Why getting divorced will damage your retirement income

Wedding decorationThe most recent Government statistics show that in 2011 there were 129,763 divorces compared with 132,338 in the previous year. This is well below the 180,493 divorces in 1993, which was the highest number ever recorded.

But that really is where the good news ends. As anyone who has been through a divorce will know, it is emotionally draining. Unfortunately it is also financially draining and the effects linger on into retirement.
Divorcing your pension income
The sharing of assets and possessions in the wake of a marriage breakdown is a complex process. From investments and property through to pets, divorce forces both parties to assess the potential monetary and emotional value of everything they possess and how best to divide these things fairly.

Assets are much easier to deal with when they are tangible or immediate; the house you live in, the money in your savings account, the car parked on the drive. We can see and understand the impact that splitting or sharing these assets will have on our financial situation.

But it is not that straightforward with a pension fund.

Every year Prudential conducts its 'Class of' study, which looks at the financial plans and expectations of people planning to retire in that year. For 2013, for the first time we analysed the effect of divorce on expected retirement income and the results highlighted a significant negative impact.

Til death us do part...
Divorce reduces the average expected retirement income by around £2,600, or as much as 16%, a year. At present, 2013's retirees who have never been divorced expect an annual income of £16,400, but this figure falls to £13,800 for those who have experienced a marriage breakdown.

Retirement incomes are already being squeezed; in fact, they are currently at a six-year low with around 18% of those retiring this year doing so below the Joseph Rowntree Foundation's minimum income standard for a single pensioner. As a result, this reduction in income is likely to make a big difference.

Women's retirement incomes are particularly vulnerable in the aftermath of a divorce - often women will have taken time out of the workplace and put their pension contributions on hold, or perhaps never even started a pension. As a result, many will have expected to live on their partner's pension.

It is also not uncommon for the female to have had little or no say in the financial decisions that have been made over the years.
Why divorce damages your retirement income
So why is it that divorce reduces retirement incomes?

Firstly, there are the financial implications of dealing with pension savings. The pension fund can be the biggest asset in a divorce and includes any money accrued through workplace pension schemes and personal pensions. There are three ways in which pensions can be dealt with on divorce:

Pension sharing - provides a clean break as the ex-spouse's pension fund is separated from the member's fund.

Attachment orders - where the ex-spouse is entitled to a part of the member's pension fund, but does not provide a clean break as the ex-spouse doesn't have a separate fund of their own.

Offsetting - where the value of the pension is offset against other assets. For example, one party receives the pension fund and the other receives the house.

A second contributing factor is the stage at which divorce tends to happen. Divorce is most common among couples aged 40 to 44, the time of their lives when they would expect their earnings and their ability to save for retirement to peak.

Finally, there are many practical costs involved in divorce, including those associated with finding new homes and legal advice. It's easy to see how these costs start to mount up and how continuing to contribute to pension savings may not seem as important.

Seven retirement nightmares
See Gallery
Why getting divorced will damage your retirement income
Figures from charity Age UK show that 29% of those over 60 feel uncertain or negative about their current financial situation - with millions facing poverty and hardship. Even though saving for retirement is not much fun, the message is therefore that having to rely on dwindling state benefits in retirement is even less so. To avoid ending up in this situation, adviser Hargreaves Lansdown recommends saving a proportion of your salary equal to half your age at the time of starting a pension. In other words, if you are 30 when you start a pension, you should put in 15% throughout your working life. If you start at 24, saving 12% of your salary a year should produce a similar return.
Many older couples rely on the pension income of one person - often the man. Should that person die first, the other person can therefore be left in a difficult position financially.
One way to prevent financial hardship for the surviving person is to take out a joint life annuity that will continue to pay out up to 67% of the original payments to the surviving partner should one of them die.

The disadvantage of this approach, however, is that the rate you receive will be lower. Again, the Pensions Advisory Service on 0845 601 2923 is a useful first port of call if you are unsure what to do.

Around 427,000 households in the over-70 age groups are either three months behind with a debt repayment or subject to some form of debt action such as insolvency, according to the Consumer Credit Counselling Service (CCCS).

Its figures also show that those aged 60 or older who came to the CCCS for help last year owed an average of £22,330. Whether you are retired or not, the best way to tackle debt problems is head on.

Free counselling services from the likes of CCCS and Citizens Advice can help with budgeting and dealing with creditors.

Importantly, they can also conduct a welfare benefits check to make sure you are receiving the pension credit, housing and council tax benefits, attendance and disability living allowances you are entitled to.


The average UK pensioner household faces a £111,400 tax bill in retirement as increasing longevity means pensioners are living on average up to 19 years past the age of 65, according to figures from MetLife. And every year in retirement adds an extra £5,864 in direct and indirect taxes based on current tax rates to the costs for the average pensioner household. You can be forced to go bankrupt if you fail to pay your taxes, so it is vital to factor these costs into your retirement planning.It is also important to check that you are receiving all the benefits and tax breaks you are entitled to if you want to make the most of your retirement cash.

The cost of a room in a care home in many parts of the country is now over £30,000 a year, according to figures from Prestige Nursing and Care. So even if the prime minister announces a cap on care costs - last year the economist Andrew Dilnot called for a new system of funding which would mean that no one would pay more than £35,000 for lifetime care - families will still face huge accommodation costs. Ways to cut this cost include opting for home care rather than a care home. Jonathan Bruce, managing director of Prestige Nursing and Care, said: "For older people who may need care in the shorter term, home care is an option which allows people to maintain their independence for longer while living in their own home and should be included in the cap." However, the only other answer is to save more while you can.
Older Britons are often targeted by unscrupulous criminals - especially if they have a bit of money put away. For example, many over 50s were victims of the so-called courier scam that tricked into keying their pin numbers into their phones and handing their cards to "couriers" who visited their homes. It parted consumers from £1.5 million in under two years. Detective Chief Inspector Paul Barnard, head of the bank sponsored dedicated cheque and plastic crime unit (DCPCU), said: "Many of us feel confident that we can spot fraudsters, but this type of crime can be sophisticated and could happen to anyone." The same is true of boiler room scams that target wealthier Britons with money to invest, offering "once-in-a-lifetime" opportunities to snap up shares at bargain prices. Tactics to watch out for include cold calling, putting you under pressure to pay up or lose the opportunity for good, and claiming to have insider information that they are prepared to share with you.
Not just income that's affected
The financial implications of divorce also stretch beyond retirement income; in general those who have been divorced are more likely to retire with debts and are less likely to expect to leave an inheritance.

Divorce will never be easy, but in many cases much of the complexity and some of the cost could be avoided if both parties have a good understanding of their finances and the options that are available to them when it comes to dividing assets. Advice from specialists, including a retirement expert or a financial adviser is a great place to start, but free advice is also available from organisations such as The Pensions Advisory Service.

Pensions often get pushed to the back when dealing with other issues during a divorce. Prioritising is essential, but it's also vital that couples invest sufficient time into dealing with retirement savings, as this will be a major factor in the living standards they are able to enjoy in retirement.

Clare Moffat is pensions specialist at Prudential.

You are spending on the wrong card!

The vital lessons of celebrity divorce
See Gallery
Why getting divorced will damage your retirement income

Rupert and Anna Murdoch: $1.7billion (£901m)

Australian Murdoch and his former wife were married for 32 years and had three children together, before splitting in 1999. Around $1.7 billion of Murdoch's fortune went to Anna.

"The divorce rate is rising rapidly among the over-60s - up 58% in 2012 compared with 2011," explains Stowe. "According to reports at the time, Anna wanted her media tycoon husband to slow down – but like many people these days, Rupert didn't want to approach his sunset years sitting in an armchair. Over 60s want to enjoy themselves, making the most of what time they have left by doing what they love best."

Mel and Robyn Gibson: $425million (£273m)

Mel Gibson's 31-year marriage to Robyn felt apart when his mistress and soon-to-be second wife Oksana Grigorieva's pregnancy was made public. Robyn was entitled to half of his assets under California state law and the Lethal Weapon actor reportedly handed her half of his estimated $850 million fortune.

"Robyn's sizeable settlement included 50% of her movie star husband's pension rights," explains Stowe. "My male clients are often displeased to discover that financial negotiations extend to their pensions. They are also shocked to discover that, if the wife is younger than the husband, her claim to a share of the pension can potentially be greater than his because her life expectancy may be greater than his."

Roman and Irina Abramovich: $300 million (£193m)

Roman Abramovich reportedly finally agreed to divorce wife Irina when she could no longer put up with his roguish ways and he refused to give up his mistress. The £150 million payout could have been a lot more painful for the Chelsea FC owner - Irina sought 50% of his $12.1 billion fortune, which if successful would have been the largest divorce settlement of all time by a count of six.

"Most couples, whether or not they are in the public eye, prefer to avoid court and maintain their privacy," says Stowe. "Moreover court proceedings, which pit one party against the other in an adversarial environment, can be unpleasant and stressful. Although $300 million sounds like a lot, Irina Abramovich could have fought for a far greater share of the couple's fortune. By agreeing to settle for less, she was able to avoid an acrimonious court case – and all the public scrutiny that would have come with it."

Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren: $110million (£70m)

Shamed by the sex scandal that wrecked their marriage, Swedish Nordgren got a reported $110 million settlement from her cheating ex, golf star Tiger Woods. When Nordegren finally ended nine months of silence over her heartbreak in August 2010, she said she "felt stupid" that Woods cheated on her with a parade of party girls and porn stars, and noted: "Money can't buy happiness. Or put my family back together."

"When the rich and famous divorce, the public want details: the juicier, the better," says Stowe. "However it is easy to get carried away by the sums and forget that, even for the most privileged among us, money is no balm for heartbreak."

Steven Spielberg and Amy Irving: $100million (£60m)

The couple, who first met when Irving tried out for the lead role in 1977's Close Encounters of the Third Kind, went onto marry in 1985. According to Celebritynetworth.com, when they divorced in 1989, Irving claimed their prenup was invalid because it was written on a napkin without any lawyers present. She successfully won a $100 million settlement.

"Don't assume that a prenuptial agreement isn't worth the paper it is written on: in England and Wales, pre-nups will certainly be considered by the court but are not yet automatically binding, " explains Stowe. "However a prenup is more likely to be upheld if it is consensual and voluntary, not signed in haste, not clearly out of date (providing for future children, for example), preferably including a review after a period of time, and properly drafted with full disclosure."

Madonna and Guy Ritchie: $76m-$92million (£48m-£59m)

When Madonna divorced director Guy Ritchie in 2008 after eight years of marriage, Ritchie was said to have walked away with between $76 to $92 million - almost a fifth of the singer's estimated $500 million net worth, plus a country house and a London pub.

"The settlement rumoured to have been received by Ritchie is thought to have been the largest divorce settlement ever paid to a man, showing that in 2013, it isn't always the wives who get the divorce settlements," explains Stowe. "In recent years I have encountered a number of successful female breadwinners who were bewildered to discover what they faced to lose if they divorced."

Sir Paul McCartney's and Heather Mills: estimated at $48.6million (£28million)

Following their divorce in 2006 Heather Mills was awarded £24.3m in the settlement decided by a court judge. According to the BBC, McCartney paid his estranged wife a £16.5m lump sum, including £2.5m to buy a London property, in addition to £7.8m assets and £35,000 a year for their daughter Beatrice. The settlement was blow for Mills who had sought some £125m of the former Beatle's £400m fortune.

"The demolition of family law legal aid, which provided help with legal costs, has led to a boom in people representing themselves in court," explains Stowe. "Heather Mills represented herself in the High Court – and discovered for herself the disadvantages of doing so.

"In the courtroom, there are no prisoners taken. You may think you are saving money by representing yourself or opting for a cheap DIY divorce online – but such decisions can turn out to be expensive in the long run if you settle for less than you are worth. "

Donald Trump and Ivana Trump; $25 million (£16m)

The Trumps 15-year marriage came to an end in 1992, with Ivana taking $25million in an out-of-court settlement, plus several properties. The couple's old Mercedes proved a major sticking point, which Ivana – who claimed Donald had given it to her as a gift – eventually won.

"I have often observed that clients who are knowledgeable and well-prepared, with a realistic outlook, are better equipped to cope with proceedings and move on with their lives afterwards," explains Stowe. "Ivana Trump has a refreshing attitude and since divorcing has gone on to enjoy considerable success of her own as a real estate developer and as the founder of Ivana Haute Couture, which sells her signature products, fragrances and accessories."

Lionel Richie and Diane Richie; estimated at $20 million (£12m)

Richie married Diane in 1995 and the couple had two children, before their marriage broke down in 2004. The Richie's became tabloid favourites, reports Forbes magazine, as Diane detailed their lavish lifestyle in her alimony petition. Among her claims: a monthly clothing allowance of $15,000; $50,000 a month for manicures, massages and other personal services; and a plastic surgery budget of $20,000 a year.

"Richie rubbished Diane's demand as "a lawyer giving some advice that's completely absurd", and insisted that despite the headlines, the couple still had a "great time" together," explains Stowe. "Perhaps he was right: the couple have remained on good terms and were spotted shoe-shopping together in 2011. It is difficult for a divorcing couple to stay friends, irrespective of the settlement size, but it can be done."

Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall; estimated between $15 and $25 million (£9.6m-£16m)

After nine years of marriage, Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall divorced with a $25 million settlement. According to Celebritynetworth.com, Jagger attempted to get out of any payment by claiming they had never really been married because their Balinese Hindu wedding ceremony was not legally binding.

"Their ceremony was invalid because under Balinese law, only Muslim marriages can be validly conducted," explains Stowe. "When a couple's marriage is not valid according to English law, it is still possible for one spouse to obtain a financial settlement – but only if the Petitioner spouse thought he or she had actually gone through a lawful marriage ceremony and acted as married thereafter. If you plan to marry overseas, however, do avoid Jerry Hall's plight by double-checking the law before you leave."


More stories
Read Full Story