To not have a 'runaway' fund?

[runawayfund]

Met a friend for coffee today and we got chatting. I told her how I was trying to start saving a bit of money each month to have a bit of financial back up in case the car breaks or we need a new dishwasher etc. She then told me she saves around £200 a month and puts it in her 'runaway fund'. She was horrified that I didn't know what a runaway fund was.

It's a account that she keeps secret from her husband in case they separate and she needs to leave the home or runaway for whatever reason. She said it's a bit of financial security for her should the worst happen between her and her husband. I asked if this meant she thought they were going I separate one day but she says they are very happy and she has no intention of leaving but also said every woman should have one. Now I'm wondering if I need to start my own runaway fund?! Although I would feel guilty keeping that from my DH. Had this always been a thing?

I don't have a secret savings fund, but I have my own savings account and pension and DH has his own savings and pension. We also have a joint account for bills and a joint savings account we pay into if we're saving for a joint project like house renovations or a holiday and sometimes we both move big chunks from our personal savings in there if something comes up. Family crisis stuff like a broken boiler we split between us.

Not sure why I'd keep it a secret but I don't think I'd want to be 100% financially vulnerable.

I have my own savings and current account as well as a joint one with DP. I'd never have just the one shared one again after my exp cleared it out when he legged it with the ow.

I don't see it as running away money, just my money

Do you all know and are you certain that your partner/husband does NOT have an independent stash? Bet you don't how would you?

Bet you I do. Because DH gets paid into our joint account that I handle. I also get his pay slips and reviewed his renewed contract for any glaring legal errors the other day so I know exactly what he earns.

And if he had a "secret stash" from before we got together then that money is his FFS, he can do with it what he likes (but if he did have such an account, he'd have already spent it on expensive whiskey and Breitling watches...)

Yes, of course as a woman it is wise and advisable to have independent monies, regardless of how these come about (in a FoF, ISA, offshore accounts, separate savings or joint accounts), but the assumption from many here that every DH is going to turn into a thieving bastard and strip your account bare is not realistic.

Calling any women who don't have a FoF naive or foolish is slightly pathetic if you don't know that person's circumstances, no??

I think NOT having independent means is is naive and foolish, and slightly smacks of dependency.

But don't hold that against me. It is just another view.

Oh and I don't think I ever said that those without independent means were naive and foolish either.

but the assumption from many here that every DH is going to turn into a thieving bastard and strip your account bare is not realistic.

I haven't seen anyone claim that every husband is going to fuck his wife over.

It's a rude insulting and untrue view, so I will hold it against you.

It's all horribly sexist of you all anyway. You haven't even considered that in a relationship of joint finances it might be the man who is vulnerable.
My DH would be at much more risk than I would should anything bad happen. So if I had a secret hidden stash as well wouldn't I be financially abusive? Or can people only do that when they have a penis?

I have been with DH for 15 years & feel like I know him inside out. I don’t believe he would ever cheat on me or do anything to damage our family. I still think it’s prudent to have money set aside, it doesn’t mean my marriage is shit.

My DH would be at much more risk than I would should anything bad happen.

I hope he's got a fund.

No not sexist but realist. In my previous posts and in other pps, we did mention that women can clear out the joint account, it does happen.

Everyone should have an account only for themselves and that only they can access.

Honestly, it is not a competition here between man and wife/partner or vice versa. And what they do and what they are like and their apparent saintlihood either.

It is about being a bit sensible in the face of possible adversity.

But you all carry on.

The bottom line is... if you never need it great!, but if you do that is also great too.

Poor Yorick, (I hope he's got a fund)

LOL . Too right. And I bet he has!

I will keep my stash and add to it every month. It is mine and mine alone. FGS I am a person in my own right. Having subscribed to our family's joint expenditure for the benefit of our family 50 50 with DH. He knows and doesn't give a fig, he has his own too.We know what each of us has.

But independence is a wonderful thing. There is nothing like that security blanket. EVER. And I don't care what anyone thinks.

I hope that is OK

It's all horribly sexist of you all anyway. You haven't even considered that in a relationship of joint finances it might be the man who is vulnerable.

Of course there are exceptions but

• 95% of SAHP are women
• 90% of resident parents/ single parents are women
• Most women earn less than their partners, partly due to the fact that more women are PT workers than men.
• Man is more likely to leave for another relationship than a woman

This makes it more likely that the woman will be left with large outgoings and no means to pay them than the man. Even if she and her partner earn the same, the second point stands. As I mentioned upthread, even if they earn the same, it's likely that neither partner can afford the household expenses on their own. However, that is more of a problem for whoever isn't the "leaver" because they have to fund it.

Financial settlements can take months to sort out, especially if one party isn't keen to pony up.

Of course there are women who are the highest earner by a large margin, an equally high earner and could easily cover household expenses alone, or are independently wealthy. I know people in all 3 categories. However, that doesn't help you if it's all in a joint account that can be emptied overnight.

I do wonder if ISAs were partly structured as they to encourage women to have money in their own name, but that's possibly wishful thinking.

So if one believes that keeping any cash off to the side is A TERRIBLE THING, it seems fair to extrapolate that to ANY secret or confidence, given the issue has been repeatedly stated to be about the 'hidden' aspect of it, not the money itself.

Gosh. I have things about my self, my life and my thoughts that are nobody's business but mine. Whilst we are a happy unit and share our lives, I feel no obligation to bare the entirety of my deepest darkest soul and mind to OH (or anyone). Same for him.

Same for anyone - we are all entitled to privacy at some level, whether that is because no positive benefit comes of me sharing xyz, or because it's the most inane, pointless nonsense imaginable, or because I just don't want to.

I don’t think my dh will cheat and he’s been incredibly generous to his ex wife.

But...I’m still keeping some money to one side as to me it seems just sensible to have my own cash if something does go tits up.

So if I decide NOT to pay into a fuckofffund, and instead spent my spending money on frivolities like expensive underpants and nice face creams and coffee and cake..... am I still deceiving my husband if I don't declare all of my spends? (after bills paid), or is it just deception of I chose to save rather than spend???

I know on here not having joint accounts is seen as not having a “proper” marriage but i do think joint accounts only makes both parties very vulnerable.

If all assets are pooled it is very easy for either partner to empty all the savings and be gone before the other partner knows what hit them. It has happened to several of my friends, both male and female.

At least having separate accounts means that if your partner ups and leaves or kicks you out they can’t also leave you with no money until payday, if you can get your own account and the payment rearranged in time.

So if one believes that keeping any cash off to the side is A TERRIBLE THING, it seems fair to extrapolate that to ANY secret or confidence, given the issue has been repeatedly stated to be about the 'hidden' aspect of it, not the money itself
Nope. Doesn't even slighty follow. Bizarre idea of yours that it does.

Why is one secret (money) not ok but another secret (whatever thing) ok?

Where do you draw the line then? You're the one saying secret money was terrible awful specifically because of the secret nature of it.

Like with most things, it’s better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

chestylarue52

Perfect response, and one that most intelligent people here will subscribe to always, with one eye at the worst case scenario.

Prepare to fail, or fail to prepare, I know what cohort I am in!

I've not RTHT but the Independent journals are reading this
www.independent.co.uk/life-style/runaway-bank-accounts-women-husbands-relationship-end-a8178481.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook

Just as much of a risk is couples who keep things very separate but rely on the other to pay for essentials. If one is suddenly incapable (road accident illness) the other cannot access their money without going to court and is temporarily stuffed at an already nightmare time. This I have seen happen.

Going to court takes months in the meantime mortgage not paid etc. Not an issue for joint account holders. Even if you are married you can't access his accounts. If this is you consider getting lasting powers of attorney done (martin Lewis recently did article on them).

A running away fund may not be enough to pay a mortgage for 6 months etc. Though am sure all these prepare for the worst advocates already have these in place plus water tight wills done so preaching to the converted.