Desperate Housewives and hidden assets

Fans of the hit Channel 4 series, Desperate Housewives, will have seen the gradual breakdown over recent weeks of the marriage between Bree Van De Kamp and Orson Hodge. In this week’s episode, Bree (the wealthier of the two) embarked on a campaign to hide assets brought into the marriage in preparation for a divorce. Her intention: to defeat Orson’s claims in divorce proceedings by artificially reducing her assets which would be the subject of financial settlement.

A word of warning…

The legal reality in England and Wales is that Bree would not get away with this behaviour. As part of the disclosure process, separating spouses are compelled to provide full details of their financial circumstances, supported by documentary evidence, usually going back at least 12 months. This includes bank statements for every account in which a party holds in his name or jointly with another individual.

As specialist Family lawyers, we are often told by clients that their spouses have another bank account, for example, that they have not declared as part of the disclosure process. This invariably shows up, whether as a result of raising a list of questions regarding their disclosure or by reference to a bank transfer to an account not appearing elsewhere in the disclosure.

The court in England and Wales can also make inferences where the disclosure by one party is simply not supported by the evidence: the purchase of that Cartier watch or Tiffany diamond, the purchase of which cannot be identified in bank or credit card statements, will raise many a judicial eyebrow.

A final word…

Where a party has purposely disposed of an asset with the intention of defeating the other spouse’s financial claims on divorce, the court has the power to reverse a transaction. The court can also restrain the future disposal of an asset where it is believed that a transaction is about to take place which is intended to defeat the other spouse’s claims.