Opinions wanted (prenuptial agreement)

[Yougotbale]

Hi, I'm a lurker but wanted to get some views and advise on my situation.
I am 34 and have been fortunate enough to have been financially successful. I am currently retired but may get involved in businesses in the future.
I have been in a relationship with my DP for 4 years. We have lived together for 3 years. She really values marriage and I would be happy to fulfill her dream by asking her to marry. However, I have mentioned that I would like a prenuptial agreement to safeguard my previous earnings and assets. (I've not turned to legal advise so might be overreacting about what is at risk, any info would be good).
At the moment my DP lives in my house. I pay all bills including car, mobile, food and holidays. She still works full time and spends her money on herself (which I like). with little expenditure, she approx saves £15-20k per year. (This is put in cold terms. I see the house as our home. Her car. We are a team).
We don't have children, and both don't want children. I got a vasectomy to take control of contraception. With this in mind, she will save a small fortune of her own.

Anyway, when I mentioned the 'prenuptial' she was very upset and offended. I can see this but think I'm not being unreasonable.
I guess, I wanted see what other people thought of prenups and of my situation?

I read your post and thought how sensible. I now have 2 friends who have signed pre-nups. Actually it is both my friends who have asked their prospective new spouses to sign. Very different circumstances - one gay marriage, no children involved and the other where it was to stop assets moving across into the other family. If I were to remarry I would probably want a pre-nup - I have a son to protect and that has to be my priority. in the cases I know the parties took independent legal advice. Best of luck!

ugenie maybe you are right. It's all the threads here that make me want to asses it more statistically. Threads about divorce, dating after divorce, unhappy marriages, the amount of posters on their second marriages, etc. I don't think I'm special enough to guarantee it won't happen to me. Maybe I'll offload some assets so they are not a problem to us.

Sorry, I also wanted to post about the golddigger - they come in all shapes and sizes - my STBexH has just moved in with one. She has a very well paid job but no assets (aged late 40's) - he has a very well paid job and substantial assets. If he hasn't insisted on a pre-nup then more fool him.

I can see both sides of the argument. This is one of those occasions when neither of you is right or wrong, but your viewpoints are incompatible.

Either one of you chooses to change, or, if it's a principle that matters that badly to you both, you choose to go your separate ways. Neither option is a reflection on who is right or wrong.

The trouble is that a compromise isn't an option here (as it's a yay or nay situation) and your respective intractability on this matter has created a battle of wills. Whoever prevails will set a precedent on who gets their way in the event of a power struggle. That's not the best basis for a marriage, regardless of whether it has a pre-nup or not.

Personally, I'd hold off on marriage until you've got this well and truly resolved.

veryconfusedits a tough one. After this thread I'm less sure but who knows. I need to look in to it in more detail then discuss it

You seem to suspect it's possible one or other of you could fall out of love. Experience has told you this can happen. This is not exactly a Tristan and Isolde scenario of being swept away by love for each other, is it?
Although you love her you're very level headed and and concerned about number one and want to be cautious. Self protection comes first, does it not? You obviously have your emotions firmly under control.
Seems to me she's the one who's pushing for a marriage but you'd be happier just living together. Is she trying to bully you into this just to satisfy her dreams? There's maybe a touch of emotional abuse there. She should accept that you're hesitant and have reservations. Therefore she should either be satisfied with living with you unmarried, or move on. Don't get married just to please her, but actually against your better judgment.
Personally, I feel you'd have far less worries staying unmarried so no pre-nup. arrangements required. I just don't think you want to be tied down with all the legal obligations that marriage entails.
If she isn't content with simply living together and leaves you you really don't need to fret over her too much. With your wealth you'll have no problem finding love somewhere else. Being shrewd and sensible you must know that.

dahlen I'll definitely get it sorted out. Either prenup, no prenup, no marriage, or partners. Hopefully, it not a factor that would end it.

With your wealth you'll have no problem finding love somewhere else.

Sorry, but

onlywatching I agree with some of that. But you could easily write a post to my DP reversing the points and blaming me. I think we can compromise. We need to know all the details and sit down and assess the best options. I do want to get married. I don't see why we should be dictated the terms and conditions. They vary from country to country but as far as I'm aware love and commitment is universal (barring religion)

But love and commitment sometimes only last as long as the spark is still burning. If it goes out you're in trouble. And it could be either partner. It just takes one to start feeling that way.
That's the time when it's so much better not to be bogged down by the legal commitments of marriage and just go your separate ways, and especially since no children will be involved.

If a break up of the marriage is the case then there will still be stuff to split. But if I do have a prenup. Not the stuff earned previously to meeting her.
Anyway, I've had too much thinking about us splitting up in a hypothetical marriage for now. It's been interesting. Lots of research to do tomorrow. Then a heart to heart on Friday me thinks. I'm more confused than when I started, which I suppose means this has been a successful thread for me

I can see why your DP is upset by the idea, but really, I think it's rather sensible. I just think they're not common enough yet not to be a bit shocking and the idea behind them is a bit unromantic, really.

My best friend is a barrister in this field and was called upon to advise a very rich man who was about to marry a woman earning substantially less about a prenup. The only things I can remember is that they can be enforceable in England, both parties have to enter into it willingly and BF told the rich man that she was obliged to tell him that the only sure-fire way to protect his assets was not to marry her.

Good luck OP, hope you sort it out.

Ok, so it's not romantic...but tbh I would be worried about her reaction. It would actually make me want a PN more than if someone just said - "sure that's fine".

As described she is at worst not going to be left on the breadline.

Personally it sounds reasonable to me (with the exception that it should change if you tried for children and had a reversal in the future).

Having said that I value my financial independence and always have done.

I think you are being practical and not unreasonable but tbh I am not sure that PN's are legally binding in the UK - so I would say see a lawyer before you press a point that may be moot...

I thought that my marriage was for life, 100%. Then my XH walked out after six years. Married aged 33 and 41. I put a lot of capital into our house from the sale of my house. I paid for a third of it outright. I put it in 50/50 names because I was married for life. I also paid off £12k of his debts.

When he walked out, I really wished we had registered it 1/3 2/3. Luckily for me, my XH morally did the tight thing and took nothing. But legally he could have been entitled to anything up to £37K.

I will never marry again without protecting my house for me and DD. cynical yes, having learned from experience, sadly.

A divorced friend is doing the same, getting a document drawn up to say they leave the marriage with the assets the joined with.

No it's not romantic, but it is realistic.

Well, why on earth don't you get legal advice? Do you really think a bunch of people on the internet you've never met are going to be able to advise you as to the legal efficacy of a pre-nup? And if not, what is the point in asking?

A pre-nup does not mean someone is not with you because of the money. It does not offer any guarantees on splitting up because they can be challenged in court. So quite possibly you will find yourself in the situation of making a financial offer, and hoping that your pre-nup reduces that. I suspect "she" is upset because most people don't want to marry on the basis of them being well provided for right now, but also to get security in the future. Particularly not women who are capable of holding down full time employment. So I would guess your pre-nup would have to overcome this.

And what does this mean with little expenditure, she approx saves £15-20k per year. (This is put in cold terms. I see the house as our home. Her car. We are a team) as it reads very oddly.

I got a vasectomy to take control of contraception. With this in mind, she will save a small fortune of her own And you think this alleged "small fortune" should be taken into account by a pre-nup, and that this justifies one? It seems that you think you have set up some kind of savings plan for her by proxy, but unless you make this clear and formalise it, it will hold no weight.

Equally, if you have "retired" at 34 to play the financial markets, and "she" still works full time, your positions might be reversed. I had a brilliant uncle who retired at 35 to dabble in the financial markets, he lost his edge and really had to watch the pennies by the end. Or you could go bankrupt.

For goodness sake, if you really have as much money as you say you have, see a very good family lawyer about a pre-nup.

get the prenup for sure. very sensible .
I'm loaded ,because i worked my arse off for years. been divorced , did not marry recent partner I just got rid of after 16 years. THANK FUCK . next time there will be a prenup

lessabs I will be getting legal advise. Lawyers don't talk about emotions though. I wanted to get posters opinions on it. I wouldn't ask for legal advise from a bunch of strangers but people's knowledge is interesting. So the point of asking was to see how prenups are perceived, get view points from people that might have wanted one and view points that people are against them.
I know it won't be that straight forward if we do decide on one.
Sorry if I was unclear:
with little expenditure, she approx saves £15-20k per year. (This is put in cold terms. I see the house as our home. Her car. We are a team).
This means she has little to no expenditure on us living as a couple. Therefore, she can save her income. Depending on how much wants to treat herself.
The bit in brackets was written because I had listed things I own and pay for. It felt when reading it back as cold.

The other point you raise, was referring to the fact that without children her potential to earn is not compromised. She is wealthy in her own right. If we were paying 50/50 for everything then she would not save as quickly. That's all I was stating.

I'm not planning any investments at the moment. I don't know too much about gambling on the stock market. If I don't work again or invest large sums in new businesses ill be fine.

Sorry for any confusion

It seems to me that either you love her and want to marry her in which case, under current UK law, a pre nup is non enforcable and every asset you take into the marriage becomes an asset of the marriage (usually judged by the length of the marriage). Or you are more worried about your previously aquired assets than you are about being married.

Sum total is, if it is the former then marry her and accept it, or if it is the latter, dont marry her and accept that she may leave you.

My DH and I have a prenup, I see it as a sensible precaution. You don't take out home insurance in the expectation of your home burning down, but if it does you are covered.

There was a recent case where a German heiress had her prenup taken into account in court. Bit of a test case that paved the way for such arrangements becoming fully recognised by the courts.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11580907

The trouble with the home insurance comparison is that with home insurance you aren't insuring against your OH burning the house down.

Do any brokers or underwriters offer adultery or DV insurance? I'm not being facetious/sarcastic - so many people are left in dire financial straits when their partner turns out to be an arsehole that it might also be prudent. It could also be done without the other person's knowledge, unlike a prenup.

Sorry - a pre-nup would be a deal breaker for me. To be honest, separate finances would be a deal breaker for me.

I would not be comfortable with the idea that my dh "let's" me save £10k - £20k a year or that he "helps" me buy a house. It would feel very unequal to me. We are a team - we have both committed everything we have to our marriage and our aims within it and our contributions - although different - have equal value. If dh was holding something back for him - whether money or emotional commitment - then I'd see that as him not being properly "in".

I should temper my comments with the fact that we were 19 and 22 and students when we got together and we married as soon as I graduated so maybe things are different if you are in your mid thirties.

"Not the stuff earned previously to meeting her. "

I think you'd find that the 'stuff earned previously' - assuming you can prove it was yours to begin with - wouldn't be considered part of the marital assets for quite some time anyway. Anything acquired during the marriage would be, regardless of any prenup. Anything you put her name on, ditto.

But again... this isn't about legalities and practicalities, this is about two people having very different ideas about what constitutes a marriage. Is it 'all my worldly goods I thee endow' or is it 'you'll do for now but, if something better comes along, I'm keeping the house'. Until you get that resolved, simply don't get married.

I'm not going to advise you on whether you should have a pre-nup

But I want to correct the impression given that they are not enforceable in the UK

Since the case of Radmacher v Granatino in the Supreme Court in 2010 they are now given a lot of weight. Not necessarily 'enforceable' but are likely to be upheld provided that there was no duress or hidden assets or the needs of dependent children make the agreement unfair.

Agree Lady Mabeth. I was coming to post about that case too but could not remember the citation.

OP you need legal advice. I may be wrong but I think that assets accumulated before a marriage, especially a marriage with no children, and more so in the case of a short lived marriage without children, may not be counted in the communal pot at the time of a split.

You might not need a prenup after all if this is the case, just marry her and then let her find that out if she tries to divorce you for half your dosh .

Remember Paul Macartney and Heather? She thought he was in for half his billions but they only counted the money he had made from royalties etc during the term of the marriage and awarded her part of that. (for herself, obv there was separate provision made for the child).