Post Nuptial Agreement anyone?

SuzieSue

fluffnutter wrote: »

No, indeed. But then they're committing to the marriage in which case 'all that I have I share with you' and all that. Either you're married, or you want to get divorced. No point being married but hiding all the silver.

No, I don't agree, I think most of those women are squirrelling away as much money away as they can as they never know when they will be traded in for a younger model. In the OP's case, she is doing the same except she already has the assets and so it just trying to protect them which is what most people would want to do in her situation.

Mrs_pbradley936

Can I ask why the properties were bought in joint names if he has not made any contribution towards the financing? If they are not in joint names mortgage them up to the hilt and offer to let him pay half the mortgages.

fluffnutter

SuzieSue wrote: »

No, I don't agree, I think most of those women are squirrelling away as much money away as they can as they never know when they will be traded in for a younger model.

Probably. But how depressing. They'd probably have far more self-respect by getting in there first and taking him to the cleaners rather than hanging around waiting to see if they're dumped.

DevilsAdvocate1

SuzieSue wrote: »

No, I don't agree, I think most of those women are squirrelling away as much money away as they can as they never know when they will be traded in for a younger model. In the OP's case, she is doing the same except she already has the assets and so it just trying to protect them which is what most people would want to do in her situation.

But if a man was hiding money from his wife I don't think we'd be as sympathetic.

simpywimpy

The BTLs were in joint names originally because I didnt think i could get a mortgage without him. It was my capital for the deposit from my parents and the houses pay for themselves mortgage wise.

They are my only income whereas he has a good wage if we were to part.

We have been married nearly 10yrs with no children together though I have one still at home and in higher ed. I also have two older ones planning their weddings.

I feel its unfair for the kids to have this worry so would prefer to hang in there until youngest finishes education and older two are married in approx 18m.

SuzieSue

DevilsAdvocate1 wrote: »

But if a man was hiding money from his wife I don't think we'd be as sympathetic.

It depends on the circumstances. If the wife was having the affairs then the husband needs to protect himself too and so I would be just as sympathetic.

meritaten

if you did get him to agree to a 'post nuptual' - he could argue it was 'under duress' and normal law would take precedence.
you have to do what others do - 'HIDE ASSETS'. Plead poverty.
all before you instigate divorce proceedings.

simpywimpy

MOney I could hide, my properties without a mortgage I can move, its the 4 BTL with mortgages that I'm concerned about.

itsanne

SuzieSue wrote: »

Thousands of women put up with their husbands being unfaithful without getting divorced, so the OP isn't that unusual.

I'm not intending to judge the OP, or anyone else in that situation. It's the whole half-hearted staying but maybe not staying that seems counter-productive. If choosing to stay I don't see how it's possible to make a go of it without being committed to doing so.

tayforth

OP - firstly, I'm sorry that your husband has been unfaithful to you. Be kind to yourself.

IMPORTANT: you can only petition for divorce on the grounds of adultery within six months of becoming aware of it.

Otherwise, it's two years' separation with his consent, or five years' separation without consent. If he's reluctant to divorce, you could be in for the long haul. It may be worth it to divorce him now. Your children are old enough to understand.
https://www.gov.uk/divorce/grounds-for-divorce

Wikivorce is an excellent resource, have a read through it.
http://www.wikivorce.com/divorce/

Good luck xx