Prenuptial agreement

[Allaboutthebees]

I have a dilemma with my soon-to-be husband.. we have a 20 year age difference but I have some family wealth that I've inherited and will soon be inheriting some more. My family are absolutely adamant that I get a prenuptial agreement in place before we marry. Their reasoning for this is that I have a lot more life to live and if things went south with my partner then he would take half of everything I have and enjoy his retirement on me essentially. I absolutely adore my partner and I just can't bare the idea of suggesting such a thing to him, I feel like he would feel untrusted and judged. I really don't know what to do. My family say that if the roles were reversed and he was the one with money, everyone would insist he gets a prenup incase I was some sort of gold-digger etc. Do people really still think like that these days?

YABU - listen to your family
YANBU - don't suggest it, it will hurt him

There is nothing unromantic about having a prenup. It is to protect both partners in case of a worst case scenario, which there is a roughly 40%ish chance of happening. You would get insurance if you had such odds in any other situation in life.

My partner and I will have one, as in a case of divorce, we don't want acrimony over assets to poison our co-parenting. So we are making decisions now, at a stage where we love eachother and look out for eachother's interests, that will protect us in the long term. I have seen knives come out amongst the most gentle of people once their relationship broke down, and don't want to risk that situation.

Don't let emotions cloud your rational judgement on this. If he loves you, he would want you protected.

Do you need to get married if you’re not keen on the financial/legal implications in the event of a divorce? Could you not stay as happily cohabiting partners instead?

Been there, been stung.

I'd consider why you want to get married - women especially are sold the whole romantic vision of a life together, partnership etc etc... but what people fail to consider is that it is actually a legal contract and with that, comes serious financial implications.

I thought I had married a good, honest, moral man. He would never do anything so wrong that we couldn't work it out. And in the sad event of a divorce, he would never touch my assets. He willingly agreed to sign a pre-nup and always said he was not interested in my money.

Then, years down the line he did something so truly unforgivable that we had to divorce - I was totally blindsided. I agreed a pay off in the end - my solicitor advised that while there was a pre-nup and that would be looked at, there were various grounds to challenge it. Add in the cost of legal fees to negotiate, and it would likely be very expensive. So I had to agree to a pay off, in addition to being stuck with all the associated costs of the divorce, selling the house etc... He just walked away and left me with all of the fall out.

Just seriously, ask yourself what it is you gain by being married and what you risk to lose, in light of the fact it is a serious legal contract and not just some romantic, idealised vision of a life together.

A fool and their inherited money are soon parted.

This. In England and wales a pre-nup does not override the law in the marriage act (upon divorce) of “fair settlement”
nor does any other privately drawn up legal document
”fair settlement “ looks at the future needs of both parties based on a list of 10 or so criteria . The law is written this way to try to prevent one party being left dependant on the state vs the other party living in relative wealth . All assets are considered in the “pot” and only if there are enough assets to provide for “fair settlement” will 50:50 come into play. For a court to consider a prenup there would have to be a considerable amount of surplus assets

The only other time they may consider it, is if your marriage is very short - less than 2 years and neither of you have financially benefitted from the other in that time . It’s still unusual though.

note that the law is very different in Scotland - you might consider moving there 🤷🏼‍♀️🤣

even if your dh (to be) agreed to abide by your pre nup as part of a consent order (where you agreement amicably on spit and court “seals” what you’ve agreed) a court could refuse to “seal” it if they consider it doesn’t meet fair settlement - there’s a recent post on the boards about this, and it crops up on boards once or twice a year where courts have told petitioners to either rethink, or refuse to seal . The court HAS to follow the law.

this is why so many cases involving pre-nuts end up going to court hearings in front of judge, in very expensive cases - and you need a lot of money to be able to afford that . Solicitors will charge you £200+ per hour for every second they’re even thinking about your cases, or reading your prenup and trying to figure out if there is any chance it’ll stand up in court of law.

If you’re in England or Wales, the court is not going to take it into account unless you both have surplus assets after “fair settlement” is met. See below for my post.

🤦‍♀️not in England and wales it won’t be

If you decide to have a pre-nup, then maybe you aren’t planning on sticking to your vows about being together until death.

She can be as certain as she likes but she has no control over what her fiance will do in the future.
I think it makes sense - advice re legalities taken into account - or just don't get married.

@Appleofmyeye2023 , that is really interesting! I just yesterday read advice from a family lawyer (UK based), who mentioned she would always advice a prenup. It might have been her drumming up clients then!

What does 'fair settlement' consist of?

It seems now marriage is just for the poor!

If you are a msn or woman with assets you are advised not to marry to protect yourself, of course no risk marrying if you are both broke students.

Seems a shame that sensible people who consider outcomes can't draw up a legal contract that reflects their current reality, in the uk.

That's at a detriment to most people (particularly if you plan to have kids)

Talk to him. You may be pleasantly surprised. I'd be more than happy to consider a pre nup if my partner was much wealthier. It tidies away any "gold digger " niggles and allows you to enjoy your relationship freely. They aren't binding in England and Wales but can have some influence. The main reason it would be disregarded would be if there are children of the marriage and the poorer partner is the main carer.

I am in a 20-year age gap and this works for us cohabiting together.

There a case (Granatino v Radmacher) in which validity of a pre-nup was upheld. However, i know nothing about it and have no idea of the detail or interaction with fair settlement. Certainly some of the law firms that advise the very wealthy refer to this case to say pre-nups are now valid in the UK, but i suspect it does not quite go that far.

I think pre-nups are a good idea and wouldn't have a problem either presenting one to a partner or signing one, but an even better idea is just not to get married in the first place? Why do you want to get married?

@WhyOhWine I think it's very much a case of they should be upheld and most likely would (assuming no circumstances changing like kids arriving and all had advise first)

But you'd not know that until you were relying on it and also at a point your ex is trying to overturn the pre-nup and make out it was unfair/ untruthfull etc. egged on by their lawyer who wants fees, not just agree the pre-nip stands and take a small fee.

Yes they are more commonly upheld for very wealthy couples because even the poorer partner is likely still very wealthy in their own right (just less so) and will still have a very comfortable life on say "their" 20 million as opposed to 50% of overall assets of say 100 million. The point of division of assets is for both parties to have adequate provision for a separate life.

It’s completely up to you whether you arrange a pre-nup, but I can’t imagine not being able to speak to my husband about this for fear of offending him. You should be able to have a calm and honest discussion about things like this if you’re getting married.

I have one with my husband and he had absolutely no issue with me suggesting it. We both had significant assets before marriage but I had a substantial inheritance on the horizon. If you do this right (well in advance of the ceremony, each gets a separate solicitor), it stands a good chance of being legally binding.

Marriage is betting 50% of your assets that it will work out.

Why are you marrying? Pop culture sells it as romance and an expression of love. Me and my husband did it purely for financial reasons alone. Contracts are not romantic IMO.

But you dont need your parents consent to marry. Thats why marriage is for adults.

Does it benefit you? If not, why not wait?

Are you sure you want to marry him? To me, marriage includes sharing what you have. Why not just stay as you are if you want to keep your finances seperate and not become responsible for each other?

Go to the divorce board on MN. Then click on link to ADVICE NOW site. Open up their guides to making financial settlemento in divorce.
the fair settlement criteria are laid out By Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

I've not married my DP for this reason. We've been in a committed relationship for 7 years and have a DP but there is an age gap and I came into the relationship with a lot more than him and assets. Our finances are largely separate - we just have a joint account for bills. I pay a larger share for things like holidays / meals out, house renovations etc. I have seen too many of my friends get fucked over by divorces and have no real desire to get married. We're both on the same page and it works fine.

I think given that pre-nups are usually only the concern of very wealthy individuals, these are ones that will have excess assets that would be able to get a financial order sealed taking the prenup into account. so, yep, if you have one very wealthy partner (multi million these days as a lot of blokes pension pots can be £100,000s plus property in excess of £500k) then it probably is worth doing

where both parties are very wealthy, it could be helpful to outline who gets what back out a marriage without involving a long solicitors debate racking up £10000 in legal bills.

I’m also sure, where you have a lot of wealth coming into the marriage the pre-nup negations are a very useful exercise on laying out ground rules of how fiancés will be organised during the marriage. It’s a very sensible thing to agree this before you marry, and a prenup could help that in defining what is “joint assets” both contribute to, versus how much autonomy you both keep during your marriage over your individual wealth. A pre nup doesn’t have to be just in case of divorce.

but for the likes of the vast majority of the population, the best we’d be able to achieve is 50:50 (per variations because of dependants) which just about covers housing, pensions, a smaller level of assets. And in a lot of cases, we’ll barely be able to afford a roof over our head even if renting. So not a lot of use as “fair settlement” will overwrite it

I would be v slow to marry in this situation. Where I'm from the divorce rate is low and affair rate is low too- small place so harder to get away with probably so marriage is not so much of a risk. Plus we have co habitation laws so even if you don't marry they are still entitled but v v heavily skued in favor of the women. The divorce rate in the UK is so so high, even higher for second marriages so I would think long and hard on this
Money changes EVERYONE, especially the people who say money doesn't matter, they seem to be the ones who go after it the most. In your situation unless there is so much to go around that you could lose half and sttill live a great life I would either not get married or insist on a pre nup

Most definitely.

Get your solicitor/financial adviser to broach the subject if you don't want to. Both sides need to take legal advice and whilst not binding under UK law, if they are done correctly then they are generally taken into account in any future divorce settlement

In my experience these are usually negotiated behind the scenes anyway between the legal representation with a very hands off approach to the engaged couple. There is no need for awkward "round table" type situations.