Judge watch

[Textbook example here of how to fleece a couple through divorce. 1. Stop them communicating: 'she must no longer have any direct contact with Barry, and all correspondence must go through them','my lawyer marched forward and physically blocked his path'.  2. Tell them it will only cost so much: 'I was given the impression that their services would cost me no more than £20,000'. 3. Refuse to breakdown bills. 4. Get them into court so costs escalate. 5. Charge (over the odds) for unnecessary things 'my five Rolls-Royces professionally valued - again, at £2,000 per car' (taking the piss here), forensic accountant at the cost of £250 an hour, 'a £3,000 travel bill for her lawyer's 100-mile journey to the court', & keep the bills coming. 6. Get them fighting using lies: My lawyers also implied regularly that Barry was devious and was not to be trusted, that he was controlling me and that he was doing everything he could to ensure I got as little money as possible. 7. Keep information from them, like offers to settle: 'none of which, Susan maintains, she was ever informed about'. ]

An amicable divorce? Well it was... until those legal piranhas got their teeth into us

When Barry Cohen and his wife Susan decided to separate, they both hoped their divorce would remain as amicable as possible. With a young son to think about, plus a menagerie of horses, dogs and birds, they were keen to reach an agreement and move on.

Indeed, so civilised was their stance that they even sat down over a cup of tea and totted up the value of their assets, which included seven properties and a fleet of five Rolls-Royces.

Then, with everything set out on paper, they agreed a figure that Barry would give to Susan by way of settlement.

With both having employed local solicitors to see them through the process, things were, as they say, progressing smoothly. Until, that is, Susan decided to seek a second opinion from another law firm.

'We learned the hard way,' says Susan, 'that all divorce lawyers seem to do is pit husband and wife against each other for a bitter and prolonged battle, so they can earn themselves thousands of pounds in fees during the process.

'Barry and I were pushed to the brink, emotionally and financially, and ended up despising each other. Worst of all, the settlement this firm got me was actually slightly less than Barry had originally offered, even though at the time I employed them they told me Barry's offer was far less than I was truly due, and they would get me a much better deal.

'And the process has left us about £150,000 worse off in legal fees. All that these solicitors care about is making money.'

They are sentiments with which Barry agrees. 'Every time I think about the money we lost, I feel like I'm about to have a heart attack,' he says. 

'I'll never forget Susan's divorce lawyers marching into court like an army. I thought: "You wouldn't get that many lawyers for a murder trial." I thought they were out for my blood.'

Yet finding themselves going through such a bitter legal wrangle is the last thing the couple ever expected. They got together in 1990, but had known each other for 10 years before that.

They have a 15- year-old son, as well as adult children from previous marriages.

Together, the couple created and built up a number of hotel and restaurant businesses, and also bought and rented out residential and commercial properties.

At the time of their break-up, they had turned around the fortunes of the Bryn Howel hotel near Llangollen, which they bought in 2003. There, they employed 55 staff and played hosts to guests who included Hollywood stars Harrison Ford and Calista Flockhart, Shirley Bassey and TV presenter Laurence Llewelyn Bowen.

But while on paper the couple certainly had an enviable lifestyle, Barry says that behind closed doors they were drifting apart.

'In many ways, we were a great team. Susan did all the front of house and hosted the weddings, while I worked on the financial side of things,' he says. 'The hotel was doing really well, and in theory we could have eaten lobster and drunk Champagne every night. But I worked such long hours that we never saw each other.

'Our dream had always been to sell the hotel, which would set us up for life. But, ironically, at the very moment we were realising our dream - securing a buyer for the hotel - we were facing up to the fact that our marriage had run its course.

'There weren't any huge rows, but we barely spoke any more and seemed to have nothing in common. Susan has since said that things would have been different if we'd done more things together to enjoy the fruits of our labour. But instead, I would always be looking for the next business opportunity.'

Barry and Susan broke up in November 2004. Almost immediately Susan began divorce proceedings, citing unreasonable behaviour.

Barry recalls: 'It was difficult, as I still held out hope that perhaps we could take a break and then work things out. But once I realised Susan wanted to move on with her life, I was determined that we would do everything as amicably as possible.

'When I told my solicitors how much I was giving Susan, they said to me I didn't have to be so generous.

'My response was to tell them that I didn't want a fight. I didn't want things to be nasty, for the sake of our son.'

Barry's words are somewhat ironic given what the next year of his life would bring.

Susan discussed the proposed settlement with her friends, who told her that she should be due 50 per cent of their assets - which was more than Barry had offered - given the fact that the couple's businesses had been built up as a joint enterprise.

Susan decided to seek a second opinion from another firm. 'Not knowing anything about the law, I just wanted to be sure I was getting a good deal,' she says. 'The new solicitor said she could get me considerably more. I was concerned that I was going to be on my own with a young child, and I wanted to get as much as I could for the sake of both of us.

'I was given the impression that their services would cost me no more than £20,000, and that they would get me a significantly bigger settlement than my original solicitor, who would have cost me around £10,000.

'I was aghast, but they said that it probably wouldn't reach that figure anyway; and if it did, it would have been well worth it.'

Looking back, Susan says she believes the firm saw her as a 'meal ticket'.

'When I arrived in a Jaguar, told them I had £80,000 in the bank and that we'd just sold our hotel for £2 million, perhaps they thought I was a cash cow.

'The thing is, although I did have money in the bank, I had nothing else coming in because the profit from the sale was in a business account, and I didn't know what I would do next.

'The money was all that I had to support my son and myself, and pay his school fees.'

Almost immediately, the aggressive stance of the new firm became apparent. Susan was informed that for their 'strategy' to work, she must no longer have any direct contact with Barry, and all correspondence must go through them.

Susan recalls: 'It seemed a bit much, especially as Barry and I have a child and business interests together. But these people are professionals, so I thought I'd better do as they advised. 

'I remember in one of the first court hearings, Barry came over to have a chat, and my lawyer marched forward and physically blocked his path, as though she was a bouncer at a nightclub. Then she grabbed me by my arm and steered me into a side room, slamming the door in Barry's face.

'I thought it was a bit over-the-top and embarrassing, but having put my faith - and money - in this firm, I went along with what they wanted.

'Barry was livid about being manhandled out of the way, and soon we were at war with each other.'

Accusations rapidly began to fly between both sides, with the first being that Barry had 'bulldozed' his wife into agreeing the value of their properties - something they both say was never the case.

'My lawyers also implied regularly that Barry was devious and was not to be trusted, that he was controlling me and that he was doing everything he could to ensure I got as little money as possible,' says Susan.

'And because I could no longer talk to Barry to hear his views on things, I ended up believing them.

'I'm sure now that the only reason I was told not to talk to Barry was so that expensive legal letters could be sent instead.' 

Throughout the divorce, Barry made repeated offers to settle - none of which, Susan maintains, she was ever informed about. In all, the couple's legal battle lasted almost a year.

'There was a huge fuss at one of the court hearings about the fact they wanted to get all our properties revalued at a cost of £2,000 per property,' recalls Barry. 'Given our entire career revolved around buying and selling properties, and both Susan and I had agreed what ours were worth, I felt this was an outrageous waste of money, and fought against it.

'I was also told I had to have my five Rolls-Royces professionally valued - again, at £2,000 per car. I sent back a furious letter saying I wasn't going to pay £2,000 for someone to look up a value online.

'Then they suddenly announced they wanted to bring in a forensic accountant at the cost of £250 an hour to go through all our assets and accounts. All along, I was treated as though I was hiding things from Susan.'

Alongside the stress of the hearings, costs were quickly escalating, and within a few months Susan's legal bills exceeded the £20,000 maximum she'd been quoted.

'It felt like bills from them were constantly landing on my doorstep,' she says. 'And they were always for several thousand pounds. I would ring their accounts department and ask for a breakdown, but was invariably told it wasn't possible.

'I regularly rang the firm and tried to pull out, but my lawyers' response was to say that if I just did the next stage, it would all be completed. Then they'd reassure me what a great settlement they would get me.'

The stress of the case on the couple was so severe that both say they were unable to sleep, lost weight and suffered from periods of depression.

Susan, who by this point had moved out of the marital home into a flat the couple owned nearby, says: 'I regularly woke at 4am feeling sick with worry, and I know now that Barry felt the same way.

'I'd hoped to get a job, but I could barely think straight because of the stress.

'Increasingly, I found myself feeling sorry for Barry and wondering whether I was being taken for a ride. All I knew was that Barry and I would most likely never talk again, and our son would have to grow up with parents who hated each other.'

Barry and Susan's divorce finally concluded with a three-day hearing at a County Court in the summer of 2006 - with the outcome that Susan received a settlement less than the one she'd originally been offered.

After the case, Susan was left to come  to terms with an overriding feeling that she had, in some way, been used by her lawyers for financial gain.

This fear was crystallised when, at an appeal hearing requested by Barry, she caught sight of a £3,000 travel bill for her lawyer's 100-mile journey to the court.

'I looked at my lawyer and said: "That is scandalous,"' says Susan. 'I make that same journey each week to see my mother and it only costs me £20 in petrol.

'Then she asked if I was pleased with the outcome of the settlement. I said I was certainly not: I had a lower settlement than I'd originally been offered, and between us Barry and I had spent around £150,000 in legal bills. I was livid. Her face fell - but she said nothing at all.

3The judge actually went on to criticise the law firm for not taking Barry's original offer into consideration as being a viable outcome. But I don't think they cared: they'd made their money and that was all that mattered to them.'

In his judgment, the District Judge said: 'It is perfectly clear that a comprehensive offer was made on September 2nd (referring to Barry's original offer).'

He went on to state that in his opinion a settlement had at that time been within striking distance, and that it was clear to him that 'Mr Cohen has not been persisting in sharp practice'.  

Without the intervention of their son, who put pressure on them both to move on to friendlier ground, it is unlikely that Susan, who remarried last year, and Barry would ever have spoken again.

The couple say at each weekend handover their son begged one to allow the other into the house for a cup of tea, whereupon they found themselves eventually having no choice but to be civil to each other.

Today, three years on, the couple are firm friends and back in business together, having recently bought an investment property, and are now, perhaps ironically, setting themselves up as wedding organisers.

Their divorce, however, is something that is still on both their minds. 'I would like to say it's something we can now look back on and laugh about - but we can't, unless we laugh in despair,' says Susan.

'We are in total agreement that we were pitted against each other for the financial benefit of the firm involved.

'But the money we lost is very real and it still feels very raw. We didn't end up with a better outcome: we lost out in every way. If I could have my time again, I would just have sorted everything out with Barry directly.'

'The lawyers I employed did nothing apart from cause me worry and stress, and make things far more difficult, emotionally and financially, than they ever should have been.

'What is most difficult to come to terms with is that it was our son who was ultimately the most hurt - financially and, at the time, emotionally - by my decision to hire these lawyers.'