No consent order following Court judgment

I have been with my partner (intended fiance) for almost 3 years and we have been living together for about 2.5 years of that time. After more than 12 months of failed attempts at an out of court financial settlement and 4 failed FDR hearings, there was a 2 day trial held in July 2009 and the judgment was handed down in September 2009. The consent order is still not agreed as my partner's STBX keeps coming back with additional demands to the consent order that are outside the bounds of the judgment - this even follows a costs hearing which found for my partner because of the sheer waste and stalling to arrive at a settlement. My partner's STBX's solicitor sent a letter almost two weeks ago now with further demands. Apparently they get a 5 minute "mention" in court on the 15th of Feb to check in on the status of the settlement. Does anyone have any recommondations about what could be said at this hearing to prevent having to get another court date to force a consent agreement. The settlement is more than fair with my partner paying 100% of school fees, very generous child maintenance and approximately 50% of his residual income going to his STBX! I cannot believe this process.

Perhaps I'm missing something. A consent order is made by voluntary agreement which is then ratified by the judge as opposed to a contested order when the judge "orders" what must happen.

nope when a judgment is made by the court - it is largely parameters that have to be crystallised by a consent order with the specifics. at least that is what is happening here.

I think you need to tell us about the specifics. A consent order cannot be forced. If agreement about the wording of the order isn't reached neither party will have any control and the judge will impose an order not by consent.

specifics are that a full trial took place and there was a judgment made by the court as to the broad division of assets, term and amount of spousal maintenance, etc.

The STBX is now asking for:

additional maintenance for upkeep in the FMH until it is sold.

refusing to contribute to the costs of holiday home but will not transfer it until FMH is sold. so insisting on the benefit of an asset that she refuses to finance.

asking my partner to waive his rights under the inheritance provision for family (dependent) act but refuses to waive hers even though part the spousal maintenance made provision for a term life insurance premium. - THIS IS A BIG ISSUE FOR ME IF WE ARE GETTING MARRIED.

she will not accept any deduction in child maintenance when the children stay with us or take holidays with us - we thought this was just a given.

is insisting on production of P60's to substantiate bonus payments.

in relation to some investmetns is insisting he must use all his own capital gains allowances to offset joint liabilities.

It's complicated. So the court handed down a judgment and they are supposed to agree withe solicitors the "order" of the specifics. It continues to cost thousands of pounds each month in legal fees.

I'm afraid harriet that some of these things will drag on.

1. You don't need to agree additional maintenance to keep the fmh up, but if it is clear that it is necessary then I would expect the court to order it, try to negotiate a settlement.

2. Try to trade off the holiday home transfer against the increased maintenance.

3. Expecting waiver of inheritance rights at point order is sealed is normal. But if there is a tie-in between maintenance (quantum) and the sale of fmh then it would be normal to delay the waiver of inheritance rights by the receiver of the maintenance until after the fmh is sold. But it would be expected to be waived at that point and there is standard language available for this. If you are saying she is trying to avoid it altogether then the court would order it.

4. Unless the number of nights the children stay with you is greater than 52 nights per year then there would not be any deduction. How many nights per week is it?

5. She can demand P60's all she wants, but it is unlikely the courts would order compliance. The payment of child maintenance is taken as a matter of fact by the payor.

6. It is normal that both parties should use capital gains allowances to the best overall advantage of both parties. Again, the court would order it to be done that way.

7. Your partner needs to take the bull by the horns and tell the lawyers what the consent order should look like. Then refuse any further communication with the other lawyers on it and simply file it with the court asking for approval. It will end up with the parties in front of the DJ who will get it done before anyone can leave the court. It does happen like this from time to time.

Thank you for your considered response. Much appreciated. I think having the drafted order into the DJ is a good approach.