Dd s boyfriend wants a pre nup .

[Velveteenrabbitt]

dd had been with her bf since uni - he has several investments and earns 85 k plus massive bonuses and his earnings will increase. She earns 32k

They are buying a house together and she is investing 30% of deposit , he 70% . Has he has more money.
They told me y day that he wants a pre nup when they get married.
I must admit I was very shocked as I assumed marriage to be a ‘ we situation’ and everything is shared as in the good and the bad - and why would money be the only thing not shared ?

I spoke to him about it as he told me that his mates just dont get it . He says that its because he has seen some married men lose their home And end up in rented if the couple split up and the man ends up worse off mostly, he wants to make sure that If anything happened its not like that .
The mortgage but also it will be not what i assumed in that it will be - joint ownership - but that he gives 70% contributions to deposit and mortgage payments, and she gives 30 % and that will be reflected too .

We are giving dd part of her deposit. The solicitor says that this is classed as a gift and is paid when the mortgage commences.

dd says that initially she was upset and insulted , but now she understands what he means she is ok with it .

I understand that she will need a solicitor for her part of the pre nup.?
I remain anxious about this - it does not feel normal ?

How can i address this with sensitivity with dd without isolating her from us ?

Ive said to him it needs to be fair and in the marriage would be uneasy if dd had to buy cheap clothes for eg and him with more income had much more spending money.. he said that - what people don't see is he does treat her - and he is generous- but again thats in his control .

He comes from quite a deprived background and I think part of this may be anxiety as he has worked very very hard .

I don't want to interfere , dd adult, but also our dd.I am aware we may need to tread carefully here am looking for balanced support and i want to stay measured about this and calm etc.

I don’t think it’s the pre-nup that’s the issue but the “I can’t afford a house in…..” and “When I have children” - that’s not him looking at himself and his partner as equals / something they’ll do together but something he is doing. It’s an odd figure of speech and one I’ve only heard from men who have turned out to be arses and have subsequently screwed their children and wives over. Obviously that’s my and my friends / colleagues experiences but there’s usually other things not right in the relationships too.

She will be enabling him to earn that money and also actually helping him by being the main parent

Clearly that can't happen then, why would she enable him to earn a higher salary if it won't benefit her?

A pre-nup needs to account for the fact that she will most likely being the one whose career takes a hit if and when they have kids, while his continues to grow while she enables everything behind the scenes.

The male partner isn't the one who will be disadvantaged by divorce. If she cheats or abuses him he can divorce her and keep his 70%. Why would the clause need to mention if she cheats or abuses him? The whole point is that the situation isn't equal and she will be disadvantaged by this agreement if he cheats or abuses her and she can't afford to leave. Asinine point to try making.

This. ^ I would be giving him a wide berth and certainly not marrying him. I know people have a right to look after their assests and money etc, but if he's so stressed about it that he's already planning what to do when they're divorced, then he really shouldn't be getting married.

@Velveteenrabbitt I would advise your daughter to think carefully about marrying this man. Although, as some people have said, a pre-nup means fuck-all in this country anyway, and you may as well write it all on a paper napkin - with no solicitor involved.

If she is planning to consult a solicitor, she will get independent legal advice. That's all you need to know.
Otherwise, OP, this is absolutely nothing to do with you. She is an adult who can make her own decisions, including those of which you may disapprove.
You already know way too much about their financial situation, so just don't ask any more questions and change the subject if it comes up in conversation.

100% this. ^

I wouldn't sign it. Fair enough to organise the mortgage so deposit split is taken into account but otherwise it's a big NO. If they are truly to be a couple then it's family money from here on in irrespective of who earns what when. Or is he expecting her to have a few kids and keep a 'little job' and otherwise support his astronomical career rise ( and then the all away with the largest percentage split when they divorce?)....

He's afraid if they divorce he will "lose his house." You're afraid that if they have kids and he divorces her, that she will end up stuck in a dead-end low-paying job because he uses his greater financial power to ensure she does all the childcare to the detriment of her earning power.

Is he the kind of person who will expect her to "pay her way" during her maternity leave even though he's getting free 24/7 childcare and a free baby (ok, little bit facetious but I think you know where I am coming from).

Your daughter is probably not going to listen to you because she has absorbed his viewpoint and may no longer be objective about it. But maybe you can sit her down and very neutrally explain that you do not recommend this marriage because a, b, c. However it's her decision and you will respect her decision.

You may also reconsider whether you want to give her the deposit for the house or just keep it in case she needs to rebuild her life later after divorce.

If they divorce, the law states that :

• all assets, no matter if in joint or individual names are matrimonial assets- that includes money bought into marriage, pensions, life policies etc
• assets are then split on basis of “fair settlement “. This is a list of 7 plus criteria, in priority order that need to be met in dividing assets. Not all will apply at time. But those that do will be applied EVEN if a consent agreeement is reached. Courts can question or even refuse to seal a consent order if they deem “ fair settlement” is not being met by what couple have agreed
• the split is based purely on future needs. Not past behaviours or expectations of what life was like before marriage.

pre nups hold no legal standing under English law. A court MAY take into account if there are sufficient funds in the asset pot to meet all the criteria for “fair settlement “ legally and have some excess assets that could be used. In practice few people will be in that position, especially if children are involved. You pd need to be pretty rich jointly for that to be case. In that case a court would probably try to protect assets within that agreement.

the other case where courts may take it into account would be in a very short marriage of say less than 3 years, where no children/dependants are involved and each person was working as they were before marriage.

seems like the young man is hopelessly poorly informed …reading too many celeb divorce cases where there are loads of excess funds.

your daughter MUST insist that they are joint tenants and equal owners of property irrespective of what each pays towards mortgage. Otherwise she’s making life difficult for herself and in extremely vulnerable position re financial abuse. If they did later divorce it’d unnecessary complicate things …though in most cases would still give her equal share anyway. Similarly if he died it’d unnecessary complicate stuff and delay stuff.

frankly, couples who insist on “ keeping” finances seperate are woefully ill informed of the law around divorce, are woefully un realistic that marriage is primarily a legal and financial contract, and woefully self centred . Let’s hope he grows up. Or someone explain how divorce actually works!

and is one of the few not privately educated in his work and is the only person from the north

Not the NORTH!!! 🤣🤣🤣

If there is a large wealth before marriage, why would you object to him protecting himself. Income earned during the marriage will go into the pot. If your DD has major assets or investments, would you object to ring fencing them prior to marriage. I don't think there is any wrong here

She just needs part of the prenup to say if they have children and she does childcare he will pay her the Nanny rate for care, provide a pension and recognise the hit on her earning potential financially. The 70 / 30 split is fine if he does 50 / 50 household tasks and that is agreed in signing - a definite list with penalties for breaches. No domestic unpaid labour imbalance at all..is the only way this could approach being fair.

Mostly though 🤢

Do they want children? What happens when she isn't earning and on maternity leave, she relies on his favour? I would have serious concerns also. Fair enough protecting his deposit but if he isn't prepared to share jointly after marriage I'd be having serious doubts.

The whole point of our social structures is that parents share their life experiences and age won wisdom

My partner and I have done this and I have the more money. There is no way I'm loosing everything I've worked for and gained in a split if it goes wonky. I've done it becuase my lay eta split, my dad remarried. Knew her for 10 years before he died and she got everything. I'm not having the same for my kids.

If he values the input of his wife, and mother of his children, into the upbringing of his children no more than that of a nanny then she should run a mile.

So they are not even engaged just yet? Buying a property in the circumstances you describe, it seems a very sensible move to protect the initial deposit each will bring. With each change in circumstances this should be reviewed though with the view that everything will be 50/50 if they have children together.

Whilst I’m with you, what if she gets long term or sustains a debilitating condition from pregnancy and childbirth and can’t do these things?

My point being: once you start carving up and itemising your role (as a pre nup sort of dictates), it’s a race to the bottom.

I’d tell the guy to shove it with the prenup. You either trust me as a life partner and to have your children and be a partner, or you don’t. No cherry-picking.

It sounds like a couple of things are being confused legally. To legally protect unequal deposit contributions when buying a house with others, you can use a Declaration of Trust. However, I don't think that necessarily takes into consideration who will pay what in mortgage repayments, as that is in the future.

Because indeed what does happen if he, heaven forfend, becomes unable to work and your daughter becomes the breadwinner?

That is not the same thing as a pre-nup.

This is why your daughter needs to get some independent (from him!) legal advice.

These boards are full of people on approx £100K with a house mouthing off about how they are going to put xyz in Trust, but as has increasingly been pointed out, many of these schemes are really made to protect (very) large sums of money more usual in intergenerational wealth that in a high earning household.

New money are just wasting their 'hard earned' cash on wealth products not designed for them, and accountants are raking it in while threads on here try to put the fear of God in people about Rachel Reeves.

I think your daughter should be wary of agreeing to a financial set up justified by incels on TikTok, based in the US. The levels of protection this young man seems to want may not be that easily obtained for a self-made Gen Zer on £85km in the UK. It also think your daughter might need some support when she ultimately, inevitably lays this out for him.

I stayed at home and raised our DC. DH never ever stopped providing for me or for our DC. Despite horrible arguments in the past, he's always taken care of me financially.

He would be pretty stupid not to have one based on what you've written.

A UK prenup is only valid if each person gets independent legal advice.

My daughter owned her own house when she met her current partner. They then bought a house together using the equity from her house and some savings her partner had. I don’t think they have a prenup as such but do have something legal which states that should they split up, the financial settlement reflects the different amounts of the initial investment.

I don’t know how they split the bills for the house etc though, they do have separate bank accounts but I think they pay equally into a joint account for living expenses as I think they earn similar amounts. My daughter went back to work after 9 months maternity leave and is not entitled to any funded child care or child benefit due to their salaries so I think they both earn a decent amount.

Obviously the agreement was written up by a solicitor who is also a family friend and my daughter’s god father. It could be that he suggested it.

Honestly I don't understand this 60/40 type split that people do. Surely the most sensible thing is for everyone's salary to go into one big joint account, all bills come out of that (and use it for the food shop), whack x amount into savings for both, x into pensions or investments and then the same amount each to just spend as they see fit without having to justify it.

Otherwise, you may as well just be flat sharing with a uni mate!

Surely if your partner is doing well, you should both be doing well?

Plus, once you add kids into the mix, how the hell do you decide who's paying for the nappies this week. Madness.