Pre-nup wanted by future in laws

Mojisola

Judi wrote: »

I'm sorry but I was firmly on the OP's side until she announced that she'd got a house of her own that she wanted to protect.

Sounds like double standards to me.

She doesn't want to protect it - some of us have suggested that she's foolish if she signs a pre-nup without making sure her OH signs one as well.

LannieDuck

OP, forget everything else - do you want to sign the pre-nup?

If you're not bothered, go ahead and sign it, but include a reciprocal wording for 'your' house. If you're signing the thing anyway, it may as well be fair and equitable.

If 'no', what's the worst that will happen? FIL will be annoyed? So what? OH is the one who counts in this, and he doesn't seem to mind.

Completely separate to that is the decision about where you're going to live in the future. Make a 5 year plan - are you going to stay in FIL's house, or are you going to save up for a deposit elsewhere? You and OH need to have a proper conversation.

System

Mojisola wrote: »

She doesn't want to protect it - some of us have suggested that she's foolish if she signs a pre-nup without making sure her OH signs one as well.

Well she wants to hold on to it so that her son has a place to live which is more or less what the Father In Law is trying to do for his son.

Sod me what a palava!

itsanne

There's a lot of criticism of the OP's fiance in this. I'd suggest another slant on things which, while not changing the bottom line that either they move and are independent or stay and are under FIL's control, makes his stance (or lack of it) at least understandable.

FIL doesn't work as the result of an injury and appears quite happy when his son is not working either. The fiance lived at home until he got together with OP. That suggests that FIL and fiance consider they have a good, close relationship, and in some ways they do as they are clearly happy to spend time together. The problem is the amount of control FIL exerts over his son, but fiance may well not recognise it. From his perspective his father has been very generous in providing a nice house, in a good area, for him and his family (including OP's second child?) to live in. If FIL has also explained about wanting to protect his asset, and many on here agree with him in that respect, fiance may feel stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The situation is complicated by the poor relationship between OP and FIL. Again from fiance's perspective, if he understands his father's point of view he may feel that OP's is skewed by her feelings about FIL. I'm not in any way criricising OP about her relationship with fiance, but she hints at reasons why FIL might have had reservations about her and is likely to have been defensive as a result. Seven years together and wanting to marry suggests a strong relationship, so FIL was wrong in his reservations, but it's not unusual for these sort of difficulties to continue indefinitely. It's probably very difficult to move things between OP and FIL onto a better footing.

So, from fiance's point of view, he's living with OP and their family in a nice house in a good area and they can continue to do so as long as they want. His fiancee would like to stay in the house too, but doesn't get on with his father and has taken umbrage at the idea that she should sign a pre-nup before they get married. She wants fiance to put his foot down and stand up to his father (as do many on here). However, he doesn't entirely agree with her as he understands why his father wants the pre-nup.


On a different note, I wonder how valid the pre-nup would be if the OP signs it under duress. If there is a lack of clarity about how much weight is attached to pre-nups in general, would this one be less likely to be upheld because it was only signed under pressure?


Finally, OP, you posted asking only about the pre-nup - and probably got more than you were expecting! I think that you and your fiance also need to take a long, hard look at how you want the next few years to pan out. What do you want in the longer term? (Where you will live, jobs etc) How will you achieve that? There is loads of help available on various boards on MSE once you know what you want. Good luck. It would be interesting to know what you decide about the pre-nup!

rpc

itsanne wrote: »

On a different note, I wonder how valid the pre-nup would be if the OP signs it under duress. If there is a lack of clarity about how much weight is attached to pre-nups in general, would this one be less likely to be upheld because it was only signed under pressure?

The supreme court judgement (which is binding on all lower courts) was pretty clear.

A prenup which is freely entered into and fair (particularly on any children) would normally be considered binding. A good indication of this would be independent legal advice.

Even in the US, prenups have been dismissed by the court when there was duress or false promises.

twojaystwokays

Just a quick update, I am really grateful to everyone who has took time to advice (even the people who have said things that I maybe did not want to hear, but isnt that the point of doing this)
I suggested to my oh that we stay as we are (dont get married) then I cant be accused of marrying him for his money or house etc. He took this badly and basically said it sounds like I was after the house all along!!!!!!!!!!!
He also said his dad cant take his name off the trust and put it in the childrens name because they are under 18, anyone able to help me on this one.
I am thinking of going to stay with my eldest for a while with the kids just to sort my head out and see if it is feasible for us all to live there, the relationship is at rock bottom right now and I think a lot of nasty things could be said.
I know by doing this I am doing exactly what my fil wants but some battles are not worth winning and mine and my four childrens happiness is the important thing, not the bloody house.

BitterAndTwisted

I don't like the sound of your OH at all. He's spent time unemployed while you've supported him as well as the two children you share and YOU'RE the one who's in the wrong?

Unless you've explained yourself very poorly indeed to your OH I cannot fathom how he can think that you might have been after the house all along. How could you have when you don't own it now and possibly never will? Is he financially illiterate?

getmore4less

You got a good thread going here not read everything so sorry if this has been covered

twojaystwokays wrote: »

He also said his dad cant take his name off the trust and put it in the childrens name because they are under 18, anyone able to help me on this one.

No legal expert but some thoughts.

Is this not one of the uses of trusts to hold assets for minors?

Don't see why hubby also has to be in the trust as a beneficiary of the assets.

Have the current terms of the trust been posted?
Can hubby get access to the assets in the trust ahead of the kids?

I would have thought that Hubby life interest with kids as ultimate beneficiary would be close to what is needed.

There is the issue that up to 18 you would probably keep an interest as the children parent/guardian if hubby died.

If you separated and you got custody of the kids that could complicate where do the kids live under the terms of the trust...

Seanymph

I'm astounded - because your FIL won't gift you a house unencumbered you will deprive two of your children from living with their father?

Did you really just say that? You are leaving your partner and your kids dad because you aren't a beneficiary of a house you haven't contributed towards at all?

BitterAndTwisted

To the OH the OP suggesting they not get married after all is the same as declining to sign this pre-nup. Ergo, her only motive is in securing an interest in the home they are presently living in. It seems to me that the OH is more firmly under his father's thumb than we or the OP may have realised.

She's not proposing to leave him, just to retreat to the house she owns to have a think about it all. I don't blame her, really.