Financial Order- self representing

[Adam]

9

Hi Adam, please remember this is only my personal opinion but having been through the process, I wouldn't change the way I used legal advice and representation.

Typically it can be about 3-6 months between each hearing.

I'd definitely use a DAB for the final hearing. As for the FDR, this is all about preference and the likelihood of you settling or going to final. I always knew my hearing was going to final, my ex was asking for far too much so I knew at the FDR, regardless of what the indicative view from the judge was going to be, the ex would always try to go for more. If you think your ex may use the FDR in the attempt to settle and it's in your best interests to finalise things earlier (I was happy to drag things out, I was in no rush to get the right outcome) then consider taking a barrister.

A barrister at the FDR will help position your case correctly. One negative to me was my case was articulated as clearly as I would have hoped but this didn't really matter to me. The judge at the FDR therefore suggested a more favourable outcome to the ex at final. Whilst she was pleased with this, I knew that I didn't have the opportunity to explain my finances to the judge and because she did have a DAB, they argued and pushed their case for a far more favourable outcome in their favour. They attempted to settle outside of court based on the judges opinion but I declined.

This paid off for more, I knew the indicative view from the judge was unaffordable so I pushed it to final, got representation and a far more favourable outcome in my favour was reached. Don't get me wrong, she still took a good chunk of the cash as our earnings are hugely different but I was tens of thousands better off.

Hope that helps and makes sense.

Thanks for the detailed explanation.
Very clear now

 

[Adam]

9

Thanks for the detailed explanation.
Very clear now

Hi
As I am self representing say my total legal cost is £20k, for my ex say total legal cost say is £100k as she has a solicitor.

When the judge split the assets under final order.
How the legal cost is treated? Say under 50:50 split is the legal cost is excluded ? Or Indirectly I will be paying half of total legal cost?

 

[Oneofmany]

she has burned money dude

 

[Ash]

Afraid I don't know the answer to that one, but someone else might know.

 

[Jumper85]

Hi
As I am self representing say my total legal cost is £20k, for my ex say total legal cost say is £100k as she has a solicitor.

When the judge split the assets under final order.
How the legal cost is treated? Say under 50:50 split is the legal cost is excluded ? Or Indirectly I will be paying half of total legal cost?

Hi @Adam

The legal fees have to be proportionate to the total value of the assets, so if you ex has spent £100k in legal fees because your finances are complex and you have +£1m then the judge won't do anything, as the cost verses the assets maybe deemed reasonable. If she's spent £100k and your assets are £200k that's a different matter. The judge would see this as careless and disproportionate and therefore take it into consideration as part of the distribution of finances.

Unfortunately what is deemed as proportionate is purely down to the judge.

 

[Adam]

Hi @Adam

The legal fees have to be proportionate to the total value of the assets, so if you ex has spent £100k in legal fees because your finances are complex and you have +£1m then the judge won't do anything, as the cost verses the assets maybe deemed reasonable. If she's spent £100k and your assets are £200k that's a different matter. The judge would see this as careless and disproportionate and therefore take it into consideration as part of the distribution of finances.

Unfortunately what is deemed as proportionate is purely down to the judge.

Thanks, sorry not clear.

say it is proportionate: then indirectly I will be paying half? Or still she has to pay 100% of hers, Without affecting my 50%?
Say if not proportionate, then she will pay 100% of hers? Without affecting my 50%?