Prenup

Fire_Fox

What are you trying to protect? Equity in a house can be protected with a Deed of Trust or by purchasing as tenants in common with an unequal split rather than the standard joint tenants where each party owns the whole house. See a solicitor - don't prejudge the response and ask about pre-nups, ask for all the options for protecting assets and the implications for death, divorce and in the event of one party quitting work to care for children.

74jax

Fire_Fox wrote: »

What are you trying to protect? Equity in a house can be protected with a Deed of Trust or by purchasing as tenants in common with an unequal split rather than the standard joint tenants where each party owns the whole house. See a solicitor - don't prejudge the response and ask about pre-nups, ask for all the options for protecting assets and the implications for death, divorce and in the event of one party quitting work to care for children.

I own a house (part mortgaged). OH owns an apartment (outright - possibly 3 times the value of the house). OH also has a significant inheritance. I have 1 DD from a previous relationship.

Main thing we want is that should anything happen to our relationship, the house remains mine for myself and my DD. OH keeps his apartment.

There's various scenarios of when we're married OH will pay off my mortgage to save on outgoings/tax/interest, possibly putting his apartment in my name so we don't pay the higher rate tax on the income from his apartment, but really these are secondary to the main concern of - house remains mine, apartment his.

Fire_Fox

74jax wrote: »

I own a house (part mortgaged). OH owns an apartment (outright - possibly 3 times the value of the house). OH also has a significant inheritance. I have 1 DD from a previous relationship.

Main thing we want is that should anything happen to our relationship, the house remains mine for myself and my DD. OH keeps his apartment.

There's various scenarios of when we're married OH will pay off my mortgage to save on outgoings/tax/interest, possibly putting his apartment in my name so we don't pay the higher rate tax on the income from his apartment, but really these are secondary to the main concern of - house remains mine, apartment his.

Take legal advice, not sure how you can protect cash but he should be able to protect any investment he makes in your home by tenants in common or a Deed of Trust. AFAIK he cannot put the apartment in your name for tax reasons, then expect it back if you split that is trying to have your cake and eat it. He can't gift it to you yet have strings attached, that is not a gift in the eyes of HMRC. It is a fine line between tax avoidance (legal) and tax evasion (illegal).

Also consider what happens in the event of either party's untimely death - if you are joint tenants on any home the other automatically inherits. If you are tenants in common you MUST have a will specifying who you want to inherit. If not one another you should specify the other's right to reside at the house, if any. Have wills drawn up anyway, it makes it much easier for the executors and survivors and it is not an expensive process.

Personally I think you are being realistic, we all hope and expect our marriage will last forever but sadly that doesn't always happen and you don't want yourselves or daughter to be out of pocket. You can assume that you will be fair to one another but actually courts don't have to agree to settlements they deem to be unfair, and if you voluntarily sign away your rights to anything that can be seen as 'deprivation of capital/ assets' by the state which is a headache for means tested benefits or state care.

ognum

VfM4meplse wrote: »

It does imply a lack of long-term faith in the relationship though.

I'm undecided about pre-nups...my head says no as I have no intention of marrying "down" - if I were to sign one it would be a concession that I was. Un-pc but true.

I hope your future partner is happy to marry 'down'. How sad that you would describe yourself thus or maybe you could find someone exactly equal!

ognum

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Take legal advice, not sure how you can protect cash but he should be able to protect any investment he makes in your home by tenants in common or a Deed of Trust. AFAIK he cannot put the apartment in your name for tax reasons, then expect it back if you split that is trying to have your cake and eat it. He can't gift it to you yet have strings attached, that is not a gift in the eyes of HMRC. It is a fine line between tax avoidance (legal) and tax evasion (illegal).

Also consider what happens in the event of either party's untimely death - if you are joint tenants on any home the other automatically inherits. If you are tenants in common you MUST have a will specifying who you want to inherit. If not one another you should specify the other's right to reside at the house, if any. Have wills drawn up anyway, it makes it much easier for the executors and survivors and it is not an expensive process.

Personally I think you are being realistic, we all hope and expect our marriage will last forever but sadly that doesn't always happen and you don't want yourselves or daughter to be out of pocket. You can assume that you will be fair to one another but actually courts don't have to agree to settlements they deem to be unfair, and if you voluntarily sign away your rights to anything that can be seen as 'deprivation of capital/ assets' by the state which is a headache for means tested benefits or state care.

I agree, I think you are being realistic, have worked for what you have and have a daughter to protect in the long term. Of course no one wants to believe there beloved will turn into something else but it does happen.

Also write a will that protects your assets for your daughter and his for his family.

Bluemeanie_2

clearingout wrote: »

spoken as someone with little to lose, perhaps?

My understanding is that UK courts are increasingly taking into account pre-nups, providing that both sides sought legal advice prior to signing and there was no....pressure to sign (in other words, a prenup wasn't pulled out at the alter with a signature demanded before going ahead). Also, if you are likely to have children or there is likely to be some kind of significant change to lifestyle as a result of marriage, the prenup is less likely to stand.

It is, I agree, very unromantic. However, having been through a divorce I know full well what people are capable of when you least expect it. I today own my own home and there is no way I would considering marrying again without protecting it as best I can for myself and my children. You have no idea what the future holds.

Excellent post CO. Completely agree.

I'm married now, but I bought my house prior to meeting my husband.
It's in solely my name still as there seems little point paying a solicitor to change it now he has the benefit of marriage. (He has no property or assets at all). As the house was probably just sitting at 100% LTV when I met him and he has made considerable contributions to the house, by both doing it up in it's entirety and financially.
I would not begrudge splitting the equity 50/50 with him (and would probably get ordered too if I tried to fight it anyway).

However, this is my "one shot" at marriage. IF we did ever get divorced, I would never get married again without the benefit of a pre-nup. But as the "stronger party" it is easy for me to say.

I think you should be able to protect yourself to a certain extent, but it has to be balanced. I.E. this paragraph of CO's post:

Also, if you are likely to have children or there is likely to be some kind of significant change to lifestyle as a result of marriage, the prenup is less likely to stand.

Wouldn't really be fair if you signed one, gave up work to raise the family then ended up with absolutley sweet FA!

74jax

ognum wrote: »

I agree, I think you are being realistic, have worked for what you have and have a daughter to protect in the long term. Of course no one wants to believe there beloved will turn into something else but it does happen.

Also write a will that protects your assets for your daughter and his for his family.

I think if I didn't have DD I maybe wouldn't feel as strongly about it. Its strange, he can keep his money and apartment, but I feel (for whatever reason) I need to protect the house. Even though he has more to 'loose' than me if it went 50/50 I don't want anything but the house we have now (and mortgage that goes with it...).

Jinx

74jax wrote: »

I think if I didn't have DD I maybe wouldn't feel as strongly about it. Its strange, he can keep his money and apartment, but I feel (for whatever reason) I need to protect the house. Even though he has more to 'loose' than me if it went 50/50 I don't want anything but the house we have now (and mortgage that goes with it...).

Totally agree with this, its how i felt going from being a divorced single mother to a partnership again that my daughter should not lose out from my decisions. Her needs were paramount (less so now shes older)

meritaten

You can write pre-nups if you wish - but, in this country the actual LAW takes precedence!

jumpedtheshark

Nuptial agreements may now be given 'determinative weight' (ie. not 'binding' but the effect might be just the same, it's just that courts can't say that because they technically have to apply a statute to make this decision! - legal tautology at its finest?!). So, I think it's worth getting one drafted if you don't want to leave yourself open to whatever happens to be the governing interpretation of s25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 at the time. The most important recent case on this is called Radmacher v Granatino. This is a pretty decent summary of it: http://www.familylaw.co.uk/articles/UKSC201042

The basic principle established in that case is this:
"The court should give effect to a nuptial agreement that is freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of its implications unless in the circumstances prevailing it would not be fair to hold the parties to their agreement." (copied from majority judgment)

Even though your agreement won't be binding, as long as it's been entered into following certain procedural safeguards and you've done your best to provide for usual future changes in circumstances within the agreement itself, it's likely that a court would give effect to the content of your agreement (if not technically the agreement itself).