Pre nuptial agreement

[rainsbow]

Just after some advice about doing a pre-nup. I'm not after a backlash about how seemingly unromantic this is, this is about protecting myself and my kids in the future should we get divorced.

In a nutshell, im 29 and I'm fortunate to own a large property mortgage free. This is solely in my name. Df and I are getting married in the autumn. If we broke up, will marital law automatically give him a share of my house despite not contributing to the purchase and the fact that it was bought outside marriage? Rightly or wrongly, that seems morally unfair and unjust to me. I want to ensure that if we broke up, that no claim can be made on my house.

Has anyone done a pre nup and can advise?

Just had a nice breezy chat with him again to reiterate my wishes and he's happy to come to the solicitor with me to draw up a pre nup.

Same not sane!

Am I the only one wondering what you could have worked so hard at by the age of 29, and with 2 kids, to have £1m in assets?

Would you mind reporting back on the advice you're given? It would be interesting to know the current status of pre nups and how they are dealt with by the courts.

Just had a nice breezy chat with him again to reiterate my wishes and he's happy to come to the solicitor with me to draw up a pre nup

are you ever going to explain what you do want out of marriage?

Agaa my parents have helped me.

Of course sorrel

Pretty sure you can ring fence the 700 and it sounds like your bloke is happy to sign to that effect.

Perfectly sensible all round.

Thanks man

it's already ring-fenced. as things are right now!

MArriage vows (traditionally) include the words 'with all my worldly goods, I thee endow). So, don't get married, don't say this, don't mean it and carry on as you are.

Or isnot a wedding you want rather than a marriage?

I think you are actually very sensible wanting to protect your assets but the very best way to do this is to not enter a contract with someone where sharing your 'worldly goods' ian part of that contract.

What a load of nonsense about traditional vows

The law develops and changes with society's needs and expectations.

Until 1991, a wedding contract meant that your husband could rape you - because those lovely traditional vows gave ongoing irreversible consent.

1991

In my lifetime. 19fucking91.

The law changes - and thank bloody fuck for that!

The economic position of parties to a marriage has changed massively in recent decades. The law is simply catching up.

Great for it OP.

www.rjerrard.co.uk/law/articles/rape.htm

*Go for it

I think you'd be very foolish to enter into marriage with the way things are. I'm almost sure pre nups aren't completely fool proof, especially after a certain amount of years.

So you are both going to have completely seperate finances and your df is going to live for free in your property contributing nothing and just walk away if the marriage breaks down. That's a strange set up if you don't mind me saying.

My DD is in your position, she will never marry, it cost her a fortune to buy the last one off. All her own money, nothing from us.

Splitting up can be heartbreaking without losing your home as well.

And another legal change for those declaring that this is what marriage is like it's some fixed thing...

1857 and the introduction of the ability to apply to a court for divorce.

That stopped the position that marriage has to be for life. Which means there has to be a way of dividing assets. The current legal divorce process recognises that it is grossly unfair to just say "oh well - with my worldly goods etc - there you go, 50/50 each".

Thankfully, the current system recognises that wouldn't always be fair. The current system - the contract of marriage in its current form - wouldn't not allow the OP to keep her pre-marital asset.

All a pre-nup does, if help clarify the intentions of the parties before it goes tits up and horribly emotive.

If a pre-nup is unromantic and not in the spirit of a marriage, surely neither is the existence of a law allowing divorce?

Times move on, and I'd like to see pre-nups as binding, with caveats such as the one in place now that it has to be done 3 months in advance.

Thankfully, the current system recognises that wouldn't always be fair. The current system - the contract of marriage in its current form - wouldn't not allow the OP to keep her pre-marital asset.

Depends on how long the marraige lasted, how much the DH contributed to maintaining the property in that time etc

I think that is a sensible precaution. If you can not protect your assets then you seriously need to rethink marriage.

Very interesting reading all of this as I hadn't ever thought of marriage as "just" being about combining assets. I am long-term engaged but no wedding plans and I will inherit probably 2 lots of property over the next couple of decades and when I do they will be mine/my children so it's interesting to read that getting married may not be the best idea.

Exactly, TinselTwins. Everything is taken into consideration - what existed before the marriage, what's fair, critically what is in the interests of the children...

Divorce already recognises that a marriage contract shouldn't mean a 50/50 split.

So why people think that having a sensible recorded agreement about your assets isn't within the spirit of marriage "use", I don't know.

I could have got 50/50 out of my divorce. I voluntarily proposed 30/70 in his favour because some assets predated me. I am all in favour of pre-nups and it's not because I'm money grabbing. I could have taken £100K off him. But - I am honourable and trustworthy. My XH not so much As well as fucking prostitutes, he also took tippex to a bank statement to try to hide £3000 from me. I shit you not. I walk away from £100K and he tries to steal £3K

I don't care how much in love people are. I don't care how much marriage is about trust. Bottom line - there are a lot of people you shouldn't trust, and you just have no idea until you see the Chlamydia result (my friend) or the tippex (me).

OP might be more sensible to not marry at all. But I think she's sensible and fair to look into what a pre-nup might do for her.

Ellisandra the OP dosn't want her OHs contributions to the household taken into consideration down the line if they split, she wants to walk away with whatever is in her name

Which is why marriage is illogical

Nobody is arguing against a pre-nup because it's "unromantic", we're saying that marriage & prenup makes no sense from the OPs point of view because her assets are best protected as things are right now .

Even though Pre-nups aren't recognised in the UK, muslims all have pre-nups in the UK, however, as they are not legally binding and most are not written down as they are verbal since marriage in Islam is a contract between 2 people; when separation/divorce occurs these go out of the window depending if the split is amicable or not.

I personally feel that pre-nups are a great tool.

This is why I don't want to get married!

Rainsbow I've been reading this thread, please update us when you've taken legal advice as I'd be interested in knowing how you are advised. Thanks

You're harping on about your hard-earned house....
then tell us your parents have helped you. One or the other OP. I call BS/DM