Britain’s first so-called “divorce hotel” has apparently opened for business in Yorkshire.
Couples who are going to divorce can check into the hotel for a weekend, during which they negotiate the terms of their divorce with the assistance of a mediator and a lawyer. At the end of the weekend filled with luxury and mediation, they leave, send the papers off to the court and are divorced within 3 months. The whole process costs the couple a “staggering £10,000.”
Or at least that’s what the press coverage says. However, I have some concerns.
Firstly, who is this “lawyer” who takes part? I am always very wary of people who are described as “lawyers”. This can cover a wide variety of legal professionals. It could mean a solicitor or a barrister. Or it could mean an entirely unqualified paralegal. All solicitors are lawyers, but not all lawyers are solicitors. Calling yourself a solicitor when you are not is a criminal offence, but anyone can call themselves a lawyer. To be frank, I would want to know if the lawyer is regulated or insured.
They are an international organisation, with branches in the USA, the Netherlands and now the UK, so perhaps they say “lawyer” because that’s a useful catch-all term for the different names for lawyers that exist in those countries. Let’s be charitable and assume that the lawyer that they use is a properly qualified, insured and regulated legal professional.
But that then begs the question – only one lawyer? The media reports say that as there is no dispute between the couple, they only need one. I can only assume that this lone lawyer is supposed to draft documents in a neutral fashion and does not get involved in giving any actual advice. The lawyer then can’t advise both sides due to the conflict of interest even if everyone is being very amicable and grown up about things. So the parties are agreeing financial terms without the benefit of legal advice.
This is very dangerous. Using a mediator is not an alternative to using a solicitor, it’s an alternative to using the court. Getting legal advice is an important part of the mediation process and it is best sought during the process. It helps the parties understand what is realistic and attainable. The mediator is not a judge or arbitrator and cannot tell them if it’s fair or likely to be approved by the court. There is the risk that the parties come to a rushed, unfair deal in mediation over a couple of days without the benefit of legal advice, only for the court to reject the deal as not achieving fairness or meeting the family’s needs. Both sides should seek legal advice from separate solicitors before formalising the agreement.
The notion that involving two solicitors leads to conflict is terribly outdated. Most family solicitors belong to Resolution and abide by its Code of Practice which is essence commits them to conducting cases in a non-confrontational non- aggressive manner. Many of them are committed to non-court dispute resolution such as collaborative law or mediation. Collaborative lawyers in particular are trained to resolve matters in an amicable and constructive manner. Good solicitors help resolve conflict rather than cause it.
Next there is the suggestion, admittedly by The Sun, that the cost of £10,000 at a divorce hotel is “staggering”. It isn’t. Ten grand (or five grand per person) is not particularly high. I regularly charge clients in divorce proceedings that sort of money when I act for them in divorces. Many get charged a lot less, some a lot more. But I suppose my clients don’t get a weekend in a hotel in Pontefract or wherever included in that price.
Other reports seem to suggest that this is a low cost panacea and imply that it can all be so much simpler without those pesky solicitors getting in the way. The Daily Mail claims that the average cost of a divorce is now £70,000 and that a divorce hotel is therefore a lot cheaper. I simply don’t recognise that figure. In over twenty years of legal practice, I have never had a client who has incurred fees anywhere remotely as high as £70,000. It may be that the astronomical cost of proceedings involving millionaires in high profile, high net worth cases skew the average upwards to those heights, but the vast bulk of people who divorce are not going to have to pay out seventy grand in fees. Divorce is expensive, but it’s not usually in that league.
Negotiating things over the weekend is an attractive idea, but that’s only going to work if you have all your ducks in a row beforehand. A large part of a divorce solicitor’s job is getting all the relevant documents together, and agreeing or ascertaining a valuation of all the assets. If the parties turn up expecting to negotiate a deal without a clear idea of what their assets are worth, or without tax or financial advice, then they either won’t make any progress or they’ll come to a deal which could very easily prove disastrous or might fall apart. The divorce hotel says that people come to their weekend with all this prepared, but I would question how many people manage to do it properly without using a solicitor. There’s a very good chance that something important will be overlooked. Furthermore before mediation it is usually sensible to get some legal advice, whether or not you’re going to do it at a mediator’s office or spend a weekend doing it in 5 star luxury.
Finally, there is the notion that the couple can then get the divorce finalised within three months of the weekend. Permit me a hollow laugh at this point. Not a hope. Bury St Edmunds Divorce Unit is currently taking between 6 and 12 months to process even the simplest of cases.
I’m all in favour of ways of making divorce less destructive and providing better value of money. Alternatives to court like negotiation, mediation, collaborative process or arbitration are frequently cheaper, involve less conflict and result in outcomes that both sides can feel is fair. Maybe a divorce hotel can be an option, but I am sceptical about what I have seen so far. However, I don’t want to be a stick-in-the-mud. I can see some advantages. If both husband and wife each have a solicitor involved throughout, preferably ones who are used to working with mediators or are collaboratively trained then it could work. But any attempt to by-pass the need for legal advice is asking for trouble.
1 May 2017