You may hear mediators say that mediation allows win-win outcomes. It may sound overplayed, maybe even slightly rose-tinted, but it really is true. Read this and you’ll see why.

Court is win-lose

In adversarial and court proceedings, there are winning parties and losing parties. And, quite often, both parties end up losing as neither gets what they want. Which category any disputant falls into will largely depend on luck and the judge because, without them, lawyers representing losing parties would never get any new clients. Who would want to leave an important decision to luck?

Mediation is win-win

Mediation is different. Participants choose their own terms of settlement. They choose terms that they each and both find acceptable. They do settle for terms imposed by others. They each walk away with a sense of being heard and of getting what they need.

Outcomes judges could never come up with

I mediated with two people who had been married for many years. They had both been members of the same pension scheme, but the husband had paid in for a few years more as the wife had taken time out to have their children. They wanted to share their pensions so that they would achieve equal pension income on retirement. The idea was that the husband might need to give his wife 10% or so of his pension to achieve this.

When 1+1 = more than 2

I recommended the involvement of a financial planner with pension expertise. His help resulted in the uncovering of an option which he and I had never come across before. If the husband transferred 95% of his own pension to his wife, and his wife transferred 100% of her own pension to him, the outcome would be almost unbelievable. They would each receive the same pension income on retirement, just as they would if he had transferred 10% of his pension to her. But, quite remarkably, this option would provide them each with an additional £800 a year. In other words, their combined pension incomes would be £1,600 a year greater by sharing their pensions this unusual way.  You can guess which option they went for.

Co-operation

Judges have no expertise in pensions and this outcome could not have come about if my clients had been in court. It’s unlikely to have come about if they’d been negotiating through solicitors either – It is extremely rare for solicitors to involve a single financial planner to help with pensions. The involvement of the financial planner within the mediation process cost my clients around £800 between them – the amount each stood to gain from the additional pension income they would receive.

Trust

Mediation is a team process. Sometimes that team is the mediator and the clients. Sometimes it’s the mediator and one or more other professionals and the clients. This example of a win-win outcome came about for two reasons. They trusted mediation,  and I trusted the value a financial planner can provide.

I am Stephen G Anderson. I am a mediator.

Stephen G Anderson, family mediator

Email me | Visit my website