My ex-wife and 年金 会社／堅い messed up our 離婚 取引，協定 years ago, and now I'm 存在 chased for £20,000 ? do I have to 支払う／賃金 up?

• e-mail

I?had a 活動停止中の 年金 with a large 年金 会社／堅い, on which my ex-wife was 認めるd a 年金 株ing order of just under a third of its value during the last １０年間.

All paperwork was とじ込み／提出するd 正確に on my 味方する, but it has recently become 明らかな my ex did not 完全にする the necessary documentation to 正確に 施行する the order, something I was unaware of.

A few years ago I asked for a 解決／入植地 人物／姿／数字 from the 年金 会社／堅い, paid the 要求するd 税金 and took the lump sum - which I assumed was with my wife's 百分率 deducted.

My ex-wife and 年金 会社／堅い messed up our 離婚 取引，協定, and now I'm 存在 chased for £20k

I have recently been 接触するd by my old solicitor who dealt with the messy 離婚. He advised me that my ex had been in 接触する with him and the 年金 会社／堅い, years after the 草案 order was とじ込み／提出するd with them, asking for her 百分率.

The 年金 会社／堅い has 確認するd there was a 草案 order とじ込み／提出するd by my solicitor, but not by my ex, and that the money paid to me did not take account of her 株.

It has 認める 違反 of data 保護 by speaking to my ex without my 許可, but says it is not at fault for 支払う／賃金ing out in 十分な to me. It said it 'has followed its 過程', leaving me at 現在の 存在 chased for £20,000 that I do not have by my ex.

Any advice will be 高く評価する／（相場などが）上がるd.

Tanya Jefferies, of This is Money, replies: You are in a really sticky 状況／情勢. We asked a 上級の and very experienced lawyer to explain your 選択s, if your ex-wife 追求するs this with you.

He also looked at the 事柄 of the 年金 会社／堅い, and whether you or yo ur ex can get it to 支払う／賃金 up instead of you.

Should your wife take 合法的な 活動／戦闘, it would be wise to get a solicitor in your corner if you 港／避難所't already.

If you don't want to use your previous solicitor because you prefer to get fresh 注目する，もくろむs on this, you can look for one on the 法律 Society's website here.

Rhys Taylor is a barrister specialising in matrimonial 財政／金融 （人命などを）奪う，主張するs who practises from The 36 Group 議会s in London. He is also the co-author of 年金s on 離婚: A Practitioner's Guide.?

What 普通は happens when 離婚ing couples make a 年金 株ing order?

供給するd that a 離婚 is finalised with a 法令 絶対の, 年金 株ing orders '施行される' in 法律 on something called 移転 day.

Rhys Taylor: In a 年金 株ing order, '移転 day' 機能（する）／行事s a bit like 交流ing 契約s on a house - meaning your ex-wife does have some 権利s

移転 day is arrived at on the later of 法令 絶対の, or 28 days after the 法廷，裁判所 認可するd the 財政上の order.

On 移転 day, the 年金 株 is 効果的な even though it has yet to be 器具／実施するd.

It is not a perfect comparison, but think of 移転 day as 存在 like the 交流 of 契約s on a house.

The 完成 has yet to happen, but a purchaser has some 実施できる 権利s from that day.

ーするために 器具／実施する an 効果的な 年金 株ing order, the parties must 供給（する） the 年金 trustee with the 要求するd 文書s and, if 要求するd by the trustee, 支払う／賃金 any 規定するd 料金.

Once these necessary 形式順守s have been 従うd with, the 年金 trustee moves into the '実施 period'.

This gives it four months to take the 'inchoate 権利s' - in plain 条件, the 権利s to the 年金 株 that are still in 進歩 に向かって 完成 - from the transferor's 年金 基金 and send them to the new 目的地 年金 基金.

I am not 全く （疑いを）晴らす from what you have written where you got to in this 過程. It sounds to me as if you probably got to 移転 day, but as your wife did not return whatever was 要求するd, the 実施 period did not 開始する.

The 合法的な status of a 年金 株 between 移転 day and the start of the 実施 period is not 全く （疑いを）晴らす.

As I have already said, your wife has some 権利s analogous t o the way the purchaser of a house with 交流d 契約s may have.

STEVE WEBB ANSWERS YOUR PENSION QUESTIONS

• Why did DWP say my mum, 90, was 借りがあるd £60k in 明言する／公表する 年金 - when that was 誤った?
• How do I 跡をつける 負かす／撃墜する a long lost 年金? Steve Webb's five 最高の，を越す tips for finding old マリファナs
• Will 明言する／公表する 年金 become means 実験（する）d if you own 所有物／資産／財産 or have 私的な 年金s?
• I paid NI for 45 years so don't I get a 十分な 明言する／公表する 年金 - please explain?
• I'm 84 and don't have a 国家の 保険 number - can I get a 明言する／公表する 年金?
• I've got £213,000 in my 年金 マリファナ, what do I need to do before I 攻撃する，衝突する 75?
• I take £3k a year from my £50k 年金 マリファナ - should I buy an annuity?
• Can I stop an old 財政上の 助言者 taking £60 a month from my 年金?
• DWP says my dad who died at 100 was underpaid 明言する／公表する 年金 for 20 years
• Why am I 存在 asked intrusive questions about moving my 年金?
• A 年金 移転 I made in 2006 was short by £3,800 but I'm only 存在 申し込む／申し出d £5k 支援する now
• Should I 支払う／賃金 extra into my 年金 to dodge the 60% 税金 罠（にかける） above £100k?

? ? ? ?

What 合法的な 活動／戦闘 might your ex-wife take now, and where does that leave you?

It may be that your wife will 適用する 支援する to the family 法廷，裁判所. She may say that she has not had her 年金 株.

The 法廷，裁判所 may look at the 法廷，裁判所 order and see whether there are any other （人命などを）奪う，主張するs left open (for example, for 定期刊行物 支払い（額）s or for a lump sum) which it could make an order about to 要求する a sum in lieu of her 百分率 in the 年金 株ing order.

However, if all other matrimonial （人命などを）奪う，主張するs have been 解任するd, the family 法廷，裁判所's 範囲 for その上の 干渉，妨害 is 極端に 狭くする and 合法的に contentious.

There is a 論争d 裁判権 (some 裁判官s say this is possible, others not) for the 法廷，裁判所 to 変化させる an 'executory order' - an order which has been made, but for whatever 推論する／理由 has yet to be 器具／実施するd.

Some might say that if you have another 年金 基金 it would be permissible to '変化させる' the executory order to 適用する to a new 年金, but 専門家 actuarial advice may be 要求するd as to what 百分率 may 適用する to the new 基金.

Others would say that this is 簡単に not possible and a 裁判官 should not entertain the （人命などを）奪う，主張する. I am sorry that this is far from （疑いを）晴らす, but this is the position.

いつかs an 控訴，上告 out of time might be 許すd and there are special 準備／条項s for 控訴，上告ing a 年金 株ing order in some circumstances.

However, from a procedural point of 見解（をとる） the time 限界s for 捜し出すing 許可 to 控訴，上告 are 21 days from the date of the order, and the 法廷，裁判所 probably would not 許す an 控訴，上告 years out of time unless there was an 極端に good 推論する／理由 for the 延期する.

My guess is that if all other （人命などを）奪う，主張するs have been 解任するd in the 法廷，裁判所 order it may be ありそうもない that anyone can 首尾よく 捜し出す to 乱す it, unless each 味方する had an agreed way to proceed before the 法廷，裁判所.

From your point of 見解（をとる）, this means you probably would not have to 支払う／賃金 your wife the 百分率 of your 退職 基金 agreed in the 初めの 年金 株ing order, at least 経由で this 合法的な 大勝する.

You and your former wife are of course 解放する／自由な to come to your own 協定. In light of the fact that she has failed to 適切に 器具／実施する the order she may be willing to discuss a lower lump sum 支払い（額） or indeed a 支払い（額） by instalments.

And if you still have 年金 資産s, if you agreed, it would be possible to make a 年金 株ing order over another 年金 基金 - but not the 基金 which was 初めは 支配する to the 年金 株ing order which was not 器具／実施するd.

You cannot have two 年金 株ing orders against the same 年金 in relation to the same marriage.

However, if you do not agree these avenues may be 極端に difficult for your ex-wife to 追求する.?

Can the 年金 会社／堅い be 軍隊d to 支払う／賃金 your wife her 年金 株?

You or your ex-wife may also consider a （民事の）告訴 to the 年金s Ombudsman.

Arguably, the 年金 trustee should not have 許すd you to cash out/移転 your 年金 if it was fully appraised of the 年金 株ing order whic h has become 効果的な.

If for some 推論する／理由 移転 day had not been reached - for example, the 法令 絶対の was not 認めるd until after you had drawn 負かす／撃墜する the 年金, or the trustee had not been 知らせるd it had been reached - then the position may be different.

But if the trustee knew it was the 後見人 of an 効果的な 年金 株ing order, the 年金s Ombudsman might consider making an order for the 年金 基金 to 補償する your wife for the loss she has 苦しむd.

It would then be a 事柄 between you and your former 年金 company whether they were able to claw 支援する any of the money which you should not have had.

If you are now a man of straw - meaning you 欠如（する） the 資産s to make it 価値（がある） 告訴するing you - that is not going to happen.

However, if you have other 資産s you would have to consider the 条件 of your contractual 関係 with the 年金 会社／堅い as to whether you are liable to make any 返済.

Your 年金 会社／堅い may 簡単に do nothing if the cost of the 論争 would be disproportionate to the sum of money they would hope to 回復する from you.