DIVORCE

[Troll]

Anyone here been though a divorce and had to give up a % of inherited property or % of property yet to be inherited as part of the settlement?


Not me - but a brother -which could affect my inheritance if his scheming bitch succeeds

 

[FiveTimes]

Anyone here been though a divorce and had to give up a % of inherited property or % of property yet to be inherited as part of the settlement?


Not me - but a brother -which could affect my inheritance if his scheming bitch succeeds

Get parents to sign over they property to you so it doesnt get included in the settlement ?
Then when the dust has settled hand over some to brother.

 

[Troll]

Get parents to sign over they property to you so it doesn't get included in the settlement ?
Then when the dust has settled hand over some to brother.

That's a plan B for the other properties - but one parent already gone during the time of marriage so there is already a inheritance

 

[formant]

Unless the inheritance is imminent, ancillary relief proceedings won't take that into account. If the relative is already dead, it'll only be your brother's predetermined share that's affected - not yours.

If the inheritance has been paid out already, during the marriage, I'm afraid she will be entitled to some of it. How much is likely to depend on whether there are children involved, whether they will mostly reside with her, and so on. She on her own, will have a much lesser claim.

I must say, ancillary relief has been the best and fairest court experience we've had during my partner's divorce. Child residence is where as a guy you've got to fear the true sexism. :-/

Do make sure his proceedings finish with a clean break order (he basically shouldn't do a settlement by consent order unless the consent order also includes the clean break). That will protect the future inheritances and other future wealth of his indefinitely.

 

[Gibbon]

Unless the inheritance is imminent, ancillary relief proceedings won't take that into account. If the relative is already dead, it'll only be your brother's predetermined share that's affected - not yours.

If the inheritance has been paid out already, during the marriage, I'm afraid she will be entitled to some of it. How much is likely to depend on whether there are children involved, whether they will mostly reside with her, and so on. She on her own, will have a much lesser claim.

I must say, ancillary relief has been the best and fairest court experience we've had during my partner's divorce. Child residence is where as a guy you've got to fear the true sexism. :-/

Do make sure his proceedings finish with a clean break order (he basically shouldn't do a settlement by consent order unless the consent order also includes the clean break). That will protect the future inheritances and other future wealth of his indefinitely.

This is best advice you can give, even if the settlement gets skewed in favour of his ex.

 

[Troll]

Unless the inheritance is imminent, ancillary relief proceedings won't take that into account. If the relative is already dead, it'll only be your brother's predetermined share that's affected - not yours.

If the inheritance has been paid out already, during the marriage, I'm afraid she will be entitled to some of it. How much is likely to depend on whether there are children involved, whether they will mostly reside with her, and so on. She on her own, will have a much lesser claim.

I must say, ancillary relief has been the best and fairest court experience we've had during my partner's divorce. Child residence is where as a guy you've got to fear the true sexism. :-/

Do make sure his proceedings finish with a clean break order (he basically shouldn't do a settlement by consent order unless the consent order also includes the clean break). That will protect the future inheritances and other future wealth of his indefinitely.

No she walked out on him to live with lover leaving him with 4 kids - I suggested he should start proceedings immediately to keep the family home... but pillock went and sold family home , they split 50/50 but he had to use his 50% to fund accommodation for him & kids (double pillock!)untill the money ran out , he was evicted from the rented property and I had to fund him
She walked out 5 years ago and current situation is both have found new partners and only one child is now under 18 (16) and 2 kids live with him and the others with her.

 

[formant]

No she walked out on him to live with lover leaving him with 4 kids - I suggested he should start proceedings immediately to keep the family home... but pillock went and sold family home , they split 50/50 but he had to use his 50% to fund accommodation for him & kids (double pillock!)untill the money ran out , he was evicted from the rented property and I had to fund him
She walked out 5 years ago and current situation is both have found new partners and only one child is now under 18 (16) and 2 kids live with him and the others with her.

Eeep, she wouldn't have gotten a payout on the family home anytime soon at all if he'd kept it with the kids. In those circumstances judges rule a percentage as hers (roughly based on how much she's contributed towards the marriage) but that's only to be paid out upon all children turning 18 or him remarrying. So, yeah, selling up straight away wasn't a smart move. On the upside, it can be a relief to live without the burden of "will have to sell house to pay out in the future".

I think in those circumstances she'll have little claim on the existing inheritance (he can claim it was needed to fund the children's upbringing in the meantime), but either way she definitely won't have a claim on future wealth. But as I said, do make sure he gets a clean break added to any settlement.