My Family Pod

Divorces, Millions & Money Trails: Inside the World of Forensic Accountants

• Myerson Solicitors • Season 1 • Episode 8

Share episode

What really happens when divorce lawyers team up with financial detectives to uncover hidden assets, shady spending, and the truth behind business valuations. 


🔍 Episode Overview:

When it comes to divorce, it's not just about the family home or savings, business interests can be some of the most complex and contested assets in the process.

 In this episode, family lawyer Nichola Bright explores the critical role that forensic accountancy plays in financial settlements on divorce, especially where business valuations are concerned.


Joined by expert forensic accountants Natalie Jones and Jack Clitheroe from Begbies Traynor, the discussion delves into:

  • What forensic accounting really involves and how it differs from traditional accounting
  • How businesses are valued during a divorce and what methods are used (e.g., earnings-based vs. net asset-based)
  • The role of Single Joint Experts (SJE) and shadow accountants in financial disputes
  • Key considerations in minority shareholdings and lifestyle analysis
  • Red flags for hidden assets or unusual spending patterns
  • Real-world examples including agricultural and family-run businesses
  • How forensic insight helps manage client expectations and drive fair outcomes


🧠 Key Takeaways:

  • Forensic accountants bring invaluable problem-solving skills and financial insight to divorce cases involving complex assets.
  • Early involvement of a forensic accountant can help close the information gap between spouses particularly when one partner runs the business.
  • Business valuation isn't just about numbers; it involves context, control, market comparisons, and sometimes, digging into past financial conduct.
  • Forensic accountants play both independent and advisory roles to support solicitors and protect client interests.


📚 Resources & Links:

  • Learn more about Myerson Family Law Services: www.myerson.co.uk
  • Connect with Begbies Traynor Group: www.begbies-traynorgroup.com
  • Explore guidance on business valuations in divorce and when to seek expert input


🎧 Listen & Subscribe:

Subscribe to My Family Pod on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favourite podcast platform. Don’t forget to rate and review!


💼 Keywords & Topics:

Family Law, Divorce, Finances on Divorce, Forensic Accountancy, Divorce Lawyer, Business Valuation, Minority Shareholding, Hidden Assets, Divorce Settlements, Single Joint Expert, Shadow Accountant, Matrimonial Finances, Director Loan Accounts, Lifestyle Analysis, Cryptocurrency in Divorce, Farming Businesses, Contentious Valuations, Court Proceedings, Family Business Disputes

UNKNOWN:

So,

SPEAKER_00:

Hello and welcome to My Family Pod. I'm Nicola Bright, Partner and Family Solicitor on the Family Law team here at Myerson and today I'm going to be talking about business valuations on divorce. When couples separate it's not just bricks and mortar that need to be valued along with savings and investments and pensions. In some cases there are also business interests to be taken into account. So someone may solely own a business or have a part share in a business and their interest in that business may need to be valued as part of the divorce process and that's where my guests come in. Today I'm joined by Natalie Jones and Jacqueline of Begbie's Trainer Group and they are both forensic accountants. Thank you for joining me today. Thank you. Thank you. So would you like to introduce yourselves in a little bit more detail for our audience? Yeah, hi, I'm Natalie. I'm a Senior Forensic Manager at Begbie's. I've been with the firm six years and prior to that I've got about 20 years of forensic accounting experience. Brilliant.

SPEAKER_03:

I'm Jeb. I'm a partner in our forensic accounting team in Manchester, but my remit is broadly national. I don't touch London, but sort of Birmingham, northwards. I've been a forensic accountant for the best part of 15 years now and doing a range of stuff, including quite a lot of contentious valuation work, which includes matrimonial valuations.

SPEAKER_00:

Brilliant. And for our listeners' sake... Would you be able to give us a little bit of an overview about what exactly is forensic accounting and how it differs from a traditional accounting role?

SPEAKER_03:

Yeah, so I see forensic accounting, what drew me to it really was that it's problem solving in nature. I did audit for the early part of my career. And the audit's quite a formulaic exercise of checking the numbers in a set of accounts. With forensic accounting, you're given a problem to solve. That might be finding an issue within a set of accounts. That might be looking, trying to quantify a loss. It might be valuing a business and trying to unpick the financials first. But each engagement is different and there's a problem-solving element to all of them. The majority of the work I do is dispute... focused which ranges from loss of profits claims to contentious valuations to contract disputes we also do fraud investigations and can be fed into these things in the matrimonial sphere for example you might or you might investigate the flow of money yeah from from a set of accounts for a particular reason and it's that sort of thing that drew me to it because it's a bit different and you find some interesting stuff in there rather than some traditional accounting roles.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, is that a similar reason as to why you got into forensic accounting? Yes, my attention to detail and not being able to let something go in work and probably outside. Yeah, it's getting to the bottom of something. So we can be looking at a very discreet area. Traditional accountants will have a broader overview of the whole business and they'll be doing sort of month end and year end and looking at budgets and forecasts whereas we can just look at maybe just expenses, just assets, investigating a particular person. So yeah, getting into the nitty gritty. It is the... most, I think, the most interesting side of accounting from a non-accountist point of view, because obviously we see lots of financial information as part of our job, but when we get reports from forensic accountants like you, it's much more interesting to read, and I always think, ooh, that's quite an interesting job you've got there, looking into people's lives and bank statements, etc. In terms of the role that you play for us as divorce lawyers, typically in a divorce case where there's a dispute over a value of a business, it may well be that one of the parties suggests on the advice of their solicitor, perhaps, that they instruct a single joint expert to prepare an expert witness report, which will be a valuation of that business or a valuation of someone's shareholding. So that's how we know each other, all of us. In terms of other roles that you play in a divorce case, do you often act as shadow accountants as well in terms of advising people that aren't instructing you on a single joint basis? So you can provide discreet advice to someone just the husband or just the wife, for example.

SPEAKER_03:

Yeah, regularly we're instructed as a shadow, particularly on some larger divorces where they need an additional voice to sense check some of the judgment calls that a single joint expert has made. But also, I've got one at the moment where I've been instructed in advance of a single joint expert to give specific bits of advice on things like... minority discounts and multiples and that sort of thing and sort of key areas of judgment it's trying to steer the process a little bit i think we can add the most value when we're in at that early stage because we can start to have those conversations and start to start to expectations manage one of the major challenges with this sort of work is you have two parties And one of them knows the business very well and the other one doesn't. And sometimes the one that doesn't can have an expectation about its value. And getting us in early, we can start to have those conversations about understanding what's going on with business a little better.

SPEAKER_00:

Level up the information gap. And yeah, I mean, as a shadow, we can get involved at any stage. But, you know, if it's at the beginning and there is an SJA appointed as well, we can help sort of review the disclosure we can help frame the question so there's there might be additional instructions for the forensic for the sje that might be relevant and then we can be there in the background throughout the process so once the sje report has been issued we can help clarify raise any clarifying questions you know if there's new evidence or areas of judgment or error we can assist in those and then sort of towards the end of the process if you know we can assist in settlement negotiations and provide advice if there's several different options on the table brilliant and that's that sort of advice is invaluable to solicitors to be able to manage our clients expectations because you're right one person doesn't have a clue about potentially the ongoings and the value of a business and what happens day to day and the other person knows it inside out especially if it's a solely owned business and and you might have Someone thinking this business is worth millions and millions, which has a huge impact on the case when actually it's not or it is. It might be. It might be worth a lot of money. And someone saying it's worth hardly anything. So that kind of early involvement is invaluable to solicitors. And clients don't often see the value in it until they see the fruits of, say, a report or you're assisting with questions and the right questions to ask is so important. because as solicitors we are not financially qualified. We can't pick apart accounts. We can't always know the best questions to ask of an SJE without your involvement. So it's good to know you obviously do both. You act as an SJA, very capable SJA, but also shadow accountants, which sometimes you also want someone on your side that's very good at the beginning, but then you can't use them as an SJA. So there are pros and cons to that, but it's very important. Not all cases need to go to an SJA after that involvement. It may be that they can agree on a value, after some shadow advice, respectively. Or maybe there is no value. Maybe there is no value. We have those patients all the time, don't we, where we'll ask you if you think there's anything in it, and you might say, not this time. It's a trade-off sometimes, what value there might be. We have to weigh up the costs to the client of getting a report. If there's no agreement from the other side about having an SJE appointed, the cost of issuing proceedings... versus any potential value in the business that cost benefit analysis is always is our you know it's our job to advise a client on that basis and that's always a difficult one um but sometimes it's a clear case for an sje or at least some shadow advice in the first instance well quite often the the business could be the most valuable part of the party's assets even you know putting property aside so exactly it's important to give it the time and the attention to decide what the best course of action is i know successful businesses often are more valuable than the than the home. There's more money in them. It might not be accessible money, but it is taken into account by the family court and it's a very important part of the process.

SPEAKER_03:

It's less visible.

SPEAKER_00:

It's less visible, yeah.

SPEAKER_03:

If you live in a house or you know what the property portfolio looks like, you can reasonably easily get an estimate of value and an expectation set. Whereas if you're not in the business and the business owner drives a nice car, lives in a big house, etc. That sets an expectation without getting under the hood of what It's actually what's going on. Those

SPEAKER_00:

lifestyle cases are really, really difficult for a lot of solicitors because some people will live beyond their means. And although, you know, if it looks like they're going on ten holidays a year and they might drive a very nice car, and therefore is the business doing really well? Actually, it's not. And they're living beyond their means. But, you know... particularly the wife on the other side, typically, might say, well, I know, I know he's earning a lot of money because he's just bought a Maserati. And you must get those sorts of things crop up all the time. And actually, there may be not much in it, maybe.

SPEAKER_03:

Yeah. That's the other way that we're instructed, really, is to get into the detail of spend and that sort of financial end of things. I had a case a few years ago where... We weren't actually valuing a business. We were quantifying the amount the husband had spent over the last decade

SPEAKER_01:

on

SPEAKER_03:

what she described as extracurricular activities, mistresses and other things. So that was a big decade-long bank analysis exercise to look into what he was spending it on and quantifying that because she wanted it removed from consideration. So...

SPEAKER_00:

That is quite common, actually. People putting things through the business that they shouldn't and must come up all the time. It's a fair amount of time. In the director's loan account or whether it's gone through the profit and loss account, that's a key one. That's a key one, yeah. In terms of your typical day, then, and just touched on some sort of cases you work on, what's a typical day look like? What's a typical case that you might work on day to day? And well, we We work on lots of different forensic accounting engagements, so matrimonial business valuations is one part of that, but they can vary in themselves because some can be quite straightforward. And obviously, as you know, you work into a legal and court timetable as well, so there can be quite intense periods of analysis and report writing, and then there might be a questions stage, and then there might be the court stage. So day-to-day can vary in juggling multiple cases at the same time, but around that there'll be lots of business development activities and networking and of course training as well because we're qualified accountants at the end of the day so we owe it to ourselves and our clients to stay up to date and maintain our qualifications. And supervision of younger accountants as well nearly qualifies and people clear you through. It's a demanding job I can imagine. In terms of your matrimonial work then, do you working as SJEs or shadows or do you have a preference either of you I

SPEAKER_03:

don't really have a preference what I would say is as an SJ often you've got no friends if someone is overly happy with your report and unless there's a major factual thing at play yeah then you're probably potentially on the wrong side of a judgment call

SPEAKER_01:

there.

SPEAKER_03:

Obviously, there are nuances to that around expectations measure and what people think the value might be and what it actually is. But I do find that often you'll submit a single joint expert report, you'll get a question from one side about why your multiple's too low and a question from the other side about why your multiple's too high. So you find a bit of a battle there. Yeah. So from a client relationship perspective, the shadow work is a little better because while you're still acting independently in your duties to the court, you're able to have proper conversations with people about why a judgment call is appropriate within a particular rate.

SPEAKER_00:

That probably would be my preference as well. And that's why I can only act for one side of the divorce. There are solicitors who act for both parties. It is the done thing. In some firms, they have solicitors who act for both parties. It's heavily regulated and very difficult to do. I can imagine, I don't know how anyone would do that, but yeah, much better acting for one person. Being able to advise that one person and help them reach a goal. But we were just touching on multiples and I wanted to ask you both about different methods of valuing a business, depending on that type of business and what method you may apply in a certain situation.

SPEAKER_03:

Yeah, so, I mean, the two main valuation methodologies that are applied in the vast majority of cases are an earnings-based approach whereby you look at the historical earnings of the business and you apply a multiple to it. It's a little more complicated than that, but in essence, that's how it works. Or a net asset basis where you look at the net assets. We tend to do both of those in most cases because the net asset basis sets a minimum value. Often, for a profitable trading business and earnings-based approach is the right way. For certain types of business like professional services firms or financial advice firms or recruitment businesses, professional services firms. Solicitors. Solicitors. You'd probably look at a revenue-based approach for a lot of businesses in a lot of other sectors. You'd look at EBITDA or profit, basically. The net asset approach tends to be for businesses where the value of the assets outstrips significantly the income that those assets generate. So things like property investment businesses. They're not typically generating huge amounts of revenue. The value is the fact that they own a property portfolio of X millions. So they're the two main ones. We do see other methodologies from time to time such as for early stage startup businesses that don't have that historical data to back up our assumptions. So we'd look at forecasts and discounted cash flow calculations to arrive at a value. That tends to be rarer in the matrimonial space. We do see it from time to time. And there are other... valuation pedologies as well. But those are three main ones, I'd say, the first two. I don't know the use to that matter.

SPEAKER_00:

I mean, as I say, the majority of the cases we're involved in are limited companies. So if your clients have small shareholdings in listed companies, then those are easily valued sort of with reference to share price. So we don't tend to get involved in those. So as Jack said, the net assets and the earnings models are rare. the way that we generally approach it. Do you have any experience in dealing with farms who have lots of assets, like fixed assets, but don't actually produce much money? Yeah,

SPEAKER_03:

so I've recently did a, it wasn't a divorce actually, a family dispute, so it was quite similar.

SPEAKER_00:

Like an inheritance

SPEAKER_03:

dispute? Effectively, yes. The deceased had promised.

SPEAKER_02:

Okay.

SPEAKER_03:

everything verbally to one's

SPEAKER_02:

own.

SPEAKER_03:

Very calm relationship between the surviving siblings falling apart. And that was interesting in that there were so many allegations of sort of misbehaviour and messing with the financials, etc. We had to unpick to be able to arrive at a value. For those cases... In that particular instance, I think it was income generative enough that we were able to do an earnings-based valuation. I think we probably looked at both. I don't think there was a huge amount in it.

SPEAKER_00:

As you say, there'd be lots of assets that you would probably have to separately consider the value, not just in the farming sector. In other businesses, you might just get a property valuation as part of an SJE valuation. But when you dig into the detail, there might be other assets that are significant and that could have a variable market value. And we'd be able to raise that during the process as a single or a shadow appointment. So actually, these ones should be valued as machinery. And if it's a manufacturing company, for example, they'd need potentially an SJE space to value those or specialists to value those.

SPEAKER_03:

The challenge with those sort of... agriculture business, but also family businesses more generally, I think tends to be structural in that rather than a limited company set up at reasonably mature over a number of years, a family company might have been set up in a strange way with a partnership and a limited company and an incorporated part of the business and different family members involved in different parts of agriculture. allegations that one person's built up one bit of it and had nothing to do with another trying to unpick those relationships with families and married couples is more difficult because people don't write things down they go well we discussed it and he said this so it's just the way it's done and that's more of a challenge with the agriculture and matrimonial things is families think it won't be a problem until it is

SPEAKER_00:

especially when you've got a couple who were in business together and have been for a long time, or perhaps were, and then they separate and one party's pushed out from the business, knows a lot about it. And it's, you know, we've had it where shareholdings have been changed behind people's backs and been removed as directors and sacked and all sorts of things. It happens quite a lot. It's really familiar. And it happens a lot in... separation cases and in family disputes as well so it is it's a very interesting area to work in but it's also very difficult when you've got to unpick that before you even start on looking at the value of a business yeah yeah and that's the hardest bit i've got a really difficult agricultural case on at the moment where that's the hardest part before you've even got into the figures just decide you know what's on this farm and where is it who owns it i suppose you If you can only take it so far, we can sort of do valuations on different assumptions. So assuming X is within the business or without or held by which party, we could give alternatives as part of our instructions.

SPEAKER_03:

And that case that I referenced earlier with that agriculture business, we did exactly that because the evidence base for some of the allegations wasn't strong enough to support certain things. So we have to say, this has been alleged, here's a value if it's true and here's a value if it's false. and we can do that in a lot of cases and it comes down to the parties being able to agree the facts

SPEAKER_02:

or

SPEAKER_03:

meet the evaluation hinges on or agree that on a particular issue one person loses and a particular

SPEAKER_00:

person you might have a valuation of a property which is higher than someone wants it to be but then the business valuation might be in their favour. And it's just, yeah. It's negotiation at the end of the day. It's negotiation. And it's, again, about from the client's point of view, from their cost. You don't want to be asking the court to appoint a second expert. It's very hard. If you're not happy with an SAA report, it's very hard to get a second expert appointed. They're called Daniels and Walker applications. And it's notoriously difficult to say, just because you don't like a report, you want another one. And that is very costly, and you could go down for costs on an application like that if you lose. So it's a constant way up for us as to, if the client's not happy with something, where do we take it? Is there a risk to them on costs? And if there is, is the difference in what they're arguing over worth it, worth that risk? And that's probably nearly a daily battle we have when we've got cases like this. And it's about sort of explaining to the client, like, yes, you could technically challenge this valuation, but this is what it's going to cost you. And if it goes wrong, this is what it's going to cost you. And the difference might be 50 grand. Is it worth it? You know, on a property valuation, for example, if they don't like a property valuation, if it's millions, sometimes it is. But it's never usually that much that it would make a difference to them overall in the case. So, yeah, it's quite difficult when you get the figures and the client doesn't like them. You as forensic accountants will get from the person that doesn't like them reams of questions about your report. Often not clarifying questions. No, they have to be clarifying questions and they go beyond that. It's a fine line. So you just have to reply saying, these are not clarifying questions. Yeah, so... And when we're talking about valuations as well, we have cases where we might have a family business. For example, the wife or the husband is in a business with their parents and siblings, and they have a minority shareholding in that business, say 20% and perhaps 20%. his father or her father owns the majority and the siblings have got a smaller share. How do you assess minority discounts within your reporting? How do you come to the conclusion what discount should apply or if a discount should apply?

SPEAKER_03:

So, theoretically, discounts apply for any share holding under 100% because it is less valuable than... the pro rata value because of the lack of control that it has. So for example, if you had 50% share of a million-pound business, that 50% share wouldn't be worth half a million pounds because you're unable to control decision-making within that business. There are reasonably well-defined thresholds to where those minority discounts apply. So 75% is the point at which you can make special resolutions. 50% is another interesting one in that if you've got a 50% share, if there's one other shareholder, you can be in a deadlock situation. So you might have a 50% shareholding that has a reasonably high minority discount because there's only one other 50% shareholding leading to a deadlock situation. If you were a 50% shareholding and there were another 10, 5% shareholdings, you probably have a lower minority discount than that because you've got more control over the whole business. So that's sort of the theory that sits behind it. It's a very nuanced issue and you see it argued in a number of different ways. For example, what's going to happen to the shares? are they going to transfer to someone else? In the example you shared, if those shares are going to be sold to the father who owns the 80%, well, does it necessarily need a minority discount if the purchaser of those shares is going to end up with 100%? Does that prejudice the husband or the... wife in that situation if you apply or don't apply a minority discount so it's a very complicated area and it's very subject to the circumstances of each case unless there are specific rules in shareholder agreements or articles I tend to lean towards advising that there is likely to be a minority discount of some kind and then having a bit of narrative on some of that theory, what circumstances might be in place that leads to that minority discount being higher, lower, shouldn't be there or it should be there, etc.

SPEAKER_00:

There's no mathematical formula there, I suppose, at the end of the day. And there's other considerations, you know, if past transactions have attracted a discount, that can sort of inform... potentially the court's opinion on what a discount should be. Previous dividend policy can influence a discount. And there's just any unfair prejudice as well, so there might be no discount applying in those circumstances. So it's taking it all in the round, in particular the disposition of the other shareholders and the composition of those and whether they are... related or armed-length shareholders. Like quasi-partnership situations in families, potentially. I suppose that can impact on the level of the discount. Yeah. Yeah, it's something that crops up a lot, and you'll probably get questions about, why have you applied this discount, and why is it not higher or lower? Yeah, because there's no exact science, and it's open to interpretation, isn't it? And it's hand-picked, so it's always something that comes up quite a bit. Yeah. Just to the duty stuff now, have you noticed any common practices of people that are trying to hide money, either in a criminal investigation or a family matrimonial situation?

SPEAKER_03:

Or

SPEAKER_00:

is it just too vast? There's too many things that people can do. I

SPEAKER_03:

think with business valuation stuff, the stuff that we see is artificially trying to press a value by diverting revenue elsewhere or by putting loads of personal costs through a business to drive down profitability. That's sort of the majority of stuff we see in that sort of area, is that sort of thing. In terms of hiding money, I don't know.

SPEAKER_00:

I suppose in terms of what you were just saying, Jack, it's interesting to align the results of the business with the timeline of any sort of... personal proceedings for divorce, because if you can see a clear pattern, we don't particularly know how long things might have been going on in the background. So it's always quite good to get a view on that.

SPEAKER_03:

And that's how we catch some of the things in a business valuation is a call through good analytics, basically. If you know the timeline of when a relationship starts to break down, you can start to see if profit margins have started to fall. or if certain lines of expenditure have started to climb. And it's that sort of thing that we probably lean towards is the analytical piece. And similarly, if from a hiding money perspective, if you were to look at the bank statements of a couple, you might be able to spot a certain trends in money being diverted or big round number sums going out of particular accounts. one of the standard tests in a fraud investigation, for example, for a cash misappropriation, would be looking at numbers ending in 00 or 000. Because if people are transferring money out, they don't tend to do it by picking a random number. And if one side of a married couple is diverting money out to try and hide it, It's unlikely that they'd do that with a random number. We'd also look for numbers that end 999 because they might be just under a threshold that needs approval by someone else. So it's that sort of thing we'd look for.

SPEAKER_00:

Do you have technology that picks up this in bank statements? Because it must take you hours to go through bank statements over however many years. Do you have any sort of...

SPEAKER_03:

We do have some decent analytical tools. tools to do that with bank statements.

SPEAKER_00:

And obviously our own experience. You know what to look for as well. Some things can be quite apparent to the trained eye. But I mean, in terms of hiding assets and that diverting funds, there's lots of different red flags to be aware of. Assets could be transferred into different names. Cryptocurrencies. Buying cryptocurrency. Yeah, because there's an element of anonymity in that. So where Where do they come from? Where do they go? PayPal accounts as well. Things will depress the value of the assets, but are they then going to come back in it? Loans to friends and family. I suppose between the parties, if one party suddenly becomes locked out of access to joint bank accounts, passwords are changed, things like that, or if there's a reluctance in general disclosure, these would be warning signs. Warning flights to one of the parties potentially, so lots to be looking out for. And when you're looking at valuing a business where perhaps this has gone on, do you ever go back to the parties and ask for more historic documentation where you think perhaps this person's been aware that they want to leave their spouse for two years and they've been doing things and it's quite evident that things are changing? Would you go beyond that and ask for documentation to see a pattern

SPEAKER_03:

beforehand? If we need to and if we can. We would, yeah.

SPEAKER_00:

Because standard disclosure would be two years accounts. Sometimes the court will order business bankless maintenance to be provided from an earlier point in time, but you may need to make an application. A solicitor may need to make an application for that. But if it's evident that it's needed, and particularly in cases where you're advising in the shadow, you're saying it's needed, we've got something to go to the court and say, actually, this is why we need the information. There definitely have to be strong suspicions about a smoking gun case. We're not auditing the account. Exactly. And we don't go looking for this. But if there's a particular area of focus, then we can probably probe into that. Yeah. Yeah. I suppose that's more relevant in perhaps criminal and fraud work. Potentially, if you're looking at criminal activity over a long period of time, perhaps. Yes.

SPEAKER_03:

But if within the... It's difficult with a joint instruction. Yes. Because the parties have agreed on the instruction system for one party to say... can you also investigate all of this

SPEAKER_00:

so if it's blaringly obvious i suppose isn't it

SPEAKER_03:

um for a shadow case we might be able to do that but the difficulty with that is is disclosure

SPEAKER_00:

exactly

SPEAKER_03:

and getting the dates to be able to do it

SPEAKER_00:

yeah especially if someone's known for a long time they want to leave their spouse it's not always the case sometimes it is an abrupt end to a marriage and You might think business is doing really well and then it suddenly drops off a cliff. So it's easy to see what's happening. But if it's been a longer period of time, that's a real challenge for us. Or perhaps it's a lifestyle choice between husband and wife that they have managed their finances in this way together. And it's, you know, both of them have misappropriated funds and they've been happy with that because they've been reaping the benefits of misappropriating funds perhaps for a long time. So it's unfair for them to say, oh, you've been doing this and actually they've both been misappropriating. Yeah, acts of participants in that. So that can happen as well, but it all feeds into the final valuation, I suppose, and getting to the bottom where that money might be now or perhaps it's gone. You

SPEAKER_03:

might be able to catch it if you were often instructed to do valuations at multiple dates, like if the business has been around for a long time when they started to... cohabit when they got married and current. So you might see a better history there, be able to build that picture a little more.

SPEAKER_00:

That's really helpful. Thank you both for coming on today. I think it's been a great discussion to talk about business valuations on divorce and I really appreciate you both taking the time out to come and record this podcast. Thank you. Thanks

SPEAKER_03:

for having us.