It has been said that most divorces are caused by arguments over money or sex. While this may be true, arguments over more trivial matters are also frequent in divorce cases, especially as the financial settlement draws on and solicitors become involved.

Money and access to children is one thing, but people then begin arguing over who gets to keep the cutlery set, the car and the record collection. Of course, the cost of replacing item such as these has to be offset against the cost of arguing through your solicitor about them, as your solicitor will charge by the hour, for each letter, phone call and email.

So common sense will tell you that by arguing over things that cost very little, running up a high cost to yourself, doesn’t make financial sense. If you have a moral solicitor (as I did, believe it or not) they’ll tell you not to pursue it either.

Of course, when you’re in the middle of a divorce, common sense and financial sense are irrelevant. The principal of the thing is what counts. If something is mine, I want it back, regardless of how much it costs to get it, and how little it might cost to replace it.

For example, during my divorce I had a collection Michael Jackson jackets, including several tour leather jackets and the Billie Jean live sequin jacket. They’d been bought over the years on eBay, and would have been very hard to replace. The ex-wife had removed them from my home (for reasons known only to her) and was refusing to return them. Most likely because she knew I wanted them.

Anyhow, I pursued this through my solicitor, against her advice, insisting on their return. The act of getting the jackets back cost me plenty, but in the end I did have them returned.

Trivial? Perhaps. It was morally right though, and you can’t put a price on that.

Clive Bellmore