Did she Lie and if so, did she break the Disclosure Rule?

Discussion in 'Finance, Property, Law' started by ExScaleyBleep, Nov 20, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Long story cut short, I got my Decree Absolute in May this year after several months of bitterness - came home Oct last year to find her sleeping with someone else. Without going into massive amounts of detail, she had to give, as did I, a full financial disclosure to divide the assets.

    It was classed as a clean break divorce and so I was told I had no comeback in later years on anything that she may have gained. However I was told by a mutual friend that she had had a 'windfall' back in the Jan/Feb time that enabled her to put a 'substantial' deposit on a house she was buying with her new partner.

    This was well before the full disclosure time but was not recorded on it.

    So my question is, have I got any grounds to go back to my solicitor and attempt recompense of some sort ? I had to pay 65/35 equity division in her favour seeing that Im on a good wage and she wasnt... even though she was living with her new partner and hes on a good screw as well (no pun intended !!)

    Of course I could just stay bitter and twisted about whole thing and no bother doing anything... just thought that Id ask thats all !

    Cheers, ESB.
  2. When dealing with bunny boiling snakes with titties you have these 2 options:

    1. Fahgeddabahdit. Life's too short, your mutual friend won't want to take sides and give a court evidential value and be known as a grass. Also, why choose a CoA that benefits those leeches, solicitors - anyone who supports lies for money shouldn't get a penny.

    2. No Surrender. Worked for Ian Paisley, didn't it? If you 'mutual friend' will grass her to you, they'll sing like a canary in court. The legalese is that, if she signed a disclosure knowingly with wrong information, she has 'Created a false Instrument' - or quite simply, fraud. So take her to the cleaners, get that 65/35 turned round in your favour and burn the biatch like she's Joan of Arc.

    Personally I reckon if she'll shiters on you you should return the favour.
  3. Generally speaking with cases such as these, much depends on the circumstances of the individual case. There are principles, but there are no set formulae.

    You both had a duty of "full and frank" disclosure. That duty was owed both to the other party in the case, and to the court. That is because unless the court knows the full financial circumstances, it is not in a position to be able to judge what is an appropriate order, whether it is one that the court imposes on you after a trial, or indeed one you might agree yourselves without going through a trial.

    If, having agreed an order, or the court having imposed an order on you, it is later discovered that one party has failed in their duty of full and frank disclosure, then you may have grounds to apply to the court to have the order set aside, and to have the ancillary relief decided again.

    Before giving permission for you to make that application the court would have to decide that:
    a. There had been non-disclosure,
    b. That non-disclosure was "material", and
    c. It would have been likely that if the court had known about the non-disclosed asset, it would have been likely to make a different order.

    Courts are generally reluctant to re-open ancillary relief cases, so you would need to think carefully whether (b) and (c) above passed muster.

    Then you need to think about whether the time, stress, hassle etc are worth what you might gain from re-opening proceedings.

    If you do apply, and succeed, you would expect the court to make costs orders against her for some or all of your costs. However if you apply and fail, then you can expect to be ordered to pay your own costs plus some or all of hers.

    Before launching proceedings, take advice from a solicitor who is in command of all the facts.

    Hope this helps.
  4. Suggest that you also need to check v v carefully what is the source of the mutual friend's info. Amount, nature and exact timing of windfall are all likely to be relevant and unless he's her accountant watch out for Chinese whispers.
  5. Agreed. See my point (a) above.

    If you are alleging non-disclosure, the burden of proving that allegation to the requisite standard is on you. You would have to satisfy the court "on the balance of probabilities" (i.e. that it was more likely than not) that what you were saying was correct.
  6. The chances of success would be greatly enhanced if it was you that was economical with the truth.
  7. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    I'd be curious to see what those with more expertise say but my own inclination would be to send her a lawyer's letter saying that it has 'come to your attention' etc etc. With heavy hints of perjury etc and ask her what she intends to do about it.

    If she is guilty she may decide, or her lawyers may advise her, to settle with you rather than risk losing a court case and potentially a criminal case. Her current paramour may not be too impressed with her getting a criminal conviction.
  8. If there's going to be any correspondence, make sure you've got a lawyer doing it for you. The last thing you want to do is go off half cocked on this kind of thing, as it can screw you later down the track.

  9. ESB, congratulations on your freedom :)

    Schweik appears to have given you some good advice, and I for one will not argue against him. As others have pointed out, make sure the information from the third party is correct, as hearsay is always a problem. Then if all adds up and you are determined to proceed, go for it. Just a tip, if you do go for it, keep your focus! don't allow yourself to be distracted.

    I wish you all the best :)
  10. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    I would ask is it worth it ?

    The money you will now have to throw at your legal guys to get them to re open the case might be more than you get back

    Take the moral high ground enjoy your freedom and remind every one that she did it to you and it will be only a matter of time before she does it to him
  11. Move on fella. I spent years hating my ex for taking the house that I'd paid for but the satisfacti8on of bumping into her at Asdas, and the barren bitch seeing my daughter was worth everything. A quick, 'I see you've no kids then given the deseased state of your ovaries and the fact that your womb is pickled in formaldehyde....' and she was sobbing in the dairy aisle. Money can't buy that.
  12. Ladies and Gents. First let me thank you, one and all, for you frank, informative and sensible replies. I expected nothing less and fully appreciate it. I sent the above information, along with extra details that I sensibly do not wish to air publicly but have no impact on the infomation stated, to my solicitor who dealt with my divorce. She also advised me of 2 CoA.

    The first is, of course, as succinctly put by Vladimir_Iliych_Crab, to leave it and forget about and get one with it.
    The second is to start the legal process and attempt to find out exactly what the amount was and how it was obtained but not declared.

    Im sure that this will take some pondering and great thought... once again, thank you for your replies. I feel a long chat face to face with my solicitor is in order when I return from the Sandpit..

    Cheers ESB.
  13. Outstanding, you would not believe how much that made me laugh.
  14. Hi all,

    This is all very good info, BUT, lets not forget that she may say that the windfall was from her lover and not her, you will have to prove th money was hers and not his......... I wish you luck ESB.

  15. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer


    I went down the path of legal disclosure of assets as I was advised by my solicitor that it at least ensured a timescale within which all would be sorted. Frankly, it was the best couple of hundred quid I ever spent as it guaranteed a date by which all would be over.

    'Full and frank' (from above) are the key words. To quote my solicitor, word for word, 'You are expected to declare, honestly and completely, your current financial state AND THERE ARE SANCTIONS IF YOU DON'T.'

    That last bit is worth bearing in mind.

    There's some good advice here, not the least of which is to deal with it through the legal people and not to fly solo.

    However, given that you're out getting sand in your shoes - and I say this respectfully - put it aside until you get back. It'll all keep for now and you don't need the distraction.