You won't be shocked to hear that as a divorce attorney one of the questions that I'm frequently asked is, 'when is my finest time to apply for divorce in order to get the greatest settlement?'.

The prize they want is their husband (or better half's) pension and I provide a very simple answer: the longer the marriage - the larger the claim.

Take Trudy whose second marriage was to Eric, a wealthy residential or commercial property developer who had a couple of residential or commercial properties, ISAs and investments. To Trudy, the real reward was Eric's pension which deserved more than ₤ 1 million.

The marital relationship concerned an end after five years, but when Trudy tried 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 calculated in her mind that she would be granted, she was wrong.

Eric could, in truth, ring fence all the pension that he had actually built up prior to the marriage. This meant that Trudy could just claim a tiny proportion that had actually accumulated throughout their short time together.

The judge felt that the excessiveness of Trudy's claim was too expensive which the bulk of the wealth in the marital relationship had originated from Eric and this was shown in the settlement that Trudy got.

So while she got a capitalised settlement to reflect the lifestyle that they had enjoyed together, it was nowhere near her expectations. The ethical of this story? A brief marital relationship equals less possessions granted.

It couldn't have actually been more different for Gloria, who was married to Frank for more than 30 years. Frank confessed to having affairs with females who he described as 'the hired help', believing it did not actually count as extramarital relations. It did to Gloria. As the pensions accumulated throughout their three years relationship, Gloria had the ability to declare half of it and was given equality of all the pensions.

Vanessa Lloyd Platt, a leading divorce lawyer, says the longer the marital relationship, the bigger the divorce claim

Frank might not ring fence one penny of it. And thanks to the length of the marriage, Gloria received what is called a 'Joint Lives Order' for upkeep. In other words, this implies Gloria would be offered upkeep for life, although this is rare today as many upkeep payments are for a set term only.

It was not assisted by the truth that Frank had actually not been upcoming over the real extent of his cost savings and had at the last moment attempted to move funds offshore. He was provided a punitive award and Gloria benefited from a number of thousands more on her side of the divorce equation. The moral here is that dishonesty does not pay - specifically in a divorce court.

So that's short and long marriages - what about a longer than typical 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 accumulated before or indeed, for a period, after separation.

It is constantly vital that a pensions professional evaluate the worth of a pension so the correct figure can be computed.

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

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

Wives in particular can bring out a lower deal when they select this alternative. The moral here is that you may feel young and prepared to start afresh, but do not be too fast to trade away your future pension.

Vanessa states 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 accumulated before or, for a duration, after separation

Another concern I'm often asked is whether a mediator will take into account all of the couple's possessions to increase a settlement.

A lot of individuals seem to believe that arbitrators will go easy on the parties - and spouses in specific - may get away with more by utilizing a conciliator, than if the matter is before the court.

This is a fallacy, as Neil discovered. The company director thought that mediation would indicate that he might put pressure on Judy to settle. It had been a long marriage covering twenty-eight years and he believed that Judy was not the brightest. He felt he might bluff his way through and hoodwink the mediator.

What Neil had actually not reckoned upon was the perseverance and cleverness of the arbitrator who insisted that all information be produced for the meetings. The arbitrator might see that Neil was being obstructive in addressing queries about monetary deals and motion of money in between subsidiary companies.

Little had Neil suspected that the conciliator had actually been a forensic investigator for HMRC, before becoming a matrimonial mediator. After many sessions the arbitrator suggested a settlement figure which Neil was outraged by and insisted they go to court. Unfortunately for Neil - the precise very same settlement figure was reached in court. It deserves bearing in mind that mediation can be a better way of resolving matters but is never ever a soft option.

Mediators will help the couple and advise actuaries to work out pension departments whatever the length of the marital relationship. The courts are now motivating the celebrations to consider alternatives to court proceedings more than ever. Arbitration is also being encouraged. All these choices are readily available simply put, medium and long marriages.

This is the factor EVERYONE is divorcing ... and why your marital relationship is at danger without you realizing

So no matter the length of your marital relationship, I advise all my customers not to have unrealistic expectations of what the final figure should be. It's crucial to understand 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 actually had a monetary impact, the conduct or behaviour will be overlooked.

Let me present you now to Henry, who thought that he was being especially smart when he moved his shares in the household business to his bro, cashed in the capital from his pension and offered it to a pal and bought himself a Lamborghini.

This was since Claudia, his spouse of twelve years had actually started divorce procedures. At the end of the litigation, the court discovered that he was deliberately trying to lower the assets available to Claudia and added back all the value of the pension, the cost of the Lamborghini and the shares to his side of the formula and then divided all of it in half. Henry's actions were so contrived that his attempts to drain pipes the properties totally backfired on him. Oh and Henry had to offer the Lamborghini.

The ethical of the story when it comes to how to maximise your settlement? Don't try to be too clever, play fair and truthfully, or risk the very opposite of what you hoped 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 solving matters.

* All names have been changed to secure customer identity.