Prenuptial agreements: DIY or Solicitor?

Gloomendoom

meritaten wrote: »

I also find it sad that you feel the need to do this. It may well be financially the thing to do - but that you feel the need to protect your property from your future OH - I think its a sad lack of trust.
If someone I was about to marry did that - I would think twice about marrying them - in fact I wouldnt marry them, I couldnt in all honesty marry someone who didnt trust me 100%.

Be fair. It's not just the OP's money at stake.

I think the previous suggestion that her parents take a charge on their share of the property is the best one and legally binding.

A prenup has all sorts of negative associations. Almost like planning to fail.

meritaten

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Be fair. It's not just the OP's money at stake.

I think the previous suggestion that her parents take a charge on their share of the property is the best one and legally binding.

A prenup has all sorts of negative associations. Almost like planning to fail.

I do take your point - but shouldnt the property be in BOTH names and steps already been taken to protect the OPs parents investment?

No woman in her right mind would object to being told 'Its virtually my house but my parents co-own it, therefore if anything happens to me - they dont lose thier investment! bit different to being asked to sign a prenup!

carm_2

Thank you for the response guys, I think getting a solicitor will definitely be the best option.

To be honest, even though it seems like a lack of trust, it's really more a form of protection and a formality, especially when it concerns my parents' money. It's their wishes, and they have supported me so much that I think it's silly to go against what they suggest because they're only trying to protect me and what they have worked so hard to provide for me.

I think it's ridiculous when people say they will think twice/walk away if they are to ask to sign a prenup because surely if your intentions are good.. why would it matter? It does take the romance out of things but it is a practicality that everyone should think about because of the 'what if?'. Everyone who chooses to get married would like to think they'll be in the percentage that stays happily married forever and as do I; I have complete faith that my OH and myself will grow old and wrinkly together. But every person should have a right to protect their assets they have acquired pre-marriage, which is what I am doing. Assets acquired during marriage is more messy but I'm not going into that.

Wow, bit of a rant.

HappyMJ

carm wrote: »

Thank you for the response guys, I think getting a solicitor will definitely be the best option.

To be honest, even though it seems like a lack of trust, it's really more a form of protection and a formality, especially when it concerns my parents' money. It's their wishes, and they have supported me so much that I think it's silly to go against what they suggest because they're only trying to protect me and what they have worked so hard to provide for me.

I think it's ridiculous when people say they will think twice/walk away if they are to ask to sign a prenup because surely if your intentions are good.. why would it matter? It does take the romance out of things but it is a practicality that everyone should think about because of the 'what if?'. Everyone who chooses to get married would like to think they'll be in the percentage that stays happily married forever and as do I; I have complete faith that my OH and myself will grow old and wrinkly together. But every person should have a right to protect their assets they have acquired pre-marriage, which is what I am doing. Assets acquired during marriage is more messy but I'm not going into that.

Wow, bit of a rant.

Pre-nups for us lot...the lot which aren't super rich are not legally binding which means any pre-nup you do make is at risk of being completely ignored in court if you do not make some reasonable provison for your OH even if it feels like you are giving him a lot of money.

If you want to protect your parents assets now then you have to get them out of your name before you get married. If you give them back to your mother before you get married and then your mother dies and leaves the property to you in her will then the asset will be shared between you and your husband if you then split in the future. You could also consider a trust....but that'll cost a bit of money.

LandyAndy

carm wrote: »

I think it's ridiculous when people say they will think twice/walk away if they are to ask to sign a prenup because surely if your intentions are good.. why would it matter? It does take the romance out of things but it is a practicality that everyone should think about because of the 'what if?'. Everyone who chooses to get married would like to think they'll be in the percentage that stays happily married forever and as do I; I have complete faith that my OH and myself will grow old and wrinkly together. But every person should have a right to protect their assets they have acquired pre-marriage, which is what I am doing. Assets acquired during marriage is more messy but I'm not going into that.

Wow, bit of a rant.

The marriage service has changed then.:(

I'm sure it used to say 'With all my worldly goods I thee endow'.

Errata

A total lack of trust is demonstrated by a fiance and their parents forcing the intended partner to sign a pre nup under duress as a condition of marriage.
If the OP doesn't want a future OH to get their mitts on the assets - don't marry them, give them a rent book and invite them to move in as a lodger.

fluffnutter

LandyAndy wrote: »

The marriage service has changed then.:(

I'm sure it used to say 'With all my worldly goods I thee endow'.

And it definitely still says 'All that I have I share with you'.

peachyprice

carm wrote: »

To be honest, even though it seems like a lack of trust, it's really more a form of protection and a formality, especially when it concerns my parents' money. It's their wishes, and they have supported me so much that I think it's silly to go against what they suggest because they're only trying to protect me and what they have worked so hard to provide for me.

In which case it's not a pre-nup you want or need. A pre-nup, which is easily overturned, is to protect YOUR assets, not your parents.

Surely it would be better for your parents, who you insist are the only ones you are protecting, to take out a legally binding contract protecting THEIR assets from both you and your intended. That is the only way they can guarantee their assets are safe, a pre-nup won't do that.

fluffnutter

Do the parents want this house as an asset, e.g. they're all tenants in common or does the OP merely want to safeguard the cash that the parents contributed?

If it's the latter then I'd endeavour to pay my parents back (re-mortgaging if necessary) so that the house was 'mine' and forget about any pre-nups. This is a family issue and it's unfair that the fiance becomes the 'risk' in all of this. Why should he be made to feel like an untrustworthy, grasping liability simply because the OP made some financial arrangement years ago with her parents?

Plus pre-nups aren't yet legally binding, so what's the point?

Gloomendoom

fluffnutter wrote: »

Plus pre-nups aren't yet legally binding, so what's the point?

I'm wondering what is the point in getting married. Not bothering would surely provide the best protection for one's personal assets.