Ordered that the order is modified, on the facts and as a matter of discretion, by increasing the pendente lite maintenance from $250 to $400 per week; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the defendant.
As we have repeatedly noted, pendente lite awards should be an accommodation between the reasonable needs of the moving spouse and the financial ability of the other spouse (see, Polito v Polito, 168 A.D.2d 440), and are to be determined with due regard for the preseparation standard of living (see, Salerno v Salerno, 142 A.D.2d 670, 672). Moreover, although generally the best remedy for any claimed inequity in a temporary award is a speedy trial (see, Cohen v Cohen, 129 A.D.2d 550), "the rule is not ironclad when the award is deficient" (Bernstein v Bernstein, 143 A.D.2d 168, 169).
Based on an assessment of the foregoing considerations, we conclude that the amount awarded by the Supreme Court was deficient to the extent indicated. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Eiber, O'Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.