 201710December 20169November 20167October 201610September 201610August 20166July 20167June 20163May 20162April 20166March 20162February 20164January 20165December 20153November 20155October 20156September 20156August 20157July 20157June 20157May 20156April 20159March 20156February 201510January 20156December 20145November 20144October 20142September 20143May 20144March 20146February 20144January 20142December 20132November 20133September 20134July 20132June 20132May 20133April 20131March 20133February 20133January 20136December 20121November 20123October 20122August 20122July 20128June 20123April 20123March 20121January 20124December 20112November 20111October 20112September 20113August 20113July 20117June 20119May 20117April 20115March 20119February 20118January 20111December 20101October 20102September 20102August 20103July 20106June 20101May 20102April 20106March 20102February 20103January 20102December 20095November 20092October 20092September 20092August 20091July 20095June 20095May 20093April 20093March 20093February 20091January 20092November 20082October 20082September 20081August 20083July 20081January 20082

Featured Articles

Contact us