DP wants a prenup!

[HappyHattie]

I’ve taken legal advice so fully understand how they do/don’t work- not looking for technical advice just opinions on whether IABU??

I am 27 DP is 32 - he earns 3x my salary. (mine is respectable and I’ve just completed a masters so will increase).

DP owned his home with about £150k of equity before we met. (He paid top end of the asking price so has not gained value and may lose a bit post Brexit)

Anyway we’re financially merged- joint accounts- I’ve never held anything back from him- including my £7k of savings when I moved in. (I know I still don’t match his income but still)

He did mention getting something in writing to protect his £150k much earlier in the relationship - fine, I was happy with that- my sibling has one as he had a large inheritance- I’ve always been independent!

But now we’re actually getting married - my £7k of savings has been swallowed up, I’m not yet named on the mortgage and we’re both wanting to start a family post wedding (2-3 kids).

The plan is I’ll drop down to PT - only today whilst talking it through with a solicitor did I realise how vulnerable I’ll be leaving myself!

I don’t want to have small children and work FT (my career is demanding and DP whilst eager to help is very much consumed by his career and often works away for short periods) I work with so many women who try to juggle this and their lives look miserable! I’d rather not have children than live like that!

So this evening I’ve been really deflated- feeling like I’m getting the shit end of the stick really - I’m not after his money (not at all) but equally I don’t really want to be drafting up a 14 page prenup which even the solicitor said ‘is likely to get quite complicated’

It also seems like it’s going to escalate from ‘protecting the £150k’ to also including inheritance, pensions, earnings...etc.

I didn’t sign up for not being a ‘team’ if I wanted to build a financial future alone - I wouldn’t be getting married.

I’m probably ABU 😞 but would appreciate some opinions!

(DP is a wonderful guy - honestly 10/10 on everything else but he had a really bad experience as a teen when he lost his parent and their very recent new spouse tried to take everything- think this has made him overly cautious)

Just say no. You’ll be the one sacrificing your career to look after future children, if the worst did happen and you divorced you will need half of everything to start again.

I don't agree she has to be the one sacrificing career for family. Make him do equal pick ups from nursery or arrange and pay childcare for his days and it all remains fair and a good example to daughters that women can build careers and out earn men.

Prenup aside, I think you need to revisit a few issues with him:

Where you live. How much of a dent will this put in your future career and earnings? Are you honestly happy living with that?

The house: Do you like it? Would you have chosen it? Would it work for kids?

Work after dc: Have you discussed your intention to not work/work PT after dc? How does he see this impacting on family finances?

I think it is fine for him to protect his 150k, sensible even. But you need to realise how much money you are potentially giving up - if you stayed out of work for 6 years after dc, that could easily be 150k or indeed well more gone. If you don't have access to London jobs, you could be giving up ££££ a year not to mention career opportunities and job satisfaction.

I think you two need to talk before involving the solicitors.

Sorry to hear you're facing hard choices, OP. I've not come across pre-nups for such a relatively small amunt of equity and no other assets.

Your partner has opened up a financial view of the future with you separating so it might be helpful for him to work through the implications of that.

It might be helpful for you to think through then discuss with him a scenario in say, ten years where he has worked FT with your support, has hopefully had career and earnings growth with your support to enable him to work late, travel with work and so on. You have intermittently worked PT around 2-3 sets of mat leave and have your 2-3 DCS. You have no personal savings, OP. The house has no or minimal additional equity (say Brexit's unknown effects on the economy). (He has a fling and) you separate.‎

Depending on what the pre-nup provisions are in the 14 pages, you have no equity to fund the purchase of a house and impaired earning and the difficulty of finding PT work to cover children and school. Possibly the pre-nup covers you being forced to leave the house (sorry haven't read the thread and am unaware of the conflict between family law now/how family law may evolve in the future! And the unknown provisions of the pre-nup beyond what you said in your OP about 150k equity). That doesn't seem to be an equitable position. If you have DDs, would he recommend it for her if she was getting married?‎ I have a DD and would not.

I would put the ball in his court first and ask him to propse how the pre-nup could offer you some comfort. He and his solicitor might offer something interesting but will probably hate this and will try and put the ball in your court.‎
‎
If 'you love him, he is resolute and it is 'essential' to sign up to a pre-nup, you might want to think how the Prenup could try and give him the immediate security he (wrongly) feels he needs about his precious equity but gives you increaing protection going forward to compensate for your the increasing earnings impairment over time after DCs. This might include pooling earned money and -
if you work PT, shared money is directed into a pension vehicle to match his presumably larger pension; and
‎
Shared money also funds a (sinking fund equivalent) savings vehicle in your name that is planned to match his 150k equity in, say, ten years.

If emergencies mean this is touched, an equal amount of protected 150k pre nup equity is 'released' so your relative protection doesn't get eroded.

Don't be surprised if this is resisted but he has introduced a financial view of separation now.

For context, if having DC will impact on your earning, some pre-nups recognise this (you could 'get' 75k of equity per child?' or the protected sum erodes by say 10 per cent per year of marriage.

Finally, after the above and bills are taken, you both get an equal share of the remaining income so your reduced earnings after having and looking after the children doesn't lead to you having less free money to spend or save to protect yourself.

To him, this might sound 'cloud cuckoo' but it might help you not being vulnerable or disadvantaged over time and help him understand that although on the face of it, a pre nup sounds fair, it may lead to a fundamentally unfair situation. His reaction will be interesting. Finally, if you have a pre-nup, will it adress what happens when yu move house (will his protected equity always be protected in the new house?). What happens when he dies? Do his DPS get his equity? Good luck.

As you asked in your OP, I forgot to add YANBU.

I think pre existing property and subsequently acquired family assets/ inheritance is fine TBH

Although they aren't necessarily going to be kep by the original spouse even under pre nup rules actually which is why plenty of people choose not to marry instead and just live together. The pre nup even to have a hope of being valid needs to be fair to both sides in most likely situations so if say against my advice here this poster gives up work or goes part time when babies come and has no or little income and her husband does not have much by then either she might well get 60%+ of the house equity (which could be less than current values as property prices are currently falling by the way in lots of areas) just to enable the children to be housed.

I have a pre nup.

I would not agree to the one you are talking about here but I might consider one worded correctly.

I can tell you how we agreed and you can decide if any of it is relevant.

For us the numbers were all much larger, both savings, multiples of earnings and income firstly. I offered to sign one and DH took me up on that offer as the higher earner. We protected out pre marital assets, of which we both had a decent, although very uneven amount. We then also agreed that in the event of the split all post marital assets would be split 5050. So as he was the higher earner by a long way I would be in a comfortable financial position fairly quickly anyway.

It would also made clear we should review and recommit after 5 years to reflect changing circumstances if we wanted to and that less weight would be paid to the pre nup the longer our marriage continued and if we had children.

We had both been cheated on previously and understood that sometimes the unexpected happens, having that conversation doesn't damage our relationship. It felt like a positive discussion.

We are 5 years down the line with two children. I am now a SAHM. We also have talked about what would happen with kids if we split. I have made it clear that my support for his career ends as I would need to work. And I would be expecting him to have the kids 50 per cent of the time. SAHM has been the right decision for our family. It has allowed him to work in a way to maximise his promotions and bonuses. As a result he is now paid significantly more. That increase well outweighs what I could have added by working. I will return to employment at a suitable time. I was never interested in the promotion game so am happy I won't have missed out on that.

In your circumstances, I might be willing to agree to protect his 150k for a limited time. Maybe birth of first child change it? Or a fixed period? But not forever. Building a family is about sharing and supporting each other.

I don't agree she has to be the one sacrificing career for family. Make him do equal pick ups from nursery or arrange and pay childcare for his days and it all remains fair and a good example to daughters that women can build careers and out earn men.

She doesn't have to be the one sacrificing her career but it is pretty impossible to force someone to do equal pickups from nursery if they insist that they can't do that particularly if the person saying that they can't leave the office early is the higher earner. Obviously some men do contribute their fair share but many don't and it is often not clear that this will happen until after the children have been born by which time it is too late.

Someone makes a good point - this man in not very rich. Many many people in the UK - especially now as people settle down later - have houses/ equity that become part of the family money. His desire to keep that money from you is unusual - he might need to think more about that.

If he is holding onto worry and stress from grief he needs to address that properly - not just recreate sad and bitter divisions.

Also - all these people saying the OP could just work full time.

MAybe she doesn't want to? Maybe she believes a family should work together so that A parent (either parent) Can be around in the earaly years and do school pick ups during the primary years. THat's not for HER. It's for THEIR joint children.

Given that is a normal wish - the husband should look at what benefits the children/ his own family set up - and ensure his finances go to support that set up.

I wouldn't marry him. I certainly wouldn't have children with him. I think a marriage should be a total gathering of assets and resources and a commitment to a life-long shared future. I'd only marry and start a family with someone who thought similarly.

My adult son as equity in his house which mostly came from me out of hard earned income taxed at 40%+ and I would not want it all going to a spouse if he ever marries. I would be happy for it all to go to his children but not a divorcing spouse.

If he wants to protect it and you won't sign a prenup he could easily just live together and have children which avoids the whole issue and perhaps reach agreement he will not move the poster in until she agrees always to work full time. He could do what my husband did which was find our childcare before we had the baby fixed up to start soon after she was born and then manage and help organise that, rather than thinking women earn pin money and must organise childcare themselves.

If he wants to protect it and you won't sign a prenup he could easily just live together and have children which avoids the whole issue

I mean, it's an option he could float but the op could just call it a day and have children with a different man - there's plenty of them.

Could you rent out his house and move to where you could commute to London and he back to your current town?

If my DH had asked for a prenup I wouldn't have married him, and I'd never have thought to ask him for one (neither of us had that much money to start with, but hypothetically!).

We got married because we love each other and want to be a partnership / family. Any money we have is shared. This will include inheritance when it comes to it. I don't know why you'd get married and plan to have children if you don't feel that way.

I hope your partner sees sense OP!

@happyhattie

Notice how that question never seems to come up when it’s a married woman announcing pregnancy?

I was asked and I am married!

Anyway, it is a tricky one because his reasons are not bad ones but neither are yours. In your shoes, I would discuss and say that living in his house makes it impossible for you to get on the property ladder so you either need to move and buy a house together OR you need the house to be jointly yours. You want to be on the property ladder, as do millions of young people, because of the security of brings. He is being unreasonable to suggest you give up all hope of that.

I would also say that going part time to raise children will negatively affect your pension and career progression so if he intends to keep his pension just for him, either he will need to arrange childcare instead (jointly paid by both of you) or he is going to need to go part time instead or as well (both work four days, for instance- this makes better financial sense for me and my DH despite him earning much more than me. Do the math- it may surprise you.) If you alone decide to go part time, make it clear that you expect payment for this, which should be the amount of money you are saving in childcare fees due to you taking the time off. This money will go into a pension that is exclusively for your use.

Get that written into the prenup, along with anything else you can think of.

Big red flag OP.

This man not only wants to protect his pre relationship investment, which on it's own would be understable, but you also think it's going to escalate to future inheritance, earnings, pension...but he's happy enough for you to drop to PT to raise his 2 or 3 kids and to piss through your savings. And you're not on the mortgage of the house you've actually invested in by paying to do it up. It's madness!

Are you contributing towards the mortgage every month??

Where do you stand if this all goes to shitsville? It's terribly uneven and very unfair. No house, no money, a stalled career and 2 or 3 kids depending on you.

"HappyHattie

Read HollowTalk's post over and over again. Then read it some more, in case it doesn't sink in.

In fact - read it to your DP and get his reaction.

I can understand pre-nups under certain circumstances (i.e. certain situations with inheritances.) Not this one, though, when it's the family home you will be raising children in cause he doesn't want to move etc etc. Trying to ring fence a pension and future earnings - I hope Karma bites his ass, to be honest.

Not sure what HE wants out of marriage but I seriously hope you don't go ahead with this.

HollowTalk Thu 17-Jan-19 09:57:08

DP is fixed here because of his job. He could ask for a job down south but;

A- he doesn’t want to
B- he would be VERY unlikely to get one as they allocate area based on priority. So if you want a desirable area like London you have to either be from London or have children at school in the area - they don’t accept ‘my wife wants to work there’

I'm trying to think what kind of job your fiance has, that he can't apply for a job unless he's from there/has children in school there. He's clearly on a good salary. I think (a) is your answer - he doesn't want to move to London and he's fobbing you off with reasons why he wouldn't get a job there.

So let's look at what you stand to lose:

a) live in an area you don't want to live in
b) live outside London which will greatly restrict your choice of jobs
c) live in a house you haven't chosen
d) live in a house that doesn't belong to you and never will
e) you won't have the chance to buy your own place
f) you'll give up half your salary if you have children
g) if you divorce you'll be massively disadvantaged, financially
h) if you stay married, you will never live in a house you choose or in the area you choose
i) I assume that if he dies, your children will inherit his house

I would ask for some of the £7K back and I'd be on the train to London immediately.

@Cismyfatarse yes you can. The pre nup DH and I have is to be updated/amended every five years or on the birth of any children.

DH wanted to wait until the birth of a child to include the part about maintenance, but I was adamant that I wanted it included from the start as it's something so important to be, following my childhood (not because I believe DH wouldn't continue to provide for our children should we divorce)

I think it's reasonable for him to want to protect assets he has pre marriage, but not anything gained during the marriage (pension, earnings etc) - otherwise, as you say, why get married.

Inheritances can be kept separate from marital assets anyway so you don't need a pre nup for that to be effective, as long as they are not mixed into the marital assets/accounts - if you used them to buy a house on both names, that would then belong to both of you. But if he shoves it in an account that you have no access to and you get no say in how it is spent, it stays out of the marriage.

You don't need to worry about being 'on the mortgage', in fact, try not to be, keep away from debt! Once you're married the marital home becomes a joint asset no matter what he thinks, and you can also register your interest in it legally. How to protect his equity at the point of marriage is another issue.

So he's doing this to protect at best £75k that he would lose if you split? At 3x your salary he probably earns at least £60k pa so that seems like a very small amount to bother getting a pre-nup for. AND you lose out on potential earnings to support his job. Are you sure that's all he wants to protect or is his family encouraging him for the pre nup? I'd check he's on the same page as you & have an honest convo - if I was giving up good potential earnings for someone that was concerned about this amount I'd be seriously worried.

I have sympathy OP for your situation......because if by walking away from everything as many posters have suggested you do, you may kind of vindicate or confirm your fiancés insecurity that you are marrying him only for love and not for any financial gain.
So, I don't think there's anything wrong in pursuing one of two routes:-

1. go down the prenup route but get YOUR t&c's included or don't do it at all.....you could of course fall out of love just by doing this process because it's like a bloody divorce BEFORE the divorce if that makes sense.
2. say you disagree with the prenup because you are marrying him for love AND lifelong security and support. What's wrong with that? If bad luck were to befall him - health, financial ruin ...,then he would need you for lifelong security and support OP.

I couldn't be with a man like this. he's basically saying fuck you and our kids if we split up.
I know you don't go into a marriage thinking this, but he obviously is.
I'd run a mile from a man like this, certainly wouldn't marry one and have dc with him.