Prenuptial agreement & divorce

Errata

Any couple can draw up a pre-nup, and come divorce time either one of them can say they signed under duress: sign this or we don't marry!

74jax

Errata wrote: »

Any couple can draw up a pre-nup, and come divorce time either one of them can say they signed under duress: sign this or we don't marry!

Sorry, yes I didn't think to mention that. When you do download the forms there's a load of info on the duress posibilites. You do sign a part, witnessed saying you've signed not under duress.

They aren't legally standing anyway so I don't think it matters, its more a line to start the dividing of assets, but its defo something to read up on.

Errata

If someone signs under duress they're hardly likely to admit to that when they sign.

thorsoak

I'm one of the posters of an older generation (I'm 70) and therefore my way of thinking could well be construed as old-fashioned, but nevertheless, may I comment that I think that if a couple are entering into a relationship - which is supposed to be loving and sharing - by signing a contract about who gets what if/when the relationship ends - then it has the roots of failure firmly sown.

When we married, 50 years ago, we both promised "all my worldly goods with you I share" - and that was the basis of our marriage.

Mojisola

thorsoak wrote: »

I'm one of the posters of an older generation (I'm 70) and therefore my way of thinking could well be construed as old-fashioned, but nevertheless, may I comment that I think that if a couple are entering into a relationship - which is supposed to be loving and sharing - by signing a contract about who gets what if/when the relationship ends - then it has the roots of failure firmly sown.

When we married, 50 years ago, we both promised "all my worldly goods with you I share" - and that was the basis of our marriage.

I think that was the case for the majority of the population but the wealthy classes often ensured that "their" family money was tied up in trusts or suchlike so that it couldn't be lost if one spouse died or if the marriage failed.

paddy's_mum

I'm all for pre-nups and think they are just commonsense when the holdings of the two parties are wildly far apart.

However, I also believe that their life should be limited and that the moment a child of the marriage is born, the pre-nuptial agreement should automatically expire. It is at that point that lifelong obligations are also born and one parent (usually) is made vulnerable simply because someone has to give up their life as it was in order to care for a small baby/child.

mgdavid

74jax wrote: »

Sorry, yes I didn't think to mention that. When you do download the forms there's a load of info on the duress posibilites. You do sign a part, witnessed saying you've signed not under duress.

They aren't legally standing anyway so I don't think it matters, its more a line to start the dividing of assets, but its defo something to read up on.

it's much more than that- I quote from the link given to me earlier:
'There is now effectively a rebuttable presumption that a pre-nup (and any other marital agreement) freely entered into by the couple with a full understanding of its implications, will be upheld by the court, unless it would be unfair to do so.'

Especially where no children are involved it takes a lot to show unfairness in a pre-nup.

Jenny321

Thanks for all the replies. I can see both sides of the arguement.

He is worth around £3-4m and I have around 150 thousand.

I am sure there are many various complications but is there an approximate settlement someone might reasonably expect to see that would look after me and any children we might have together? (I think someone answered half the difference in an increase in wealth between marriage and divorce if no children are involved as a likely outcome)

I will get a lawyer if it's necessary in the end, but I want to be as informed as possible beforehand

FBaby

I have to say I don't understand the reason for this prenuptials. Surely getting married is about being prepared to take the jump, and it is that commitment, with the risk attached that make marriage such a serious official statement.

If you are still at the stage that preserving your wealth is more important, why get married at all. Why not share your life as partners, until either you break-up, or you have been together long enough to make the above commitment?

74jax

Jenny321 wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies. I can see both sides of the arguement.

He is worth around £3-4m and I have around 150 thousand.

I am sure there are many various complications but is there an approximate settlement someone might reasonably expect to see that would look after me and any children we might have together? (I think someone answered half the difference in an increase in wealth between marriage and divorce if no children are involved as a likely outcome)

I will get a lawyer if it's necessary in the end, but I want to be as informed as possible beforehand

Very similar to me. I would look up some prenups, a prenup doesn't stipulate what you would get if you split in detail, so it wouldn't say 1mil to hubby 500k to wife. As you have to take into account what would happen if you lost it all.

In our case, we put down that hubby's appartment would remain his, my house would remain mine. We then listed his inheritance, stocks/shares etc and my saving etc.

The the case of a child, the CSA can work this out, you don't list that in a pre nup, if that makes sence. You can't really deal with 'what ifs'.

I wanted to add in if our marriage broke down because OH cheated then the prenup became void, but my solicitor said it wasn't worth putting it in - we still did though.

FBaby wrote: »

I have to say I don't understand the reason for this prenuptials. Surely getting married is about being prepared to take the jump, and it is that commitment, with the risk attached that make marriage such a serious official statement.

If you are still at the stage that preserving your wealth is more important, why get married at all. Why not share your life as partners, until either you break-up, or you have been together long enough to make the above commitment?

In our case, preserving his wealth wasn't more important than getting married, he wanted to protect his inheritance. I have been divorced and went into that marriage expecting it to work, not expecting my ex to cheat and leave me. Had I had the money my OH does it would have been a bigger kick in the teeth seeing my Dad's hard earned money go to my ex.

I don't think they work when one side wants them and the other doesn't. In our case I couldn't have given two hoots about it, so didn't mind. I had no preference either way, he wanted one, I happily signed.

We had been together many years and OH was keen to live together before we got married, but that was a big no-no to me.