You won't be shocked to hear that as a divorce legal representative one of the concerns that I'm typically asked is, 'when is my finest time to submit for divorce in order to get the greatest settlement?'.

The reward they have in mind is their husband (or better half's) pension and I offer them an extremely simple answer: the longer the marital relationship - the bigger the claim.

Take Trudy whose 2nd marriage was to Eric, a rich residential or commercial property designer who had a couple of residential or commercial properties, ISAs and investments. To Trudy, the real reward was Eric's pension which was worth more than ₤ 1 million.

The marriage came to an end after five years, however when Trudy attempted to declare versus Eric's pension she was devastated to be informed by her legal representative that rather of the half-share that she had actually determined in her mind that she would be granted, she was wrong.

Eric could, in truth, ring fence all the pension that he had actually developed prior to the marital relationship. This implied that Trudy could just claim a tiny proportion that had actually accrued throughout their short time together.

The judge felt that the excessiveness of Trudy's claim was expensive and that most of the wealth in the marital relationship had actually originated from Eric and this was shown in the settlement that Trudy received.

So while she got a capitalised settlement to reflect the way of life that they had actually delighted in together, it was nowhere near her expectations. The moral of this story? A brief marriage equals less possessions awarded.

It could not have actually been more various for Gloria, who was married to Frank for more than thirty years. Frank admitted to having affairs with females who he described as 'the employed assistance', believing it did not truly count as cheating. It did to Gloria. As the pensions stacked up during their 3 decade relationship, Gloria was able to claim half of it and was granted equality of all the pensions.

Vanessa Lloyd Platt, a top divorce attorney, states the longer the marriage, the larger the divorce claim

Frank might not ring fence one penny of it. And thanks to the length of the marriage, Gloria got what is called a 'Joint Lives Order' for maintenance. Simply put, this means Gloria would be given maintenance for life, although this is unusual today as a lot of upkeep payments are for a set term only.

It was not assisted by the fact that Frank had actually not been forthcoming over the real level of his savings and had at the last moment tried to move funds offshore. He was offered a punitive award and Gloria took advantage of a number of thousands more on her side of the divorce formula. The moral here is that dishonesty does not pay - especially in a divorce court.

So that's short and long marriages - what about a longer than average length of marital relationship (12 years) for state 15 years?

Here the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has actually been accrued before or indeed, for a duration, after separation.

It is constantly essential that a pensions specialist evaluate the value of a pension so the proper figure can be determined.

Which is where Gemma came unstuck. She had a 16-year marital relationship to City broker Paul. His pension encountered hundreds of countless pounds. Gemma was none too troubled by the pension but, like numerous other halves I see, she desired the security of staying in the home that she loved. So instead of declaring any of Paul's pension she traded it off versus the worth of your house.

This is called a 'set-off', but as a legal representative I would constantly recommend to any client that an actuary report is acquired first and all choices are thought about.

Wives in specific can bring out a lesser deal when they select this choice. The ethical here is that you might feel young and ready to begin afresh, but do not be too fast to trade away your future pension.

Vanessa says that in a marital relationship longer than the average of 12 years, the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has actually been accrued before or, for a period, after separation

Another concern I'm often asked is whether a conciliator will consider all of the couple's possessions to maximise a settlement.

Many people appear to believe that conciliators will go easy on the parties - and partners in particular - may get away with more by utilizing a conciliator, than if the matter is before the court.

This is a misconception, as Neil discovered. The company director believed that mediation would imply that he could put pressure on Judy to settle. It had actually been a long marital relationship covering twenty-eight years and he thought that Judy was not the brightest. He felt he could bluff his method through and bamboozle the conciliator.

What Neil had actually not reckoned upon was the tenacity and cleverness of the arbitrator who firmly insisted that all information be produced for the conferences. The arbitrator could see that Neil was being obstructive in answering questions about financial deals and motion of cash in between subsidiary business.

Little had Neil suspected that the mediator had actually been a forensic private investigator for HMRC, before ending up being a matrimonial conciliator. After many sessions the conciliator recommended a settlement figure which Neil was outraged by and insisted they go to court. Unfortunately for Neil - the precise same settlement figure was reached in court. It deserves remembering that mediation can be a far better method of resolving matters but is never a soft choice.

Mediators will assist the couple and instruct actuaries to exercise pension departments whatever the length of the marital relationship. The courts are now motivating the celebrations to think about alternatives to court procedures especially. Arbitration is also being encouraged. All these choices are readily available simply put, medium and long marriages.

This is the factor EVERYONE is separating ... and why your marriage is at danger without you realizing

So no matter the length of your marital relationship, I encourage all my clients not to have unrealistic expectations of what the final figure must be. It's important to realise that you can not punish your soon to be ex-partner in the courtroom. Unless you can demonstrate that the behaviour of your partner has had a financial impact, the conduct or behaviour will be overlooked.

Let me present you now to Henry, who thought that he was being especially creative when he moved his shares in the household company to his sibling, moneyed in the capital from his pension and provided it to a buddy and bought himself a Lamborghini.

This was since Claudia, his spouse of twelve years had begun divorce procedures. At the end of the lawsuits, the court found that he was intentionally trying to reduce the possessions available to Claudia and included back all the worth of the pension, the cost of the Lamborghini and the shares to his side of the equation and then divided all of it in half. Henry's actions were so contrived that his attempts to drain the properties completely backfired on him. Oh and Henry needed to offer the Lamborghini.

The ethical of the story when it pertains to how to maximise your settlement? Don't try to be too clever, play fair and truthfully, or run the risk of the very opposite of what you wished to accomplish. Divorce can be a minefield, and it does not have to blow up for either of you if you both take practical steps towards resolving matters.

* All names have been changed to protect client identity.