You won't be amazed to hear that as a divorce legal representative one of the questions that I'm often asked is, 'when is my best time to apply for divorce in order to get the highest settlement?'.

The prize they want is their partner (or spouse's) pension and I give them an extremely easy answer: the longer the marital relationship - the bigger the claim.

Take Trudy whose 2nd marital relationship was to Eric, a rich residential or commercial property developer who had a few residential or commercial properties, ISAs and financial investments. To Trudy, the real reward was Eric's pension which was worth more than ₤ 1 million.

The marital relationship pertained to an end after five years, however when Trudy attempted to claim versus Eric's pension she was devastated to be informed by her lawyer that rather of the half-share that she had computed in her mind that she would be granted, she was wrong.

Eric could, in truth, ring fence all the pension that he had actually developed prior to the marriage. This indicated that Trudy could only lay claim to a tiny proportion that had actually accrued throughout their short time together.

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

So while she got a capitalised settlement to show the way of life that they had actually taken pleasure in together, it was no place near her expectations. The moral of this story? A brief marital relationship equals less properties awarded.

It couldn't have actually been more various for Gloria, who was wed to Frank for more than 30 years. Frank admitted to having affairs with women who he described as 'the worked with assistance', believing it did not actually count as extramarital relations. It did to Gloria. As the pensions accumulated throughout their three decade relationship, Gloria was able to claim half of it and was approved equality of all the pensions.

Vanessa Lloyd Platt, a top divorce lawyer, says the longer the marriage, the bigger the divorce claim

Frank could 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. Simply put, this implies Gloria would be offered maintenance for life, although this is uncommon today as many upkeep payments are for a set term only.

It was not assisted by the fact that Frank had actually not been upcoming over the true level of his cost savings and had at the last moment tried to transfer funds offshore. He was provided a punitive award and Gloria took advantage of a number of thousands more on her side of the divorce formula. The ethical here is that dishonesty does not pay - specifically in a divorce court.

So that's brief and long marriages - what about a longer than average length of marital relationship (12 years) for say 15 years?

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

It is always crucial that a pensions expert evaluate the value of a pension so the correct figure can be determined.

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

This is called a 'set-off', but as a legal representative I would always recommend to any customer that an actuary report is gotten very first and all alternatives are thought about.

Wives in specific can come out with a lower offer when they select this option. The ethical here is that you may feel young and all set to begin afresh, however do not be too fast to trade away your future pension.

Vanessa says that in a marriage longer than the average of 12 years, the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has been accrued before or, for a duration, after separation

Another concern I'm typically asked is whether a conciliator will take into consideration all of the couple's properties to increase a settlement.

Numerous people appear to believe that conciliators will go simple on the parties - and partners in specific - might get away with more by using a mediator, than if the matter is before the court.

This is a fallacy, as Neil found. The company director thought that mediation would indicate that he could put pressure on Judy to settle. It had been a long marital relationship spanning twenty-eight years and he thought that Judy was not the brightest. He felt he might bluff his method through and bamboozle the mediator.

What Neil had actually not reckoned upon was the persistence and cleverness of the mediator who insisted that all information be produced for the meetings. The conciliator might see that Neil was being obstructive in responding to queries about financial deals and movement of money between subsidiary companies.

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

Mediators will assist the couple and advise actuaries to work out pension divisions whatever the length of the marriage. The courts are now encouraging the parties to consider alternatives to court proceedings more than ever. Arbitration is likewise being encouraged. All these choices are readily available in other words, medium and long marriages.

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

So no matter the length of your marriage, I advise all my customers not to have impractical expectations of what the final figure must be. It's crucial to understand that you can not penalize your quickly to be ex-partner in the courtroom. Unless you can demonstrate that the behaviour of your spouse has actually had a financial effect, the conduct or behaviour will be neglected.

Let me present you now to Henry, who thought that he was being especially creative when he moved his shares in the family business to his sibling, cashed in the capital from his pension and provided it to a good friend and bought himself a Lamborghini.

This was because Claudia, his partner of twelve years had actually started divorce proceedings. At the end of the litigation, the court discovered that he was intentionally trying to decrease the properties available to Claudia and added back all the worth of the pension, the expense of the Lamborghini and the shares to his side of the equation and after that divided all of it in half. Henry's actions were so contrived that his attempts to drain the properties totally backfired on him. Oh and Henry needed to offer the Lamborghini.

The moral 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 really opposite of what you wished to accomplish. Divorce can be a minefield, and it does not need to explode for either of you if you both take practical actions towards resolving matters.

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