You will not be amazed to hear that as a divorce lawyer among the concerns that I'm frequently asked is, 'when is my best time to file for divorce in order to get the greatest settlement?'.

The prize they have in mind is their hubby (or other half's) pension and I provide an extremely easy answer: the longer the marital relationship - the bigger the claim.

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

The marriage concerned an end after five years, but when Trudy tried to claim against Eric's pension she was devastated to be informed by her attorney that rather of the half-share that she had actually determined in her mind that she would be awarded, she was incorrect.

Eric could, in reality, ring fence all the pension that he had developed up prior to the marriage. This indicated that Trudy could just lay claim to a small proportion that had accrued throughout their brief time together.

The judge felt that the excessiveness of Trudy's claim was expensive and that most of the wealth in the marital relationship had actually come from Eric and this was shown in the settlement that Trudy got.

So while she got a capitalised settlement to reflect the way of life that they had delighted in together, it was nowhere near her expectations. The moral of this story? A brief marital relationship equals less assets awarded.

It couldn't have been more different for Gloria, who was wed to Frank for more than thirty years. Frank confessed to having affairs with ladies who he referred to as 'the worked with help', thinking it did not really count as infidelity. It did to Gloria. As the pensions accumulated during their 3 years relationship, Gloria was able to claim half of it and was approved equality of all the pensions.

Vanessa Lloyd Platt, a top divorce legal representative, states the longer the marital relationship, the larger the divorce claim

Frank could not ring fence one cent of it. And thanks to the length of the marriage, Gloria received what is called a 'Joint Lives Order' for upkeep. Simply put, this means Gloria would be given upkeep for life, although this is rare today as most upkeep payments are for a set term just.

It was not assisted by the reality that Frank had actually not been forthcoming over the true level of his cost savings and had at the last minute tried to transfer funds offshore. He was given a punitive award and Gloria benefited from several thousands more on her side of the divorce formula. 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 marriage (12 years) for say 15 years?

Here the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has been accumulated before or indeed, for a period, after separation.

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

Which is where Gemma came unstuck. She had a 16-year marriage to City broker Paul. His pension encountered hundreds of countless pounds. Gemma was none too bothered by the pension however, like many other halves I see, she desired the security of remaining in the home that she loved. So instead of claiming any of Paul's pension she traded it off versus the value of your home.

This is called a 'set-off', but as an attorney I would constantly suggest to any customer that an actuary report is acquired first and all options are thought about.

Wives in particular can bring out a lower deal when they choose this option. The moral here is that you may feel young and all set to start afresh, however do not be too quick to trade away your future pension.

Vanessa says 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 typically asked is whether a mediator will consider all of the couple's properties to maximise a settlement.

Many people seem to think that mediators will go simple on the parties - and spouses in particular - may get away with more by utilizing an arbitrator, than if the matter is before the court.

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

What Neil had actually not reckoned upon was the persistence and cleverness of the arbitrator who firmly insisted that all info be produced for the conferences. The arbitrator could see that Neil was being obstructive in addressing queries about monetary transactions and motion of money in between subsidiary companies.

Little had actually Neil presumed that the conciliator had been a forensic private investigator for HMRC, before ending up being a matrimonial conciliator. After lots of sessions the conciliator suggested a settlement figure which Neil was outraged by and insisted they litigate. Unfortunately for Neil - the exact very same settlement figure was reached in court. It's worth bearing in mind that mediation can be a far better way of fixing matters but is never ever a soft alternative.

Mediators will help the couple and instruct actuaries to work out pension divisions whatever the length of the marriage. The courts are now encouraging the celebrations to consider alternatives to court procedures especially. Arbitration is also being encouraged. All these alternatives are readily available in brief, medium and long marriages.

This is the factor EVERYONE is divorcing ... and why your marital relationship is at threat without you understanding

So no matter the length of your marital relationship, I advise all my clients not to have unrealistic expectations of what the last figure ought to be. It's essential to realise 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 had a monetary impact, the conduct or behaviour will be disregarded.

Let me present you now to Henry, who thought that he was being especially clever when he moved his shares in the household company to his bro, moneyed in the capital from his pension and offered it to a good friend and purchased himself a Lamborghini.

This was due to the fact that Claudia, his better half of twelve years had actually started divorce procedures. At the end of the litigation, the court discovered that he was intentionally trying to decrease the assets offered to Claudia and added back all the value of the pension, the cost of the Lamborghini and the shares to his side of the equation and then divided all of it in half. Henry's actions were so contrived that his efforts to drain pipes the properties absolutely backfired on him. Oh and Henry needed to offer the Lamborghini.

The ethical of the story when it pertains to how to maximise your settlement? Don't attempt to be too clever, play fair and honestly, or risk the really opposite of what you wished to achieve. Divorce can be a minefield, and it does not have to explode for either of you if you both take reasonable steps towards solving matters.

* All names have actually been changed to safeguard customer identity.