“We Knew Something Didn’t Add Up” – A Real Divorce Consultation on Missing Information, Hidden Assets, and Getting to the Truth
When going through a divorce, one of the most critical — and often misunderstood — stages is financial disclosure.
Many clients come to us not because they are looking for conflict, but because something doesn’t feel right.
There’s a sense that the numbers don’t quite add up. That something is missing. That decisions are being made without the full picture.
This real consultation highlights exactly that situation — where a client carefully reviewed their spouse’s financial disclosure and identified a series of inconsistencies that required closer legal scrutiny.
More importantly, it demonstrates how a strategic, methodical approach can turn uncertainty into clarity — and ultimately protect your financial position.
Why Financial Disclosure Matters More Than You Think
In financial remedy proceedings, disclosure is the foundation of everything.
Before any settlement discussions can begin, both parties are under a legal duty to provide full and frank disclosure of their financial circumstances.
This includes:
- All bank accounts (past and present)
- Income from all sources
- Property and assets
- Pensions
- Liabilities and outgoings
If that disclosure is incomplete — whether intentionally or not — any agreement reached could be fundamentally unfair.
In this case, the concern was not just about what had been disclosed, but what had not.
As we explained during the consultation:
- You cannot properly assess fairness without full visibility
- You cannot make informed decisions based on partial information
- And critically — you cannot negotiate effectively if the financial landscape is unclear
This is why, at NjP Solicitors, we approach disclosure with a forensic mindset. We are not simply reviewing documents — we are testing them.
The Red Flags: What Didn’t Add Up
When we reviewed the disclosure alongside the client, several issues emerged — each of which had the potential to materially impact the overall settlement.
1. Missing Pension Information
One of the most significant omissions was the absence of a Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV) for the pension.
From a legal perspective, this is not a minor oversight.
Pensions are often one of the largest assets within a marriage — particularly in long marriages.
Without a CETV:
- You cannot quantify the value of the pension
- You cannot assess whether a pension sharing order is appropriate
- You cannot compare pension provision between the parties
In practical terms, it means you are negotiating “blind” on a potentially substantial asset.
Our approach in situations like this is clear: No meaningful negotiation should take place until pension values are properly disclosed and, where necessary, expert advice is obtained.
2. Unexplained Income and Payments
The bank statements revealed multiple incoming payments that had not been clearly explained or categorised.
These included:
- Additional income streams not referenced in the Form E
- Irregular or one-off payments of significant value
- Periods where there appeared to be no income at all — raising questions about financial support during that time
From a legal standpoint, this raises two key issues: Income transparency and earning capacity.
If income is understated or unclear:
- Maintenance calculations may be inaccurate
- True financial resources may be hidden
- The court’s assessment of fairness may be distorted
Equally, unexplained payments can sometimes indicate:
- Undisclosed work or income streams
- Capital being introduced or moved
- Financial arrangements that have not been fully disclosed
This is why we do not simply accept figures at face value — we interrogate them.
3. Changes in Assets Before Disclosure
It appeared that a vehicle had been replaced — moving from a financed arrangement to a cash purchase.
This was not clearly explained or supported by the documentation.
This raises a concept we regularly deal with in financial remedy cases: Dissipation of assets
This refers to situations where one party reduces the available financial pot — whether deliberately or carelessly — before settlement.
Some key questions we asked:
- Where did the funds for the purchase come from?
- Were those funds matrimonial assets?
- Has the overall asset pool been reduced as a result?
Even relatively modest transactions can become significant when viewed in context.
4. Potential Undisclosed Accounts or Transfers
One of the most telling aspects of this case was the pattern of transactions between accounts.
We identified:
- Transfers that did not clearly reconcile with disclosed accounts
- Payments to and from individuals or entities not explained
- Inconsistencies that suggested there may be additional accounts or financial activity outside the disclosed documentation
This is where experience matters. Because while a single unexplained payment may be innocent — a pattern of them rarely is.
Our role is to:
- Cross-reference transactions across accounts
- Identify inconsistencies in financial flows
- Ask targeted, proportionate questions that require clear answers
As we explained in the consultation: You may not immediately see the full picture — but financial behaviour leaves a trail.
5. Living Arrangements Not Properly Disclosed
The disclosure stated that the other party was not living with anyone else.
However, this may not have been accurate.
While this may not always directly affect the division of assets, it can be relevant in several ways:
- It may impact outgoings and financial needs
- It may indicate financial support from a third party
- It raises questions about the overall reliability of the disclosure
Credibility matters in financial proceedings. If one aspect of disclosure is inaccurate, it naturally leads to closer scrutiny of the rest.
Our Advice: Focus on What Actually Moves the Case Forward
A key part of our role is not just identifying issues — but helping clients focus their energy in the right place.
In this consultation, there were understandable emotional reactions to certain statements within the disclosure.
For example, comments about who “worked more” during the marriage.
While important on a personal level, these points are unlikely to affect the legal outcome.
The law in England and Wales is clear: Financial contributions and non-financial contributions (such as raising children) are treated equally.
So instead of engaging in arguments that do not move the case forward, our advice was to focus on:
- Financial accuracy
- Missing information
- Asset values
- Income clarity
Because these are the factors that genuinely shape a fair settlement.
Outcome of the Consultation: From Uncertainty to a Clear Plan
By the end of the consultation, the client moved from uncertainty to having a clear, structured plan.
We identified the key gaps in the disclosure — including missing pension information, unexplained income, and inconsistencies — and set out exactly how these would be addressed.
Just as importantly, the client left with clarity on what actually matters legally, what steps come next, and how the process would be handled in a controlled and strategic way.
Key Takeaway
One of the most important lessons from this consultation is that unfair outcomes are rarely caused by one obvious issue.
More often, they arise from a series of smaller gaps — a £3,000 account here, a missing valuation there, an unexplained payment elsewhere — that, when viewed together, distort the overall financial picture and can seriously affect the fairness of a settlement.
This is why a detailed, methodical approach to disclosure is essential to achieving a fair outcome.
Need Clarity on Your Own Situation?
If you are reviewing financial disclosure and something doesn’t feel right, it is worth exploring that further.
You do not need to have all the answers before seeking advice — but getting clarity early can significantly strengthen your position.
At NjP Solicitors, we help you understand exactly where you stand, identify what may be missing, and guide you towards a fair and informed resolution.