Hi All, long time no see, I am sorry to have left this thread somewhat
unfinished.... so here goes.............
I'm not criticising
Louise or casting aspersions, but if in her case someone managed to get the
same outcome as an actuarial report it was more by luck than judgement.
Sometimes I hit my car engine and it solves the problem, but that doesn't
make me a mechanic...Typical! Response from an "expert"
Solicitor..."
someone managed" That SOMEONE happened to be my
intelligent 28 year serving Police SGT of a husband, who became somewhat of
an expert in HIS own police pension scheme! And a long time serving
intelligent JUDGE agreed. Whether a pension expert agreed or not at the end
of the day my husbands calculations worked out exactly the same as the
"expert" who charged £1900 to do it!
I would so love the above
Solicitor to comment to the Judge involved that her Judgement was down to
luck and not her intelligence!!
Yes I did speak with Peter and I
understand all the flaws in the workings we did, but they are all arguable
in simple laymans terms.
I have given our workings to 4 police
officers upto now, who after paying for expert reports all really come up
with the same figures give or take one or two percent and so did their
Solicitors!! This is not to say it will work in every case.
Another thing dont forget that whilst all these "experts" are pouring
over anyones pension be it a police pension or not, is that the pension
maybe years away and any house or cash settlement that someone may receive
today could be worth so much more in years to come! Stats say that a prison
officer, policeman or fireman has a life span of roughly FIVE years after
he retires (its higher for women apparentely!)
And in any
event, no judge is going to accept a layman's assessment over an actuarial
report (whether it turns out to be right or not). So even if Louise's
system worked in more than her one case, you'd never get a judge to accept
it as suitably expert evidence. That's not the way the legal system works
and whether or not that is fair isn't going to change it. No! she didnt accept my husbands assessment over an actuarial report, she
looked at them both side by side and the outcome was roughly the same!! We
said on the workings out 28% and the final acturay report said 32% we
eventually agreed on 30% of what it was worth that day in court! Not as,
they tried to argue 30% when he retired! Which would of been ten years
after they divorced!!! Would that of been fair????????
I am
sorry folks this was not ment to be a rant, and I promise I will sort out
from the huge pile of folders we have the actual pension report that cost
nearly two grand and the workings out we did. I will put them all together
in an email over the next few days and forward them to anyone who wants
them.
The problem you will all have is you have to be prepared
to say your piece in court, but if you have a reasonable understanding of
fairness and so does your SX2b, then at least you have a better chance with
simple laymans terms than the baffling reports that make no sense, to
anyone other than a pension expert.
Give me a couple of days to get
back to you all on this.
Kind ones
Louise
Forum 
England and Wales 
Scotland 
hi fiona i have a quick question for you 
