to be really pissed off that dp has gone and done a pre-nup without telling me!

[miarosemum]

have been with dp for 3 years, and has been step dad to my dd of 4. she has not seen her real dad since a baby, so dd know dp as daddy which is fab. dp has his own house outright, and has just spent a great deal of dosh having a loft extension done to accomodate us to all live together. really looking forward to this next period in our lives when he comes home today to tell me her has been to a solicitor today to get pre-nup done to protect his house in case our relationship fails...now that is all very well but he cannot understand why i am so upset that he done all this secretive and not discussed with me, i feel let down that we could'nt talk about it and yet here we are about to move into a lovely new refurbished house.

[Whatmeworry]

I wouldn't marry a man who wanted a pre-nup.

And if it was a woman friend with her own home, taking in a new DP and his DD?

I know what I'd be advising her.....

[SheCutOffTheirTails]

It does mean he doesn't trust you.

He's treating you like a gold-digger.

Only sign if you are happy to accept yourself as one.

[sleepindogz]

it means he has read all the angst and anger on the Relationships board and thought sod that :)

with the best will in the world, relationships fail. He is being sensible

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

He's been anything but sensible because he's drawn up a document that is legally worthless. He's panicked for some reason. Sensible would have been to discuss the matter with the OP and do the thing properly... both getting legal advice and both signing the agreement.

[JanMorrow]

I would feel really hurt by this myself. To and get a legal document drawn up without discussing it with you, shows total disregard for your thoughts and feelings.

I can understand him not wanting to lose his house in the event of a relationship break down. He owned it before he met you, so it's not a joint asset.. but will you be contributing towards the mortgage when you move in? I'm assuming the agreement takes this into account? Does it mention what would happen in the event of you having a child together?

I would be having serious words with him. If you think you may sign this document, I would also consider getting independent legal advice first.

[northerngirl41]

It sounds like he may have had to have this in place if he's drawn down on the mortgage to do the extension? I.e. if he as the owner has asked for a mortgage extension, the bank will want to make damn sure that no one else has a claim to the property if he defaults and they want their money out. You could very well have a claim on the property if living there and contributing to bills/mortgage etc over the long term.

There is no doubt at all he has handled this appaulingly badly - but I think you need to go and speak to him about it rather than assuming the worst.

[LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726]

I don't know that discussing it 'before' or 'after' (as he has done), is actually the issue. Pre-nups really do bring it home that if the relationship fails (and who wants to think about that when all's rosy in the garden) 'your home' will not be your home any longer. Perhaps harder still when one partner brings a child in.

The outcome would be the same whether it was discussed beforehand or not, really. It probably smarts a bit but I think that he's being sensible. Some ex-partners can be very vengeful and he - and you - should be protected from that as far as possible.

I can understand the hurt feelings, particularly with your daughter to consider, but if he'd told you beforehand (and it is still before you marry), what difference would it really have made that you've been told now?

[Ephiny]

It sounds like he owns the house outright, so no question of contributing to or being named on a mortgage.

Honestly it sounds like the OP does quite well out of this - she and her child get to live in a lovely refurbished family home essentially for free. Even if things do go horribly wrong and they end up separating, she'll surely have saved a lot, i.e. what she'd otherwise have had to pay out in rent/mortgage every month - that is the biggest outgoing for most people.

They definitely need to talk about it though, it's really important in a relationship to have this kind of thing sorted out and agreed on, and make sure you have the same values/feelings on how things should be shared in a relationship or indeed marriage. Better to talk these things through now than have to consider them for the first time in the aftermath of a breakup.

[auroraday]

This is horrible. I can see why it's important to be practical and protect what you've worked for but it smacks of poor judgment to have had this drawn up without broaching it gently and discussing it first.
Are you actually getting married? If marriage isn't even on the horizon and he is already thinking about protecting his assets from you, chances are that isn't going to happen and you are wasting your time. :(

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

"what difference would it really have made "

Every difference in the world. If it is a 'pre-nup' i.e. the pair are getting married and he wants to protect his assets against a future divorce claim, then it is not binding if one party simply draws up an agreement on their own. Both parties have to be in agreement, take independent legal advice and sign up voluntarily. If it isn't done properly it's not worth the paper it's written on.

[squeakytoy]

Does he have children from a previous relationship?

[ImperialBlether]

I agree with you, OP, that he could have told you about this. He must have made the appointment beforehand - I would have expected "We need to talk about what happens if we split up - obviously I don't want that to happen."

In your position I would not want to make a claim on his house, but at the same time I wouldn't want to be left homeless, so I'd be looking at using my own wages to get a mortgage on a property to rent out.

[bubblesincoffee]

We are all speculating about this and making judgements, but none of us know what this pre nup actually says.

For all we know, he could have put plans in place within the agreement so that OP and her dd are not left completely destitute in the event of a split.

In our case, I would have been the one that could have made a pre nup and asked dh to sign it, as I am the one that was more financially stable and the children are biolgically mine, not his. But I made a conscious descision that there is no way I would start a marriage in that way. Partly because I don't see how you can truly make a lifelong commitment through marriage at the same time as having a get out clause. The two things simply don't go together. The whole point of being married is that you come together and share your life, your joys, your problems, your finances! And partly because even if we did split up, I wouldn't want either of us to be completely left in the shit money wise. It's the risk I chose to take when I got married, and some may say that that is unwise, but we couldn't have entered into a marriage any other way.

If that is how the OP feels too, then there are bigger problems here than just the lack of a claim to a house if they split.

[HappyMummyOfOne]

YABU, he's protecting what he has worked hard for. If you dont like the idea of a pre nup then dont sign it and dont move in with him.

If this was a woman posting that she owned a large house outright but wanted to move a partner in almost every post would advise her to protect herself legally in the event of a split. Funny it doesnt work the other way round and the man is awful for trying to do the same.

[AnansiGirl]

There appears to be no female equivalent for the insult 'cocklodger' which is often hurled at men who live in a woman's home without contributing anything.
Although the OP hasn't been back to explain further, and she could be paying half the bills and sharing the housework for all we know.

[eurochick]

I think pre-nups are a great idea. I am the one with most to lose finacially if our marriage failed. I wimped out of suggesting one because it had taken him six and a half years to get around to proposing and I didn't want to rock the boat. I do wish I had one.

[LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726]

Cogito... thanks, didn't realise that. I meant 'what difference' more from a 'feelings' point of view, but yes, I can see that there are legal ramifications too. Perhaps this is something that OP and her partner can now look into from a joint perspective then.

[LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726]

AnansiGirl... 'Vag-limpet'? 'Fanjo-barnacle'?

[ChaoticAngelofGryffindor]

I wouldn't have a problem with the pre-nup per se. It makes sense that he wants to protect himself in the event of a break up.

I would have a problem if 'he' had gone behind my back and got one drawn up. For me it would be a trust issue. How could I trust him not to go behind my back again wrt something else.

[minipie]

Are you actually getting married OP?

If not, it doesn't sound like a pre nup.

It sounds like a cohabitation agreement - to make it clear that he owns the house so that you cannot later make a claim to it if you split up.

Which, if you're not married, is perfectly fair enough.

I agree though that is would have been better if he'd raised the idea with you before speaking to a lawyer and getting an agreement drafted. I don't think he's necessarily been sneaky though, just done things in the wrong order.

[LynetteScavo]

Arf @ LyingWitchInTheWardrobe

I think fangolodger is the correct term.

[nocake]

Having been through a financially messy (and expensive) divorce I think pre-nups should be compulsory before anyone gets married. Having said that, he hasn't done one because you're not getting married (at least you haven't told us that you are). He has simply done something very sensible and protected his assets against a situation that he hopes doesn't happen but he is aware might happen. If the positions were reversed I would be advising you to do the same.

[LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726]

Thanks, LynetteScavo... I'm adding it to my 'MN Dictionary'...

[miarosemum]

wow guys, thanks for all your responses...he owns his house outright, not bad for a 38 year old but he is self employed and has a very successful business. i however am a single parent,but i work and have had my own successful career for the last 12 years but i do not earn anywhere near what he earns. We have no intention to get married at the moment, we are happy as we are, but we have discussed having children of our own in the near future. dd does not see her biological dad so dp has been the only dad in her life and he ad she are happy with this. he has practically been living in my flat for the last year (privately rented) while the building work is going on at his for us to move into. I also questioned the fact that seeing as we have no intention to marry, why a pre-nup? as the house is his, and he owns outright in his own name with no one else?

[miarosemum]

he has told me that i am due a letter through the post that i have to sign but not really told me the contents of it?