Fiancé asking for a prenup

Says a man - and if you are not a man. WTAF!! That’s even worse.

42% is still pretty crap though, isn't it. And then you have to consider that a tranche of the remaining 58% are probably unhappily married. Let's take a conservative estimate that 20% of that remainder are staying for family or financial reasons, or are too scared to split. So 53.6% of marriages end in divorce or are unhappy, possibly even more that are unhappy.

Marriage is therefore a technology that fails about half the time. I honestly don't see the point unless it's to have children.

Imagine if you were boarding a plane, and someone told you that there was a 42% chance it would crash. The terms are that you would escape with life and limb, but you'd have much less money, your earning capacity would be buggered while having far more expenses afterwards, and you'd never trust another plane again in your life. Would you still get on it?

And imagine you were told there was at least a further 11.6% chance that none of that would happen, but you were still in for the most unpleasant ride of your life.

No one in their RIGHT MINDS would get on that plane!

Marriage is not working in today's society. I'm beginning to think that the same protections of marriage should kick in when women have kids, and that couples can choose to make each other next of kin if they want. And then get rid of the entire institution of marriage. It's responsible for SO much heartbreak.

ETA: I know that marriage works out well for some, and I'm really happy for those people. It keeps some hope alive in me and cheers me up to hear of good marriages. But there's no doubt that it works for far too few people. Maybe human beings are innately too selfish for it, now that we don't have to rely on each other like we once did?

What's this guy (the OP's partner) looking for, the size of her bank balance and his exit plan, not exactly expressing Byron's sentiments in, "She Walks in Beauty".

There is a lot of combative waffle on this thread about women sacrificing looks,beauty,youth body and women should be remunerated for arduous task of pregnancy. Prenup to include reward childbirth . It’s reductionist,alarmist and all a bit women are goddesses woohoo.

Well technically yes but the marriage rate is also at the lowest it has ever been, so that will naturally skew the statistics. Those who get married, knowing that in this day and age there is no societal expectation that they should do so, are more likely to be fully committed to making the marriage work.

It doesnt mean that fewer people are splitting up, just that only divorce statistics can be reliably sourced. A couple living together for 15 years, having kids and splitting up, will never be legally recorded in the way that a divorce would.

There are so many variables that make this an unreliable "fact" in terms of relationship success or otherwise.

Okay so we’ve had the example of the waitress and the millionaire. Let me talk you through this example, which is perhaps slightly more like the OP.

Let’s imagine that Aquea is a doctor and her fiancé Dave owns a small haulage company. The OP has already said that he employs 35 people, but he has large overheads and the margins are small.

Aquea and Dave agree a pre nup which excludes his business from the assets, then they marry.

For the first few years, his business doesn’t make very much profit at all. Yes, he has lots of money coming in, but he has even more going out to pay the wages of 35 staff, fuel, insurance , running the depot and servicing the huge bank loan he took out to buy the trucks.

So he says he can only take a wage of £20,000 / year . Every January and July there’s a cash flow crisis so he has no income at all . He even takes out a few personal credit cards, so he can use them to pay the staff wages if necessary. Of course these repayments ( as personal debt ) get added onto the family bills each month.

Aquea, however, is earning £40,000/ year as a trainee surgeon, so she pays 2/3 of all their bills , including the mortgage on their house , which they own 50:50.

Dave feels really bad that he can’t pay his share, but promises that it will all be different soon, when some of the bank loans are paid off and the company is profitable.

Then the first baby comes along and although Dave was very excited to be a dad, it turns out that his business is super busy and he can’t take any time off on paternity leave. As he frequently reminds her, he doesn’t get any paid leave like her so it makes more sense for her to take time off instead.

Fortunately Aquea had built up some savings, which of course they need to pay the bills for that year, as she earns 2/3 of their income and they can hardly survive on Dave’s wages of £20,000.

It’s a shame that Dave‘s company is still not making much of a profit, but then he’s ploughing every spare penny back into paying off the large company bank loans.

After maternity leave, Aquea goes back to work full time , as they need her wages and her savings are running out. Money is tight as they have a mortgage and FT nursery for a baby is expensive.

Very quickly, they discover that neither of their jobs fit around nursery hours so they have to hire a nanny. This becomes another source of stress as Dave hates having someone else around the house and it causes a lot of problems in their marriage. Eventually, Aquea decides to take a part time job in general practice for more regular hours, with no on call or weekend work.

She is bitterly disappointed to give up her post in surgery, but she tells herself she’s doing it for her marriage and her child.

Dave is still working lots of evenings and weekends at his haulage business, he’s hired more staff and making some profit. He brings his dad, his brother and his finance director Debbie into the business - they all invest capital in return for shares, which reduces the company debt. The share structure of the company is changed to reflect this, but of course Aquea doesn’t know as she has no involvement.

Another baby comes along and the last of Aquea’s savings are spent funding another maternity leave . She feels more and more resentful as she is paying 2/3 of the bills ( plus all the little extras for the kids that Dave would complain about) and doing all the childcare and 95% of the housework. She never sees. Dave as he’s always working or at the gym.

Everyone tells her she should expect to do everything as Dave works more than FT and she is only PT and besides, she is so lucky to be married to a rich business man who allows her to only work part time. Dave sometimes jokes about how he married a gold digger and everyone laughs.

When the children are both in school, sadly their marriage breaks up. It turns out that Dave is having an affair with Debbie, his finance director, who is pregnant with his baby . All these evenings and weekends he was “ working late“ was time he was with her. The money that he was borrowing on credit cards was probably going to Debbie - but Aquea can’t prove that .

It also turns out that the business makes a profit of £500,000 / year and has been doing so for years.

Aquea never thought to download the company acounts, as she was too busy working 4 days a week in a demanding job, running the house and brining up two small children single handedly. Besides, she trusted her husband .

Even if she had done so, Dave and his accountant has set up a complicated structure of several linked companies , with a HQ in the Isle of Man.

So in the divorce, the assets of the marriage are

⁃	their home , which Aqueq has paid 2/3 of, but she will get half
⁃	Her NHS persion which she has paid all of but she will get half 
⁃	Her car, which she paid all of but she will get half 
⁃	Her savings of £40,000  which all go on legal fees for the divorce. But she will still have to pay Dave half of them. 

She won’t get the business because of the pre nup. Her solicitor thought she might have a good case to fight this, as their circumstances are very different from when it was signed.

But when they investigate, they find out that since the share structure was changed, Dave’s shares now only have a right to income and not capital. All the capital belongs to the shares owned by Debbie and Dave’s parents , which means that he has no assets in his own name for Aquea to come after.

So even if Aquea fights and wins some of Dave’s shares, they will be worthless to her as they only have a right to income as decided by the Board ( which is Dave, Debbie and his parents ).

Dave claims to have no pension and he doesn’t even have any money in his bank acounts , as he uses the company credit card for everything . Turns out his car is also a company car.

Dave and Aquea have to sell the family home and after the mortgage is paid off, Dave will get most of it as he gets

50% of the house
50% of the CETV for his wife’s NHS pension accrued during the marriage 50% of her car
50% of her savings (which are already spent )

Dave even threatens to clain spousal maintenance from her , as she is now earning £60,000 as a PT GP and he is only taking a salary of £24,000 from his company.

As soon as Aqua moves out, she puts in a claim to the CMS for child support for their two children. Dave immediately drops his salary to £9,000 / year, so he only has to pay £7 week child support.

Debbie continues to take a salary and dividends of £ 250,000 / year from the company.

Dave tells all his family that Aquea took him to the cleaners in the divorce - they all feel sorry for him.

And that , dear readers, is how Dave walks away with a company worth million, an annual household income of quarter of a million and a huge pension and savings in an offshore account. He pays no child maintenance and never sees his kids ( well he and Debbie have a new baby to keep them busy ).

Aquea walks away with nothing except the kids, her car and her pension. She is now mid 40s and has to take out a big mortgage to buy a 3 bed flat , as she has only a small deposit.

I think you're actually wrong The divorce rate. Statistically it's around 42% with the divorce rate in the UK at its lowest since 1971.

It’s pretty disingenuous of OP and PPs to be suggesting that she is doing him the great favour and enormous sacrifice of bearing children. Yes, pregnancy, birth and motherhood can hold various risks for women.

But OP clearly wants children at least as much as her partner does. She is not offering to be his surrogate and wanting paid for that. They both bring their willingness to make the other a parent to the marriage.

Actually, it’s not just disingenuous it’s insulting. Women have more to offer a marriage than their wombs (given in sacrifice!), and lots of men are looking for more in a partner than her child bearing ability.

extraordinary contribution...

those silly us giving birth to our kids for free...

You want him to see you as an amazing catch that he’s lucky to marry. Fair enough. So what are you bringing to the marriage table? Who owns the house now? Who paid the deposit? What assets do you have? How does your income compare to his?

The prenup would be less valid if OP did not have her own solicitor. It is a premise of a watertight prenup.

The example you gave in your post had the wife getting nothing. I was responding to that.

A pre-nup doesn’t automatically mean one party isn’t entitled to anything the other accrued before the marriage. That would be the usual position as it’s common sense, but the parties can agree whatever division of assets they agree on, provided that it doesn’t leave one in hardship on divorce.

This. You’d be advised to protect your business if it were yours. You’d advise your children to do this too if they were getting married. It’s his business, he built it, before you were married and probably before you met.

His time isn’t ticking away here, if you split now, he’ll still get married to someone else and have kids and get his prenup. Wealthy guys don’t stay single for long. I am not saying you should marry him if you dislike him, but I would not drop him over the prenup, a prenup is standard nowadays for a wealth disparity.

The prenup can and should include provisions taking into account your ‘extraordinary contribution’of giving birth. It should also include provision taking into account any detrimental effect to your earnings/earning potential due to childbirth and time off for parenting.

Many of them don't seem to struggle much morally either!

What a ridiculous notion. My DH and I agreed a prenup. It’s now long spent (20 + years and 2 kids. Gifting half of everything on marriage is a fools game. I would want my DD’s to do the same.

I learnt after two marriages that romance means nothing. You should only go into a contract, which is what this is, with a business head on.
Your future happiness and the happiness of your children depends on it.

Nobody said they are entitled to nothing. They just arent entitled to assets accrued before the marriage. They may be entitled to a portion of assets that have grown or been purchased during the marriage.

Just because you can't get half of everything your ex husband has ever owned, it doesn't mean you've been left with nothing!

@DeftTaupeLeaderno competent family solicitor would draft a pre nup which entitled the wife to nothing, precisely because it wouldn’t be enforceable. As for Radmacher, Supreme Court decisions have to be followed. That’s why properly negotiated pre nups are enforceable.

Depends how old you are. If you're young, I'd run. His money will probably always be more important than you.

Family court will ignore the assets he acquired before the marriage and the rest will be sorted as it is with anyone, through the CMS system/courts. She may well be granted the house until the youngest is 18 and then it will be sold. She may not receive money from the sale if it was acquired before their marriage. She may be entitled to some of the money if the house has increased in price over the years. May.

They ARE however taken into account and not disregarded. They are still worth having to show intent.

Get a solicitor to look at the prenup for you, make sure you are happy with it and that you and any future children are taken care of, and add any provisions you want in the event of a divorce then see if you and your DP can both agree on it, if you can't the weddings off and relationship's done. At least you will have found out before you were married and had children that you have different expectations in life.

Why didn't you say exactly that to him? So odd...tell him how you feel, it really is that simple.

Have a prenup he is entitled to ask same as u but have it done with solicitors to cover kids, homes pensions as in every other marriage.