Hi The absence of a Section 28 (1A) Direction was brought up by a lawyer who recently proof read the financial consent order in relation to me buying a house from my ex that is the subject of the order. They thought the order was oddly worded (was written by my ex's lawyer and I amended it under guidance from another lawyer - I wanted a clean break so neither party could lay claim to anything from the other in the future to be fair.
The proofing lawyer though it odd that there was no Section 28 (1A) Direction. I have the option to apply for an amendment of the document if a Section 28 is important to include.
The consent order is now 2 years old and settling the finances is the last part of the divorce. I am remarrying and want to make sure that the lack of the Section 28 (1A) Direction doesn't have any implications. Basically I want to make sure that everything is watertight and I can get on with my life without worrying what can be thrown at me next as its been a hard time doing this myself. You can judge for yourself if you think its oddly worded - see below. Thanks Paul
UPON reading the application signed by the parties and the Applicant’s solicitor
AND UPON reading the Statements of Information pursuant to Rule 9.26 Family Procedure Rules 2010
AND UPON it being recorded:
a) The provisions of this Order are accepted in full and final satisfaction of all financial claims and claims in respect of any property whatsoever, including claims for pension sharing orders, which either may be entitled to bring against the other howsoever arising; and,
b) Neither of them has any legal or equitable interest in property or assets owned by the other save as provided for in this Order.
c) All assets other than mentioned below remain the ownership of the person now with.
d) The Former Matrimonial Home 50 Foxdale Drive will remain in the sole name of the Respondent who will be responsible for all outgoings and liabilities relating to the property.
e) The property 268 Spruce Road, Cumbernauld which is in the Applicant’s sole name subject to a charge in favour of Birmingham Midshires is to be retained by the Applicant who will be responsible for all outgoings and liabilities relating to the property.
f) The Respondent and the Applicant undertake to the court and agree that they will both be held equally responsible for the re-payment of monies owed to Acorna Associates Ltd. that was mispaid into their joint Lloyds TSB bank accounts by one or more clients between 2006 and 2009 totalling £11,956.12
g) The Respondent and the Applicant undertake to the court and agree that they will both be held responsible for the re-payment of monies borrowed from Acorna Associates Ltd. during 2009 against payment for 76 The Crofts, Silloth (“the Silloth Property) totalling £31,737.71.
h) The lump sum set out in paragraph two of the Order is £4,391.00 in respect of Black Horse Finance, Argos finance, and set-up costs for 268 Spruce Road owed by the Applicant to the Respondent.
i) The parties are deemed to have made all claims competent to them under Sections 23, 24, 24A and 24B-D of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.
BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED that SUBJECT TO DECREE ABSOLUTE:
1. The Silloth Property be sold forthwith and the following consequential provisions shall apply:
(a) The Silloth Property shall be sold for such price as agreed between the parties;
(b) The Applicant and the Respondent shall have the conduct of the sale;
(c) The Applicant and the Respondent have agreed that the conduct of the conveyancing shall be by a Conveyancer agreed and appointed by the Applicant and the Respondent;
(d) The Silloth Property shall be offered for sale by such agents as may be agreed between the parties;
(e) The proceeds of the sale of The Silloth Property shall be applied as follows: -
(i) In payment of the agent’s fees
(ii) In payment of the conveyancers’ fees;
(iii) In payment of the total debts due to Acorna Associates Ltd. being £43,693.83;
(iv) The remaining balance to be divided as follows:
A. 73% to the Applicant
B. B. 27% to the Respondent
2. Contemporaneously with the sale of The Silloth Property the Applicant do pay the Respondent a lump sum of £4,391.00
3. Upon compliance with paragraphs 1 & 2 hereof the remaining claims for financial provision, property adjustment and pension sharing orders of the Applicant & Respondent do stand dismissed and it is directed that neither the Applicant nor the Respondent shall be entitled to make any such further application in relation to their marriage under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s23(1)(a) or (b).
4. Neither the Applicant nor the Respondent shall be entitled on the death of the other to apply for an order under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975.
5. It is certified that for the purpose of the Community Legal services (Financial) Regulations 2000 and Access to Justice Act 1999 that the Applicant’s share of the proceeds of the sale of The Silloth Property has been ordered to be paid to enable the Applicant to purchase a home for herself and her dependent.
6. No order for Costs of and incidental to the making of this Order.
Hi - thank you for what you have said I'll have a think over this and see if I need to come back to you again. - Which item do you class as the extra payment on sale?