What Is a Consent Order in Family Law?

What Is a Consent Order in Family Law?

A financial consent order records the financial settlement agreed between divorcing spouses and makes it legally binding through court approval. It can address property, savings, investments, pensions and maintenance. This article concerns divorce in England and Wales.

In my experience, the biggest misunderstanding is that agreeing your finances between yourselves means everything has been legally settled.

A couple may have discussed who keeps the house, how their savings will be divided and whether either person will pay maintenance. They may even have written everything down and signed it. That is a useful starting point, but it should not be mistaken for a court-approved financial settlement.

When someone tells me, “We have already agreed everything,” my next question is: “What exactly have you agreed, and does it deal with all the financial matters you need to resolve?”

That is where careful advice and drafting make a difference.

Does Getting Divorced Deal With Your Finances?

The divorce ends the marriage. It does not, by itself, resolve the financial claims between you and your former spouse. An agreed financial settlement needs to be dealt with separately.

I find that this distinction can come as a surprise. People understandably focus on obtaining the final divorce order because it feels like the point at which everything is finished.

However, I would want a client to understand their financial position before assuming they can put the matter behind them. Has the property been addressed? Have pensions been considered? Are there continuing payments? Does the proposed order dismiss the claims they intend to bring to an end?

Those questions deserve attention even where the separation has been amicable.

Why an Amicable Agreement Still Needs Careful Drafting

Being on good terms can make reaching a settlement considerably easier. It does not remove the need to document that settlement properly.

An illustrative example I often use is a couple who agree that one person will remain in the family home. They also discuss their savings and put the arrangement in writing between themselves.

For several years, neither questions it. The divorce is completed and both move on.

Later, the property has increased substantially in value and their relationship is less cooperative. They begin to disagree about what the original agreement covered and whether any financial claims remain outstanding.

The increase in value does not automatically mean that someone can reopen a settlement. The concern is the uncertainty left by an informal arrangement and the assumptions each person made about its effect.

My advice would be to address that uncertainty while both people are still willing to cooperate. A properly drafted consent order can help avoid different interpretations of what was intended.

What I Look For in a Proposed Financial Settlement

I do not assess an agreement simply by looking at the percentage each person receives. I want to understand whether it will work once they are living separately.

That means looking at the whole financial picture, including property, mortgages, savings, investments, pensions, debts, income and ongoing responsibilities.

An agreement can appear balanced on paper while leaving one person unable to meet their housing costs or overlooking a significant pension. Reaching agreement is important, but the agreement also needs to be informed and workable.

Can You Afford to Keep the Family Home?

Keeping the home may feel like the most reassuring outcome, particularly where children are involved.

I would nevertheless want to look closely at affordability. Can the person remaining there meet the mortgage payments, household bills and maintenance costs? How will any payment to the other spouse be funded? What needs to happen before the proposed arrangement can be completed?

These are practical questions that should be addressed before the settlement is finalised.

I would also be cautious about an agreement that says the house will be dealt with “later”. If a sale, transfer or payment is intended, the terms need to be clear enough for both people to understand what must happen and when.

Have You Properly Considered Pensions?

Pensions are easy to overlook because they do not feel as immediately accessible as money in a bank account. Yet they may represent a substantial part of the couple’s financial position.

I would be concerned about a settlement that deals carefully with the house and savings but dismisses pensions without proper consideration.

The question is not simply whether each person is happy with the arrangement today. It is whether they understand what it means for their longer-term financial security.

Where pension sharing is proposed, the order and supporting documentation need to deal with it correctly. I would not advise anyone to rely on a private promise about dividing pension benefits.

Are Ongoing Payments Clearly Defined?

Vague promises can create problems even when they are made with good intentions.

“I will help with the bills” or “I will pay what I can” may sound reasonable during an amicable discussion. However, those phrases leave each person free to understand the arrangement differently.

I would want clarity about the intended payments, their timing and duration, and how the obligations are to be recorded.

Both people should leave the process knowing what they have agreed to do.

Why Financial Disclosure Matters

Before advising someone to accept a settlement, I would want them to have a sufficiently clear understanding of the finances.

If a person does not know the value of the assets, the extent of the debts or the pension position, it is difficult for them to assess what they are accepting or giving up.

I would be particularly cautious where someone feels pressured to sign quickly because they want the divorce over with. Wanting closure is understandable, but it should not come at the expense of an informed decision.

The court application includes Form D81, a statement providing information about both parties’ financial circumstances. That document supports the court’s consideration of the proposed order; it is not a substitute for taking the time to understand the settlement yourself.

For me, financial disclosure is the foundation of meaningful agreement. It allows the discussion to be based on the actual position rather than assumptions.

Will the Court Approve Whatever We Have Agreed?

No. The judge does not simply approve the order because both spouses have signed it.

The court considers the proposed settlement and the financial information provided. There is usually no hearing, but the judge may ask questions or require changes if they are not satisfied that the arrangement is fair.

This is why I would advise against treating court approval as a formality.

Before submitting an order, I would want to resolve unclear terms, check that important assets have been considered and make sure both people understand the consequences.

If someone appears to have agreed under pressure, does not understand the proposal or cannot realistically carry out their obligations, I would advise them to pause and obtain further advice.

Does a Consent Order Always Give You a Clean Break?

A consent order and a clean break are not interchangeable expressions.

The order records the agreed settlement. Whether it brings particular financial claims to an end depends on its terms and the circumstances.

I would therefore ask a client what they expect the order to achieve. Do they want to end financial ties wherever possible? Will maintenance continue? Are payments or other obligations still to be completed?

Those intentions need to be considered and reflected appropriately in the drafting.

I would not promise complete finality simply because a document is called a consent order. The important point is understanding which claims it resolves and which responsibilities remain.

When Should You Apply for a Consent Order?

The timing should be considered alongside the divorce proceedings.

The court cannot approve a financial consent order before the conditional divorce order. It is usually simpler to seek approval before the final divorce order, because applying afterwards can have financial consequences, particularly for pensions.

I would recommend discussing that timing before moving ahead with the final divorce application.

I would also caution against leaving the finances unresolved indefinitely because you currently get along. Circumstances can change, and dealing with the agreement while communication is constructive may be much easier than trying to resolve uncertainty years later.

What If You Have Already Agreed Everything?

My practical first step would be to write down precisely what has been agreed and gather the relevant financial information.

That should include the property, mortgage, savings, investments, pensions, debts and income, together with any proposed payments or continuing responsibilities.

Then have the settlement and proposed consent order reviewed by a suitably qualified family-law professional. Ask whether the wording reflects your intentions, whether the arrangement can be implemented and which financial claims it will resolve.

I would advise against downloading a form, copying your informal agreement into it and assuming the job is complete. Drafting matters because the order needs to give effect to the settlement you actually intend.

Obtaining advice does not have to undermine an amicable agreement. It can help both people understand and protect what they have achieved.

My Advice: Do Not Stop at “We Have Agreed”

An agreement is a positive step, but it should not be the last one.

What matters is whether both people understand the settlement, whether it works in practice and whether it has been properly formalised.

I would always encourage a divorcing couple to deal with those questions while they are still cooperating. That can provide far greater reassurance than relying on goodwill and an informal document.

The aim is to give both people the clarity they thought they had when they first said, “We have agreed.”