Pre-nup wanted by future in laws

lostinrates

GobbledyGook wrote: »

If it's in his name then it's protected. If he chose to put it into his son's name (be that via trust or whatever) then he should have thought about the impact his son's choices could/would make on that before he changed the names.

.

I agree with all of this. Wholeheartedly.

However, its not clear, and doubt it ever will be to op from her description of the people involved, whether or not this might have been discussed between her partner and his father originally. Its quite possible it was and she wasn't informed, for example.

IMO its no excuse for any tax dodge but.......I'm trying to consider the issues separately because I don't know whether or not its legitamate so don't care to assume its not IYSWIM.

Person_one

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

No, that isn't the point if marriage.

If marriage isn't about throwing everything in together, about sharing and about being a true united partnership, then what the heck is it about?

bossymoo

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but if you've been together 7 years, and had two children, and his father has always been controlling, what steps have you both taken to improve your own situation? Was the agreement to always live there? When you decided to get married, what was the plan for your living arrangements? When child #1 arrived did you talk again about your longer term plans before going for child #2?

I only ask as, when discussing marriage, my late OH and I talked about everything. Where we would live, how many children we wanted, how that fitted with work and earnings etc. we agreed certain things needed to be achieved before others could happen (eg he worked away a lot which I wasn't happy with if he wanted babies, so he found a job closer to home before we started our family)

So, when FIL offered the house was the plan to always live there?

Oh, and by the way, wills and life assurance? Do it. As I found out, men can die aged 35 leaving a young wife with two kids under the age of three. Thank heaven our home was just that: ours. In joint names. I know of young widows with children who have become homeless - don't leave yourself exposed, if the worst does happen, the last thing you need is upset about where to live.

Independence all the way, for me.

itsanne

As far as I see it the situation is this (just to make sure that I'm understanding it). I'll add my own thoughts as appropriate.

You own a house for which you pay the mortgage.

Your son and his girlfriend live in it rent free. This means you are subsidising both of them. It's nice to be able to do that if you can.

You live in a house owned by your FIL in trust for your husband and the two children you have with him.

You live in that house rent free because your FIL wants rent as cash and you don't want to pay it as cash. You should be saving the money that you would be paying as rent. The reason why your FIL wants the rent in cash is a red herring. If he has asked for rent in cash, his intention has not been for you to have the house rent free in the first place.


Both you and your fiance are in MW jobs, you part time and him some of the time. Would you be able to work more hours or full time as your children are at school?

There are times when your fiance is not in work that you struggle financially. What benefits are you claiming at these times?

Your FIL does not help you out at these times. Actually he does. Allowing you to live rent free is a huge help. He's helping you not just at these times but all the rest of the time too. When you consider that your son and his girlfriend live in your house rent free, he's subsidising them too, because you wouldn't be letting them do that in any other circumstances.

Your FIL wants you to sign a pre-nup relinquishing any claim on the house you're living in. I can see both sides of this. Try to see it from his perspective, without taking it personally.

You've said you don't want to sign it. You can't be forced to sign it. Maybe you should think about it from your FIL's point of view before making your mind up. If you still don't want to sign it, then don't. What happens if you simply refuse to sign?

You've said you don't mind signing it. Then why this thread? Which of the two things you've said is more accurate? (I can imagine you having mixed feelings about it, but you need to decide.) If you sign it, FIL should pay for a solicitor of your choice,

If you sign it you don't want to protect the house you own by having your OH sign a reciprocal pre-nup. I have read what you've said about that, and sorry to be blunt, but that's just plain foolish. In the event of a split, regardless of how unlikely it may be, your then ex would be in a far better position than you and your children. If only for their sake, if you decide to sign then there must be a reciprocal version!


You are unhappy that it's an insult/rejection to be asked to sign, but at the end of the day there's a limit as to how much it matters whether your prospective FIL thinks you are the most wonderful thing ever to have happened to his son or the gold digger you suspect. You're marrying the son, not the father, and plenty of people have less than ideal relationships with their outlaws.

You have to balance paying your way in monetary terms and moving elsewhere, or paying by ceding control to your FIL and remaining where you are. There will be repercussions either way. I know which I would choose, but ultimately only you can decide whether or not to sign, regardless of the advice on here.


Edited as I forgot to include: You need advice as to the effect both houses may have on your entitlement to benefits at any point.

Georgiegirl256

Person_one wrote: »

If marriage isn't about throwing everything in together, about sharing and about being a true united partnership, then what the heck is it about?

It's about lurrrve!

One of the first bits of advice I got before getting married was "keep your bank accounts separate" They need'nt have worried about that, we were going to do that anyhow!

meritaten

I can see where the OP is coming from. they are getting married and FIL wants to keep what will be her husbands house separate and 'protected'. it doesn't seem to be her husbands idea. Sign the prenup hun. but make your OH sign a similar one protecting YOUR house! whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

and your FIL - thank him sincerely for giving you the idea for the prenup. so you can protect YOUR childrens inheritance. That should annoy the old bu99er!

Person_one

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

It's about lurrrve!

One of the first bits of advice I got before getting married was "keep your bank accounts separate" They need'nt have worried about that, we were going to do that anyhow!

What's love got to do with it? Its a powerful contract.

MrsE_2

marmitepotato wrote: »

^^^^^ This. I'd be telling future FIL, that I felt hurt by his suggestion, as I've been with his son for the past seven years, had two children by him and was no gold digger. He can take from that what he likes, the fact that he's made his son and your children secure but couldn't give a hoot about the children's mother (you) is beyond belief.:mad::mad::mad: what a selfish, thoughtless, hurtful man he is.

I really don't see the problem with prenups.
If I could buy my dd a house, I would want to protect it in the event of her relationship breakdown. Im twice divorced, these things happen hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

lostinrates

Person_one wrote: »

If marriage isn't about throwing everything in together, about sharing and about being a true united partnership, then what the heck is it about?

Person_one wrote: »

What's love got to do with it? Its a powerful contract.

Well, its a very strong contract! So a prenup can sometimes a good plan for discussing what you do if the contract is not fulfilled in someway. I certainly do not thing the are essential, most particularly here in uk.

Love is very definitely something, the primary thing and a certain non negotiable thing in my marriage though, without it we'd probably have to look at some of the contractual terms for how we deal with frustration of the contract!:D

Georgiegirl256

Person_one wrote: »

What's love got to do with it? Its a powerful contract.

What's love got to do with it? I actually can't believe you said that! :eek: If you haven't got love you haven't got anything, and you shouldn't be getting married. I love my husband, he's my rock. If I didn't love him I wouldn't have married him.

* I have Tina Turners 'What's love got to with it?' going round my head now!