VoIP usage in general, and especially Business VoIP, has increased significantly in recent years. VoIP stands for Voice over Internet Protocol and is the technology used for voice communication over a broadband internet connection.
When VoIP first came onto the market its usage consisted of people talking through their computers to one another. The quality was poor and was widely thought of as not being appropriate for business use. Not only that, the service was also inadequate with no extras on top of simply making and receiving calls. All this meant that businesses rarely chose VoIP and it was mostly used by home users looking for a cheap way to speak to family and friends.
This situation is much changed now though. More recently more advanced ways of using VoIP have materialised, with VoIP adapters and VoIP phones coming onto the market. VoIP adapters allow users to use their existing phones to speak through their computers, while VoIP phones are a telephone like piece of equipment that use the internet connection (as all VoIP does) to communicate. The user experience is identical to that of a telephone user. These are much more appropriate to businesses. The quality of VoIP has been massively improved as well. This makes calls with quality VoIP providers indistinguishable from those made using a telephone.
There are many features now available through VoIP providers that make the technology more viable for businesses. The most significant are voicemail and call forwarding. Voicemail is not possible with computer to computer VoIP, but is necessary for many businesses. Call forwarding means many calls can be made simultaneously within a business and calls can be passed from one member of staff to another. Other services now available include caller ID, call waiting and call blocking. All these mean that the service can be more efficient and more businesses feel that VoIP meets their requirements.
The future of VoIP looks good, with quality and services likely to see further improvements. More and more providers are coming onto the market, making it a more competitive area and improving the quality. It has been predicted by In-Stat that 79% of American businesses will be using VoIP by 2013. This estimation shows how much business VoIP has increased in recent years and the continued advancement of the technology. It is very possible that VoIP will soon overtake regular telephones, both for personal and business use. Turning to business VoIP no longer has a negative impact on businesses. The main positive is that significant savings can be made compared with traditional telephones. With many VoIP providers the quality and service is now on a par with telephone providers and it is cheaper, so it is easy to see why so many businesses are switching to VoIP.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
An Introduction to Algorithmic Trading
Put simply, algorithmic trading systems are computer programs that are used to predict the financial markets to help traders. These systems use mathematical calculations to work out when trading conditions are favourable and then trade on behalf of traders. They follow the markets and monitor trends based on a number of variables, including timing, price, and quantity. They allow financial institutions to trade much more than they would otherwise be able to do. Humans are unable to act on these trends as quick as algorithmic trading systems, and they can also carry on while their users are doing other things.
There are a wide array of algorithmic trading systems, each programmed to suit particular trading markets. They can, amongst other things, be used for the currency markets, hedge funds, mutual funds and pension funds.
More often than not algorithmic trading systems, also known as automated trading technology, are used for short term trades. They will buy and sell within a short period, therefore taking advantage of small opportunities. Due to this, huge profits with one trade are rare as there isn’t the time for such dramatic changes. The reason for this is that most systems are designed to sell before conditions are likely to change in a negative way, whereas long term trades tend to have more ups and downs before reaping the rewards.
There are many advantages to algorithmic trading systems. As they are run by computers they eliminate human error, although humans are sometimes likely to take risks seeing the potential in the future, which won’t happen with algorithmic trading systems. The risk of a major mistake is significantly reduced as they are risk adverse. Although they can’t be 100% accurate, they are considered less risky than manual trading. As these systems are able to operate 24/7 and decisions can be made immediately (within seconds) they boost efficiency. As you don’t need to be a trading expert to be able to use them, it has allowed many more people to take advantage of trading.
Some form of computerised trading system has been around since the 1930’s. They have continually developed ever since, but their popularity has really exploded in the last decade. As they have become more advanced, their accuracy has also increased so mistakes are less common. Investors now feel that they can really trust algorithmic trading systems. Around 40% of trades are made using some type of algorithmic trading technology and this is likely to increase. Many predict that within a few years they will dominate certain trading industries. They are unlikely to completely replace humans but there is no doubt that they are here to stay. As long as they keep improving they will continue to grow in popularity.
Andrew Marshall (c)
There are a wide array of algorithmic trading systems, each programmed to suit particular trading markets. They can, amongst other things, be used for the currency markets, hedge funds, mutual funds and pension funds.
More often than not algorithmic trading systems, also known as automated trading technology, are used for short term trades. They will buy and sell within a short period, therefore taking advantage of small opportunities. Due to this, huge profits with one trade are rare as there isn’t the time for such dramatic changes. The reason for this is that most systems are designed to sell before conditions are likely to change in a negative way, whereas long term trades tend to have more ups and downs before reaping the rewards.
There are many advantages to algorithmic trading systems. As they are run by computers they eliminate human error, although humans are sometimes likely to take risks seeing the potential in the future, which won’t happen with algorithmic trading systems. The risk of a major mistake is significantly reduced as they are risk adverse. Although they can’t be 100% accurate, they are considered less risky than manual trading. As these systems are able to operate 24/7 and decisions can be made immediately (within seconds) they boost efficiency. As you don’t need to be a trading expert to be able to use them, it has allowed many more people to take advantage of trading.
Some form of computerised trading system has been around since the 1930’s. They have continually developed ever since, but their popularity has really exploded in the last decade. As they have become more advanced, their accuracy has also increased so mistakes are less common. Investors now feel that they can really trust algorithmic trading systems. Around 40% of trades are made using some type of algorithmic trading technology and this is likely to increase. Many predict that within a few years they will dominate certain trading industries. They are unlikely to completely replace humans but there is no doubt that they are here to stay. As long as they keep improving they will continue to grow in popularity.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Friday, May 14, 2010
How attitudes to Family, Marriage and Divorce have changed
Attitudes to family, marriage and divorce have changed over the last century. Here we look at how different aspects of family life are seen compared to the past.
Marriage
In the past people married at a much younger age on average than they do today. Marrying in your late teens or early twenties was the norm. Most people got married as this is what was expected of you, and people rarely considered not doing so.
Many fewer decide to marry these days. Many make the conscious decisions not to as they prefer to remain more independent. This can be the case for both genders. Some would argue that people wait to meet the right person now, whereas before they would marry the first person who came along.
Living Together while not Married
In the past it was not socially acceptable for unmarried couples to live together. It was seen as wrong and was therefore extremely rare. It is possible that this contributed to early marriage.
Unmarried couples living together has almost become the norm now. Many decide to see how they get along living together before they decide to marry. It is also common for couples to live together, and possibly have children, without ever getting married. They live the same way as a married couple without ever making it official.
Children
It used to be rare for people not to have children. Most people would conform to a very specific lifestyle, marrying young and having children soon after. Hardly anyone had children before marriage, and it was even rarer for people to do this by choice.
Nowadays it is not uncommon at all for people to have children without being married and this is not seen as a big issue by most. Sometimes parents live together as a family with their children without being married, while others are single parents. Not everyone decides to have children either. It is no longer seen as something you must do so it has become more of a choice.
The Role of Women
A hundred years ago, the role of women was very specific. They were expected to marry, have children, and not work. Their role was to look after the home and their children while men went out to work.
Women’s role in family life, and life in general, now depends on the individual person and her circumstances. Many still crave the traditional lifestyle of marriage and children, but many make other choices. There are many more career women; some are working parents while others don’t have children at all. The role of men is also less rigid, and it is much more common than it used to be for Mothers to go to work while Fathers stay at home.
Divorce
Divorce was once illegal so wasn’t an option at all. Even once it did become legal it was rarely considered and was deemed a sin by many.
Now it is much more common for a variety of reasons. Attitudes have completely changed and divorce is seen as perfectly acceptable for those in an unhappy marriage and there is no longer the same stigma attached to it. Although some think of the increase in divorce as a negative, it could be argued that it is better than remaining unhappy. It is also practically easier with family law having changed to make it easier for those seeking a divorce.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Marriage
In the past people married at a much younger age on average than they do today. Marrying in your late teens or early twenties was the norm. Most people got married as this is what was expected of you, and people rarely considered not doing so.
Many fewer decide to marry these days. Many make the conscious decisions not to as they prefer to remain more independent. This can be the case for both genders. Some would argue that people wait to meet the right person now, whereas before they would marry the first person who came along.
Living Together while not Married
In the past it was not socially acceptable for unmarried couples to live together. It was seen as wrong and was therefore extremely rare. It is possible that this contributed to early marriage.
Unmarried couples living together has almost become the norm now. Many decide to see how they get along living together before they decide to marry. It is also common for couples to live together, and possibly have children, without ever getting married. They live the same way as a married couple without ever making it official.
Children
It used to be rare for people not to have children. Most people would conform to a very specific lifestyle, marrying young and having children soon after. Hardly anyone had children before marriage, and it was even rarer for people to do this by choice.
Nowadays it is not uncommon at all for people to have children without being married and this is not seen as a big issue by most. Sometimes parents live together as a family with their children without being married, while others are single parents. Not everyone decides to have children either. It is no longer seen as something you must do so it has become more of a choice.
The Role of Women
A hundred years ago, the role of women was very specific. They were expected to marry, have children, and not work. Their role was to look after the home and their children while men went out to work.
Women’s role in family life, and life in general, now depends on the individual person and her circumstances. Many still crave the traditional lifestyle of marriage and children, but many make other choices. There are many more career women; some are working parents while others don’t have children at all. The role of men is also less rigid, and it is much more common than it used to be for Mothers to go to work while Fathers stay at home.
Divorce
Divorce was once illegal so wasn’t an option at all. Even once it did become legal it was rarely considered and was deemed a sin by many.
Now it is much more common for a variety of reasons. Attitudes have completely changed and divorce is seen as perfectly acceptable for those in an unhappy marriage and there is no longer the same stigma attached to it. Although some think of the increase in divorce as a negative, it could be argued that it is better than remaining unhappy. It is also practically easier with family law having changed to make it easier for those seeking a divorce.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
What is the Future of the Child Trust Fund?
What will happen to the Child Trust Fund now that a Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition government has been agreed?
During their thirteen years in power, one of the many schemes the Labour Party bought in was the Child Trust Fund. The scheme works by the parents of all new born children being given a £250 voucher to invest on behalf of their child. They are then given another £250 voucher when the child turns seven. The amount of each of these payments is £500 for children born with a disability. Once the original payment has been invested, family and friends can invest a further £1,200 per year. Children then acquire the accumulated amount plus interest upon their eighteenth birthday.
Both the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have spoken out about their reservation towards the child trust fund in its present form. The Lib Dem’s have long been against the scheme and stated in their manifesto that they planned to completely scrap it in the event of them winning the election. Of course they did not win the election, but due to the hung parliament they will be playing their part in forming a government. The Lib Dem’s don’t feel that it is the best way to provide for children. Their pre-election plans were to spend the money saved from scrapping it on education, especially helping the disadvantaged.
In their manifesto, the Conservative Party said they wouldn’t go as far as the Lib Dem’s, but would reduce it to only the poorest third of families. They don’t think that children with well-off parents need the benefit it offers. When they first made the announcement stating this it was thought the cut off point would be families earning £16,000 per year.
After the election results and days of intense negotiations between the two parties, a coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats has now been agreed. As neither were in favour of a child trust fund for all, it seems inevitable that there will be changes. The question is, will it be capped or scrapped?
It has been highly documented that cuts in public spending will be made over the coming parliament, with the Tories planning £6 billion worth of cuts in the next year. As the Conservatives have the majority of MP’s within the coalition it is likely their child trust fund policy will take priority over that of the Lib Dem’s. But with pressure likely from the Lib Dem’s not to cut so brutally in other areas, it is possible the child trust fund could be sacrificed. Plus it seems that some of the Liberal Democrats education ideas will be adopted in the new government so the money saved if the child trust fund is scrapped could be used to pay for this.
It seems as though the best hope for supporters of the child trust fund is for it to be capped at something around those parents earning £16,000 per year. It has been argued though, that this would make the aim of the scheme completely redundant. It was bought in to encourage parents to save, and to teach children the benefits of saving. If it is only made available to the poorest they may not be able to invest beyond the two £500 vouchers, therefore resulting in only £1,000 being invested. Added to this would be the accumulated interest over 18 years but it would still be by no means significant.
There will be many changes over the course of the Conservative – Lib Dem time in government. With the current financial situation it will be interesting to see which decisions they make over the coming years. But one thing that does seem on the cards is the end of a child trust fund available to all.
Andrew Marshall (c)
During their thirteen years in power, one of the many schemes the Labour Party bought in was the Child Trust Fund. The scheme works by the parents of all new born children being given a £250 voucher to invest on behalf of their child. They are then given another £250 voucher when the child turns seven. The amount of each of these payments is £500 for children born with a disability. Once the original payment has been invested, family and friends can invest a further £1,200 per year. Children then acquire the accumulated amount plus interest upon their eighteenth birthday.
Both the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have spoken out about their reservation towards the child trust fund in its present form. The Lib Dem’s have long been against the scheme and stated in their manifesto that they planned to completely scrap it in the event of them winning the election. Of course they did not win the election, but due to the hung parliament they will be playing their part in forming a government. The Lib Dem’s don’t feel that it is the best way to provide for children. Their pre-election plans were to spend the money saved from scrapping it on education, especially helping the disadvantaged.
In their manifesto, the Conservative Party said they wouldn’t go as far as the Lib Dem’s, but would reduce it to only the poorest third of families. They don’t think that children with well-off parents need the benefit it offers. When they first made the announcement stating this it was thought the cut off point would be families earning £16,000 per year.
After the election results and days of intense negotiations between the two parties, a coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats has now been agreed. As neither were in favour of a child trust fund for all, it seems inevitable that there will be changes. The question is, will it be capped or scrapped?
It has been highly documented that cuts in public spending will be made over the coming parliament, with the Tories planning £6 billion worth of cuts in the next year. As the Conservatives have the majority of MP’s within the coalition it is likely their child trust fund policy will take priority over that of the Lib Dem’s. But with pressure likely from the Lib Dem’s not to cut so brutally in other areas, it is possible the child trust fund could be sacrificed. Plus it seems that some of the Liberal Democrats education ideas will be adopted in the new government so the money saved if the child trust fund is scrapped could be used to pay for this.
It seems as though the best hope for supporters of the child trust fund is for it to be capped at something around those parents earning £16,000 per year. It has been argued though, that this would make the aim of the scheme completely redundant. It was bought in to encourage parents to save, and to teach children the benefits of saving. If it is only made available to the poorest they may not be able to invest beyond the two £500 vouchers, therefore resulting in only £1,000 being invested. Added to this would be the accumulated interest over 18 years but it would still be by no means significant.
There will be many changes over the course of the Conservative – Lib Dem time in government. With the current financial situation it will be interesting to see which decisions they make over the coming years. But one thing that does seem on the cards is the end of a child trust fund available to all.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Style of Shutters
There are many types of Window Shutters available. Some of the most common ones are detailed below.
Full Height Shutters
Full height shutters cover the full length of a window. They usually work as two separate panels, one on each side of the window, which are swung open and closed according to the conditions. This means people are able to choose how they want their shutters placed depending on the weather conditions. For example on a warm day they may want them open to let in the outdoors or closed to keep the sunlight out and the room cool.
Cafe Style
Cafe style shutters cover the bottom half of a window while leaving the top half open. They are typically used on tall windows that stretch to the majority of the walls length. The advantage of this style is that the bottom half being covered results in privacy, while the top half being open mean plenty of light is still let into a room. With most other styles it comes down to a choice of one or the other.
Tier On Tier
These cover the whole window but the top and bottom half are independent of one another. This allows for control over each half of the structure separately. This has the obvious advantage of controlling each part of the window by itself. This means there can be privacy and light like with cafe style shutters, with the top half open and the bottom half closed. Alternatively it can be the other ways round, letting in air at the bottom and blocking out sunlight at the top.
Solid Shutters
Solid shutters are exactly as they sound; solid shutters that cover the whole window, with either one whole shutter or one on either side of the window. Unlike most styles they do not have louvers therefore not allowing maximum control that louvers offer. The advantage is that the light can be completely blocked out if necessary.
Custom Shutters
Many shutter companies will offer custom shutters. Most will have specific styles, as outlined above, but can also create more bespoke styles for those who require something different to the generic styles. This allows for alternative shapes and a mixture of styles to be used.
Panelled Shutters
Panelled Shutters are where two or more shutter panels are used. This means each section of the window can be controlled separately. They are most commonly used for large window units where it is advantageous to control each section individually.
Colours
Most shutters are made of wood (although many different types of wood can be used) and painted. Any colour can be used although some shutter providers will limit what they can provide. Just like curtains, people will usually choose colours that go well with the house they will be appearing in. Unlike curtains though, both the inside and outside of the home will be considered when choosing the colour of shutters.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Full Height Shutters
Full height shutters cover the full length of a window. They usually work as two separate panels, one on each side of the window, which are swung open and closed according to the conditions. This means people are able to choose how they want their shutters placed depending on the weather conditions. For example on a warm day they may want them open to let in the outdoors or closed to keep the sunlight out and the room cool.
Cafe Style
Cafe style shutters cover the bottom half of a window while leaving the top half open. They are typically used on tall windows that stretch to the majority of the walls length. The advantage of this style is that the bottom half being covered results in privacy, while the top half being open mean plenty of light is still let into a room. With most other styles it comes down to a choice of one or the other.
Tier On Tier
These cover the whole window but the top and bottom half are independent of one another. This allows for control over each half of the structure separately. This has the obvious advantage of controlling each part of the window by itself. This means there can be privacy and light like with cafe style shutters, with the top half open and the bottom half closed. Alternatively it can be the other ways round, letting in air at the bottom and blocking out sunlight at the top.
Solid Shutters
Solid shutters are exactly as they sound; solid shutters that cover the whole window, with either one whole shutter or one on either side of the window. Unlike most styles they do not have louvers therefore not allowing maximum control that louvers offer. The advantage is that the light can be completely blocked out if necessary.
Custom Shutters
Many shutter companies will offer custom shutters. Most will have specific styles, as outlined above, but can also create more bespoke styles for those who require something different to the generic styles. This allows for alternative shapes and a mixture of styles to be used.
Panelled Shutters
Panelled Shutters are where two or more shutter panels are used. This means each section of the window can be controlled separately. They are most commonly used for large window units where it is advantageous to control each section individually.
Colours
Most shutters are made of wood (although many different types of wood can be used) and painted. Any colour can be used although some shutter providers will limit what they can provide. Just like curtains, people will usually choose colours that go well with the house they will be appearing in. Unlike curtains though, both the inside and outside of the home will be considered when choosing the colour of shutters.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Friday, May 7, 2010
How do Divorce Proceedings work in England and Wales?
The number of divorces in the England and Wales has risen dramatically over the last twenty years. Divorce proceedings can be long and complex involving disputes and divorce solicitors, or short and simple with both people in agreement.
A divorce begins with one half of a couple filing a Partition of Divorce. (S)he will fill out the Partition of Divorce stating the details of the marriage and reasons why the divorce is necessary. This is then presented to a Divorce Court, who will sort through these papers and send them to the other half of the couple. During proceedings the person filing for divorce is referred to as the petitioner with the other persons referred to the Respondent.
There are certain conditions for a divorce to be able to take place. Couples divorcing in England and Wales (things work differently in other parts of the UK). The couple can be originally from anywhere in the world but must live in England or Wales, and have a permanent address in England or Wales, when divorce proceedings begin. A Judge will need to decide whether the marriage has irretrievably broken down, which it must have done if the divorce is to be granted. Of course, different Judge’s will have different views as to what constitutes an irretrievably broken down marriage. As a rule of thumb one of the following reasons must exist:
The respondent has committed adultery.
The respondent has behaved unreasonably.
The couple have been separated for more than two years and mutually agree to a divorce.
The couple do not mutually agree to a divorce but have been separated for more than five years.
Adultery or unreasonable behaviour will need to be proven if the divorce is being contested. There are other reasons beside these where a Judge may consider granting a divorce.
Once a Judge has decided that a divorce is viable the divorce papers will be sent to the respondent. Within eight days the relevant papers will need to be sent back to the divorce court. Here the respondent must state his or her intentions and whether or not they intend to defend the divorce. Should they wish to defend the divorce they have 29 days to send the details of the defence to the court. Whether or not the divorce will be granted is sometimes decided in court, but this is rare now days.
Eventually the petitioner will apply for a decree nisi. This is issued to say divorce proceedings are under way, but does not mean it is yet final. To get to this stage a Judge would have reviewed the paperwork and decided when the decree nisi is granted. One it has been granted divorce proceedings have officially begun. Once divorce proceedings have been completed a decree absolute is granted. This is the stage where the divorce is final.
Andrew Marshall (c)
For Divorce Solicitors London visit FLIP’s website
A divorce begins with one half of a couple filing a Partition of Divorce. (S)he will fill out the Partition of Divorce stating the details of the marriage and reasons why the divorce is necessary. This is then presented to a Divorce Court, who will sort through these papers and send them to the other half of the couple. During proceedings the person filing for divorce is referred to as the petitioner with the other persons referred to the Respondent.
There are certain conditions for a divorce to be able to take place. Couples divorcing in England and Wales (things work differently in other parts of the UK). The couple can be originally from anywhere in the world but must live in England or Wales, and have a permanent address in England or Wales, when divorce proceedings begin. A Judge will need to decide whether the marriage has irretrievably broken down, which it must have done if the divorce is to be granted. Of course, different Judge’s will have different views as to what constitutes an irretrievably broken down marriage. As a rule of thumb one of the following reasons must exist:
The respondent has committed adultery.
The respondent has behaved unreasonably.
The couple have been separated for more than two years and mutually agree to a divorce.
The couple do not mutually agree to a divorce but have been separated for more than five years.
Adultery or unreasonable behaviour will need to be proven if the divorce is being contested. There are other reasons beside these where a Judge may consider granting a divorce.
Once a Judge has decided that a divorce is viable the divorce papers will be sent to the respondent. Within eight days the relevant papers will need to be sent back to the divorce court. Here the respondent must state his or her intentions and whether or not they intend to defend the divorce. Should they wish to defend the divorce they have 29 days to send the details of the defence to the court. Whether or not the divorce will be granted is sometimes decided in court, but this is rare now days.
Eventually the petitioner will apply for a decree nisi. This is issued to say divorce proceedings are under way, but does not mean it is yet final. To get to this stage a Judge would have reviewed the paperwork and decided when the decree nisi is granted. One it has been granted divorce proceedings have officially begun. Once divorce proceedings have been completed a decree absolute is granted. This is the stage where the divorce is final.
Andrew Marshall (c)
For Divorce Solicitors London visit FLIP’s website
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Factors after a Divorce
There are many factors that come into divorce proceedings, and many areas where decisions have to be made, either by the former couple themselves or in the courtroom. Possessions must be sold or divided and decisions need to be made regarding children and other factors.
Often the most financially valuable factor is property the couple may have shared. If they were renting this will be easier, as they will usually simply move out, or one or the other will move out. If one stays living in the home there could still be a dispute if they would both like to stay there, but it is still simpler than if they own the property. There are two options regarding owned property; it can be sold and the money made can be split (either equally or not, depending on circumstances), or one of the couple can remain in the home with the other moving elsewhere. Again who stays and who goes could be an area of disagreement as could financial agreements regarding this. The person who stays may have to buy out the other party, or it might just be part of the terms of the divorce.
Any savings a couple shared will have to be sorted out prior to a divorce. Inevitably there are often disputes as to how it should be split; should it be split down the middle or should one person be entitled to more than the other? As with property this can come down to many factors. If one person gave up a career when the couple married, then (s)he may be entitled to more, as the working person will have the ability to earn more after the divorce. As well as property and savings, any other assets will need to be divided or sold.
Divorce proceedings are most complex if children are involved. Some former couples will agree that the children should stay with one parent or the other in the best interests of the children. One reason could be that one parent is working and one is not, so the non-working parent has more time to dedicate to their upbringing. This can though, be a major issue if both parents are fighting for custody. It is not only custody battles that can be complex, visitation rights for the parent the children do not live with can be contested just as much. When decided in court, decisions regarding children will be based on what is best for them, but not everybody will agree on what that is. Money is a factor, with the parent living away from the children often paying maintenance to the other parent to help them bring up the children. This will depend on the earnings of each parent. For older children, their own preference may be considered.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Bross Bennett are a Divorce Lawyers based in London. For Solicitors Kent visit the ABS Law website.
Often the most financially valuable factor is property the couple may have shared. If they were renting this will be easier, as they will usually simply move out, or one or the other will move out. If one stays living in the home there could still be a dispute if they would both like to stay there, but it is still simpler than if they own the property. There are two options regarding owned property; it can be sold and the money made can be split (either equally or not, depending on circumstances), or one of the couple can remain in the home with the other moving elsewhere. Again who stays and who goes could be an area of disagreement as could financial agreements regarding this. The person who stays may have to buy out the other party, or it might just be part of the terms of the divorce.
Any savings a couple shared will have to be sorted out prior to a divorce. Inevitably there are often disputes as to how it should be split; should it be split down the middle or should one person be entitled to more than the other? As with property this can come down to many factors. If one person gave up a career when the couple married, then (s)he may be entitled to more, as the working person will have the ability to earn more after the divorce. As well as property and savings, any other assets will need to be divided or sold.
Divorce proceedings are most complex if children are involved. Some former couples will agree that the children should stay with one parent or the other in the best interests of the children. One reason could be that one parent is working and one is not, so the non-working parent has more time to dedicate to their upbringing. This can though, be a major issue if both parents are fighting for custody. It is not only custody battles that can be complex, visitation rights for the parent the children do not live with can be contested just as much. When decided in court, decisions regarding children will be based on what is best for them, but not everybody will agree on what that is. Money is a factor, with the parent living away from the children often paying maintenance to the other parent to help them bring up the children. This will depend on the earnings of each parent. For older children, their own preference may be considered.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Bross Bennett are a Divorce Lawyers based in London. For Solicitors Kent visit the ABS Law website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)