FEAR OF FINANCE
Not that this column would stand in the way of fair treatment anyway. The Equal Opportunities Commission may have passed a significant milestone last year when the number of complaints from men exceeded those from women for the first time ever, but raw figures suggest that women still, on average, earn less than men and they certainly have much poorer pension expectations than men.
According to Flemings, 52 per cent of the adult female population is likely to be hard-up in retirement, compared with 46 per cent of men, and it will take a working lifetime after equality of earnings has been established for that inbuilt bias to be eroded.
Pensions, of course, are a peculiar asset, and are often regarded as deferred pay. Once the principle was established, however, that the tangible assets built up during a marriage should be shared equally on divorce, it has become increasingly difficult to argue that intangible assets like pensions should be treated any differently to tangible assets like houses, furniture and investments.
The main reasons that they have not been shared in the past are purely practical. It is difficult to put a precise value on a pension while the owner is still working because in the past most pensions have been based on a multiple of the owner's final salary and length of service. Personal pension pots are easier to quantify or at least to guesstimate by using the standard criteria used in marketing them.
But converting an accepted principle into sound practice is not going to be easy. It looks as if the law will recognise both for pensions to be shared when they actually become due for payment - pension earmarking - and for the prospective pension funds to be capitalised and split into two at the time of divorce - pension splitting. The former may favour the wealthier party and the choice of method could itself become a contentious issue. There is also a general fear that whatever the basis of division the sum of the two halves will be less than the whole and part will be swallowed up in administrative costs.
All current proposals seem to agree that the point of divorce is the most suitable point for the partition of pension assets. But this ignores the fact that under future legislation there will always be a gap of 18 months between the point at which a marriage actually breaks down (and the parties petition for divorce) and the point of divorce itself.
In the past, the time interval between the point of break-down and the point of divorce may also have been much longer. Some couples may have separated, reached a private financial agreement and gone their separate ways years before they even contemplate divorce. There is a real risk that if pension assets are put on the table to be split, many amicable agreements will be reopened acrimoniously. There is a good case, therefore, for arguing that assets and pensions should be split at the point of separation rather than the point of divorce.
The best - and worst - investments in 2013
The death of the pension: how equity release can fund your retirement
How to start your own internet business
Julian Knight: We are seeing the dying days of the golden pension
Accident claims are shaken up: Insurers expect premiums to be held down by a new ruling. Ian Gregory reports
- 1 Pope Francis: Being an atheist is alright as long as you do good
- 2 What, let gays get married? We must be bonkers
- 3 'Something passed underneath us, quite close': Airbus A320 has close encounter with UFO
- 4 Lord of the Sings: Sir Christopher Lee, 91, to release heavy metal album
- 5 Two bailed after arrest over Woolwich attack Twitter comments
BMF is the UK’s biggest and best loved outdoor fitness classes
Find out what The Independent's resident travel expert has to say about one of the most beautiful small cities in the world
Nook is donating eReaders to volunteers at high-need schools and participating in exclusive events throughout the campaign.
Get the latest on The Evening Standard's campaign to get London's children reading.
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Day In a Page
A modern home of almost 1,000sq ft is close to Stoke Newington's high street. £499,950
A five-bedroom bungalow in Hoveton with riverside garden and mooring dock, £550,000
A refurbished one-bedroom flat with south-facing reception and high ceilings. £579,950
A four-bedroom Grade II-listed house in Nazeing with large gardens. £550,000
A modern four-bedroom house in a converted stable within walking distance to Peckham Rye. £695,000
Three-bedroom house in a quiet residential area within close distance to Battersea Park. £450,000
A three-bedroom cottage within commuting distance of London, Norwich and Cambridge. £250,000
A two-bedroom cottage with a sun room and gardens in South Chard. £350,000.
A three-bedroom semi-detached house with original features including fireplaces and wooden flooring. £399,950
A modern two-bedroom flat split across two floors and close to several public transport links. £595,000
A one-bedroom flat with an open-plan reception/kitchen and private balcony. £315,000.
A bright two-bedroom garden flat between South Acton and Chiswick Park. £499,950.
A listed four-bedroom farmhouse with stables, set in four acres. £500,000.
A three-storey family home with four bedrooms and an extended kitchen/diner. £995,000.
A three-bedroom Hamstone cottage in the rolling Somerset countryside. £430,000.
A luxury one-bedroom apartment on the first floor of a converted Victorian house. £425,000.