Lending money to husband

justjohn

solicitor will do a pre-nup and loan aggreement. He may also recommend tying money up in a trust for children if envolved.

think that answers you original question. In these cases its just about tying money up so the other party cannot get there mits on it.

justjohn

nickyhutch wrote: »

How romantic.

Some people just have different views....relationships can still work even if they are not the same as the majority.

Head_Girl

Thanks carolinejane, (Snap on the first name)

The new ISA can only take single applicants, so it will still be in my name, but it will be used for our future. Whether or not he's paying me back or paying into a new ISA it's the same thing and at least he's not paying the ridiculous interest rates charged by the cc companies. What will make him forget their joint debts is when he comes home tonight from a week away from me at work and finally cuts those bloody cards up! :T

nickyhutch

justjohn wrote: »

Some people just have different views....relationships can still work even if they are not the same as the majority.

I know. I don't think seeing money within a marriage as a business arrangement is conducive to a romantic/loving relationship, though.

Steel_2

Head_Girl wrote: »

Thanks carolinejane, (Snap on the first name)

The new ISA can only take single applicants, so it will still be in my name, but it will be used for our future. Whether or not he's paying me back or paying into a new ISA it's the same thing and at least he's not paying the ridiculous interest rates charged by the cc companies. What will make him forget their joint debts is when he comes home tonight from a week away from me at work and finally cuts those bloody cards up! :T

It's not you know. Physically it is. Emotionally it is not.

Can I make one really small suggestion. To never refer to it again as 'paying you back' or 'paying back'. Even if you still think it in your own mind, don't say it any more.

Eventually he may come to resent you for continually referring to it in those terms and as long as you do, the spectre of his ex-wife is there.

I lost a lot of money in a bad business deal a couple of years ago and my husband had to pay for all the household bills, including our debt payments, for some time. He has never referred to me paying him back. If he had I would have felt even more guilty for what had happened and it would still be hanging over our marriage to this day.

I have an immense amount of respect for him for that. He considers we have joint finances and we share the good and the bad equally.

Now the shoe is on the other foot. He is looking at voluntary redundancy and I am taking over the bills for everything. I couldn't be more happy to do so.

carolinejane_2

nickyhutch wrote: »

I know. I don't think seeing money within a marriage as a business arrangement is conducive to a romantic/loving relationship, though.

I guess nobody does when they are the flush of romance but you only need to read the families board and DFW to see how many people do get into trouble because they did not see money as business arrangement. I have changed my view on this and now think Head Girl is being very sensible. How awful if the worst did happen and she ended up losing all her savings that he had not contributed to at all

Head_Girl

Thanks Justjohn,

I had what I thought was the same as the majority relationship for 22 years, until my ex husband left me! I now know that nothing is guaranteed and fully expected to come on here and have people tell me how stupid I was to have done this without having a formal agreement. Obviously I was wrong and people are more concerned about my relationship with my new husband. However, I do have two teenage daughters to consider and I want to make sure that their future is as secure as I can make it. This is the only reason for my post. I love my new husband very much and am very much looking forward to our future together. Believe me I was thinking of him when I wrote this post. He is so embarrassed by this and would rather keep paying the cc companies than be in debt to me. What sort of wife would I be to have the wherewithall to help him, but just stand back and do nothing to protect his male ego? Sorry, but that's just not me. I am a carer by nature and hate to see anybody hurting. I am from the school of practicality (?) and common sense and this seemed the sensible thing to do.

justjohn

carolinejane wrote: »

I guess nobody does when they are the flush of romance but you only need to read the families board and DFW to see how many people do get into trouble because they did not see money as business arrangement. I have changed my view on this and now think Head Girl is being very sensible. How awful if the worst did happen and she ended up losing all her savings that he had not contributed to at all

Thats fine....But would it be ok for the guy to see the whole relationship as a business arrangement.

Because each too there own.

Vomityspice

There is no need to pay a solicitor to knock up an agreement.

Simply write out a short letter outlining the terms of the payment. I.e.


The sum of £xxxxx was given to Mr Head Girl on the xxxxx. The expectation is that this money is repaid at xxx monthly until the principle sum is repaid.

Job done.

Note the real reason for this is to ensure the debt is acknowledged and you don't have to go to the trouble of proving you lent him the money. Often in these types of cases the recipient of the money will claim the money was a gift. You really have to decide is it a gift or is it a loan??

The reality is that as the marriage progresses, the less likely it is any court would take any notice of it! Anything after 5 years is likely will be assumed joint assets so you wouldn't be able to apportion this if you decided to separate.

Steel_2

carolinejane wrote: »

How awful if the worst did happen and she ended up losing all her savings that he had not contributed to at all

There are other ways of contributing to a marriage besides financial.

For example, a great many women contribute to a marriage by having and rearing children, but they may not contribute financially to any savings accounts.