Undeclared money

cloud_dog

atush wrote: »

No shame on him or whoever came up with this scam.

Each to their own then. I think you are making the assumption of a scam as opposed to what is considered reasonable when splitting assets.

If I was the OPs father and my will left the OP an amount of money, and after they had separated the OP (unfortunately) received the inheritance and my gift was forced to be split with their ex-partner I would feel mightily aggrieved (from the other side, obviously).

Robin_TBW

I'm never getting married without a prenuptual agreement in place... (unless she has more money than me then I'm good!)

seriousDFW

Shark wrote: »

I hate a lot of parts of British law but this especially. Why should finances be split equally just because you are married...

Because getting married means entering a partnership which is equal in all ways. Those who don't wish to submit to that, shouldn't get married.

Glen_Clark

cloud_dog wrote: »

Yes, I understand that, but there is a significant difference....

Assuming the husband is the main / only bread winner this is probably due to a conscious decision; usually this is because of children and the the need for a home maker. Therefore the conscious decision for one to earn nothing / much less and undertake significant home making activities is complimented by the other earning income to support the whole family. This is where, and rightly, all income, savings, pension, etc is considered when splitting people and their finances.

This is significantly different to the inheritance scenario, which is not 'earned', either in terms of monetary content or activity, and which I would say (again my opinion) should be considered separately to the normal assets.

It is unfortunate in this world that you have to consider these aspects when you are simply making a will so as to ensure your wishes are completed to your intent.

Mojisola has since answered that question.
The couple voluntarily agree and promise to share what they have.
I have never married so have no axe to grind here.
But I do believe, to quote Alan Sugar, that when you make a deal, whether its good, bad or indifferent, it is a matter of personal integrity stick to it.
Some of the shares I have bought have fallen in value. With the benefit of hindsight I should not have bought them. But I would not ask for my money back - and would get very short shrift if I did. Whats different about the marriage contract?

SailorSam

Robin_TBW wrote: »

Gift it to other family members who you deem trustworthy and believe will gift it back to you after

Be very careful doing that, i've just spent almost 2yrs fighting the sister that i had 100% trust in. After a big legal bill i've won. But it was an expensive lesson to learn.

mulronie

Your only hope is to use the £20k to build a time machine, go back to your wedding day, and pull off a good old-fashioned jilting.

With marriage, as with most things, terms and conditions apply. Caveat emptor. Buyer beware.

Gromitt

SailorSam wrote: »

i've just spent almost 2yrs fighting the sister that i had 100% trust in. After a big legal bill i've won. But it was an expensive lesson to learn.

I assume it was a sizable amount of cash then ? Do you actually have the cash back now ? I know willing the legal battle is only about half of the total battle, the rest actually getting the cash!

Sceptic001

Glen_Clark wrote: »

The couple voluntarily agree and promise to share what they have.
I have never married so have no axe to grind here.
But I do believe, to quote Alan Sugar, that when you make a deal, whether its good, bad or indifferent, it is a matter of personal integrity stick to it.
Some of the shares I have bought have fallen in value. With the benefit of hindsight I should not have bought them. But I would not ask for my money back - and would get very short shrift if I did. Whats different about the marriage contract?

Wow, Glen, I think you have hit on something here. :T :beer:

If the marriage vows were to include the statement "I swear I have performed due diligence on my prospective spouse and am satisfied with the outcome of my investigations," the divorce rate could plummet!

grey_gym_sock

Sceptic001 wrote: »

If the marriage vows were to include the statement "I swear I have performed due diligence on my prospective spouse and am satisfied with the outcome of my investigations," the divorce rate could plummet!

but so could the marriage rate

cloud_dog

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Mojisola has since answered that question.
The couple voluntarily agree and promise to share what they have.
I have never married so have no axe to grind here.
But I do believe, to quote Alan Sugar, that when you make a deal, whether its good, bad or indifferent, it is a matter of personal integrity stick to it.
Some of the shares I have bought have fallen in value. With the benefit of hindsight I should not have bought them. But I would not ask for my money back - and would get very short shrift if I did. Whats different about the marriage contract?

Not sure if you and Mojisola have missed this bit but.... the financial gain has occurred after the separation therefore is there not a reasonable case for the monies to be treated differently?

I'm sure even the great Lord Sugar understands that once you agree to exit a contract the agreement you reach, financial or otherwise, is based on the information known at that point in time. I'm sure you're not advocating the ability to go back and renegotiate an agreement after the fact.... Surely, as that would't demonstrate your 'integrity'?