![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
It's not a trick Michael, it's an illusion.
Getting Married in June - Pre Nups / Advice
- Thread starter sbk1972
- Start date
Soldato
OP sounds like a guy who I used to know that charged his girlfriend petrol money when he took her out. No shame in it either.
Soldato
Why bump a nearly 2 year old threadBumpatron!
Saw this on my lunch time walk today, which amused me
Rule 1 protect your children
Rule 2 protect yourself.
Rule 3 no children go straight rule 2
Rule 4 see rule 2
We have seen it time and time again when the male gets shafted. As for getting married at this stage i would say forget it. Wait till you are in your 60s.
Rule 2 protect yourself.
Rule 3 no children go straight rule 2
Rule 4 see rule 2
We have seen it time and time again when the male gets shafted. As for getting married at this stage i would say forget it. Wait till you are in your 60s.
Caporegime
Whilst this is understandable in a relationship that has only blossomed. 15 years and two kids down the road whilst asking this question seems rather odd to the say the least. I am 12 years down the road with a second child on the way. We are not married either although we do entertain the idea. I would never ever think of a prenup even though I paid the bulk of our house deposit.
Not wrong.
There is no basis in law for prenuptual agreements in the UK. The judiciary is under no obligation to enforce them. In recent years, there has been absolutely no consistency as to their enforcement either.
As a general rule, they will be upheld (or adhered to closely) providing they were fair to both parties at the time of writing, and still represent a fair agreement at the time of divorce. But if they can be considered in any way unfair then the judge will likely disregard, or diverge away from, the terms of the agreement.
They don't work like they do in the US. A pre-nup will not protect your assets in the event of a divorce. They will simply guide a judge as to how you prefer your assets to be divided.
Last edited:
Soldato
Prenups don't really have any weight in the UK. You can sign them, but your case will still be considered individually by a court regardless. The best you'll get is that it would indicate that you are keeping *something* seperate, such as a business or assets from before the relationship, so they'd look at how you've managed to maintain that seperation from your wife. If your wife has become involved in any way though (even emotionally), it's not going to prevent a court splitting it up.
I've often wondered why any assets prior to a relationship are even up for grabs after a separation. If the relationship impacts those assets in any way, then sure, they should be considered. But if my girlfriend owned a house and I moved in, we got married and then it didn't work out a few years later, I wouldn't be looking to receive any portion of the house.
Soldato
Because it's your home now too, regardless of financial input. If you lived in it for 2 years and supported your wife and kids in any way, even without paying mortgage or bills, theres a "reasonable assumption" that its your home.
And it's not really even about supporting them:
If your car insurance is registered there, if you commute to and from that house to go to work, if you recieve mail there from credit cards or literally anything... then it can be argued that by allowing you to register that house for those things in your name, she has accepted that you now live there and you refer to it as "home".
Why though?
Assuming it was fully paid off at that point then why is that assumption reasonable?
I mean if it wasn't and one party was paying off the mortgage while the other was looking after kids or working part time, supporting the main breadwinner and then contributing to other expenses so the mortgage could be paid etc.. then that perhaps does seem reasonable.
But assets held before the relationship ought to be excluded, if say Granny had left a house to Tracy, then Tracy marries a guy named Bob and he moves into the house, they have a couple of kids, they've built up a nice pile of savings, investments through their relationship... then Bob ****s his secretary at the office, Tracy wants to kick him out and wants a divorce. Why should Bob get half the house?
I completely agree that it would be our home. But it would still be her house. Even if there was a mortgage being paid, if she was financially independent and capable of paying all bills, I'd still not expect a portion of that property. If I was contributing to the mortgage or to the bills in a manner that it was required so she could pay the mortgage then it would be different. Otherwise I'd see myself as simply paying for my usage of water, electricity, food etc.
I avoided the kids element because I think that changes things.
Soldato
You guys are fixing on finances, which is fair because they're important, but the court doesn't care. It's not about who pays for what, it's about 2 people living together.
The fact is that if Tracy owned a house 100% outright that was left from her Granny, and then you moved in a got married and spent 2 years there and nowhere else, and receieved any correspondance there and registered your car there and all the other little things that you do with your home, then Tracy HAS ACCEPTED that you now call that house "home". If she wanted to keep it all to herself, then she should have maintained a better seperation. Pre-nups can help towards that, but will not exclusively award you 100% of your stuff back like they do in the US.
I'm not saying I agree, just laying it how it is.
Edit: It's about what can be argued. That's why "reasonable assumption" is a legal term. If you only lived in Tracy's house 1 day a week and your mum got your mail, then you're unlikely to get anything out of it. But if she allows you to call ti home and invite friends round and do DIY and all your stuff is there then that's a home. She is within her rights to charge you 50% of the value of the house but she probably wont; because who would?!
The fact is that if Tracy owned a house 100% outright that was left from her Granny, and then you moved in a got married and spent 2 years there and nowhere else, and receieved any correspondance there and registered your car there and all the other little things that you do with your home, then Tracy HAS ACCEPTED that you now call that house "home". If she wanted to keep it all to herself, then she should have maintained a better seperation. Pre-nups can help towards that, but will not exclusively award you 100% of your stuff back like they do in the US.
I'm not saying I agree, just laying it how it is.
Edit: It's about what can be argued. That's why "reasonable assumption" is a legal term. If you only lived in Tracy's house 1 day a week and your mum got your mail, then you're unlikely to get anything out of it. But if she allows you to call ti home and invite friends round and do DIY and all your stuff is there then that's a home. She is within her rights to charge you 50% of the value of the house but she probably wont; because who would?!
Last edited:
A tricky situation and another point where the law is wrong or needs to catch up.
If i have been paying my mortgage for 15 years and the gf moves in and contributes nothing apart from gas/water/CT she should not be able to get anything from house tbh.
Maybe a rental agreement should ge drawn up ib this kind of situation . Sod the romance protect yourself. maybe i have trust issues
If i have been paying my mortgage for 15 years and the gf moves in and contributes nothing apart from gas/water/CT she should not be able to get anything from house tbh.
Maybe a rental agreement should ge drawn up ib this kind of situation . Sod the romance protect yourself. maybe i have trust issues
Soldato
A marriage means you are bundling your assets, goals and future together. Your wife alters her life goals, what she saves, what she tries to buy etc based on what you collectively own and work towards whilst married. Therefore financial jiggery pokery about who owned what before doesn't apply.
If you don't want to bundle those things together, don't get married. In turn, you don't get any protections like spousal inheritance tax exemption etc. System works if you ask me, though if I divorce in future maybe I'll change my mind.
If you don't want to bundle those things together, don't get married. In turn, you don't get any protections like spousal inheritance tax exemption etc. System works if you ask me, though if I divorce in future maybe I'll change my mind.
It happens though i know 2 blokes who had a nice life, GF moved in then after 2 and 3 years had to sell the house due to said woman being evil and the courts being backward.
(Marriage is different rules should apply however marriage is not a forever thing anymore)
Perhaps it’s a generational thing, but a pre-nup never entered my head, during one ten year marriage, and an eight year live-in relationship.
The marriage didn’t really count, we were both very young, it was a million years ago, and we lived in a council flat.
In the eight year relationship, we bought a house and split the mortgage, but after catching me one too many times tom catting around, she walked out, saying “I don’t want anything but my Le Creuset cookware, and the crockery and cutlery, you can keep everything, and I’ll sign an affidavit at a solicitors to that effect if you wish.”
I didn’t, I trusted her word, and she kept it.
I sold the house, bought another one, and started seeing the woman who is now my wife, I never asked her for one thin dime when she eventually moved in, I just said, “I’ll cover everything, you just buy the shopping, deal?”
She was fine with that.
As far as I’m concerned, if it all went **** up, she could have half of everything, she’s stuck by me for years now, mind you, if it’s not non PC, I’ve been whiter than white this time around, and we have no kids.
The marriage didn’t really count, we were both very young, it was a million years ago, and we lived in a council flat.
In the eight year relationship, we bought a house and split the mortgage, but after catching me one too many times tom catting around, she walked out, saying “I don’t want anything but my Le Creuset cookware, and the crockery and cutlery, you can keep everything, and I’ll sign an affidavit at a solicitors to that effect if you wish.”
I didn’t, I trusted her word, and she kept it.
I sold the house, bought another one, and started seeing the woman who is now my wife, I never asked her for one thin dime when she eventually moved in, I just said, “I’ll cover everything, you just buy the shopping, deal?”
She was fine with that.
As far as I’m concerned, if it all went **** up, she could have half of everything, she’s stuck by me for years now, mind you, if it’s not non PC, I’ve been whiter than white this time around, and we have no kids.
Last edited:
Soldato
Prenup = You don't really trust you wife. Don't bother getting married. I'd rate Pre Nups up along side "reveal baby gender" parties and baby showers.
2 year old thread
Who bumped this?OP are you still married then?
You should always have a backup cash stash somewhere. Because it's always the man who gets screwed if it goes bad, especially when kids are involved.
If your really good, you'll have enough to change your name and disappear if they start chasing you for more money
If your really good, you'll have enough to change your name and disappear if they start chasing you for more money
Man of Honour
My wife says if I ever leave her she'll have all my UK property and the Porsche.
I tell her that's fine, the court doesn't know about the good stuff
She's an accountant so we have this top bants. But seriously OP....
I tell her that's fine, the court doesn't know about the good stuff
She's an accountant so we have this top bants. But seriously OP....