Entering Marriage with valuable assets, where do I stand

Apple24

Hi All


I’m hoping I could get some help and advice with the following


I currently own my own home where I live and all the contents inside it. I am due to get married next year and my fianc! has no assets at all. I know after marriage ‘what’s yours is mine’ and all that but I have worked very hard to achieve what I have today and want some security.


After marriage my soon to be husband will move in with me. We have agreed that I will continue to pay the mortgage and he will make a contribution to bills. However, I still would like something legal to confirm the house and only the current assets in the house are mine. The only reason for this is for whatever reason if things don’t work out 10 years down then I want to know I am safe and secure in my own house as I’m not sure if we would we will be in a good financial position as a couple to buy a property together.


I have been reading about prenuptial agreements but understand they are not legally binding in United Kingdom. Does anybody know of any other route that I could take which is legally binding? I know more than likely I will never use it but you just never know. Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated J

inkie

My daughter is marrying in 8 weeks, they are both uni students. She has a considerable amount of cash in the bank. They are making their marriage vows and part of that is:

All that I have I share with you

Any legal agreement, if it were possible, would be incongruent with that promise.

Mojisola

Apple24 wrote: »

However, I still would like something legal to confirm the house and only the current assets in the house are mine.

The only reason for this is for whatever reason if things don’t work out 10 years down then I want to know I am safe and secure in my own house as I’m not sure if we would we will be in a good financial position as a couple to buy a property together.

After ten years, the split would start at 50/50 with very good arguments needed to give more to one party.

A marriage that lasts up to about five years and then finishes is more likely to end up with each side being returned to the financial state they were in before the marriage.

If you want to keep all your assets, don't get married.

moneyistooshorttomention

Does it make any difference if the marriage ceremony itself is in a different country? Just wondering if that would affect things at all...

POPPYOSCAR

Mojisola wrote: »

After ten years, the split would start at 50/50 with very good arguments needed to give more to one party.

A marriage that lasts up to about five years and then finishes is more likely to end up with each side being returned to the financial state they were in before the marriage.

If you want to keep all your assets, don't get married.[/QUOTE]




I have to agree with all the above posters.


Why get married in the first place?

tea_lover

You can either keep your assets as solely yours, or you can get married.

TBagpuss

I have been reading about prenuptial agreements but understand they are not legally binding in United Kingdom. Does anybody know of any other route that I could take which is legally binding? I know more than likely I will never use it but you just never know. Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated

No, there is not an alternative.

Pre-Nups are not legally enforceable but that doesn't mean that they are not worth while. When a couple divorce, and if they can't agree on a financial split, so a Judge is deciding who gets what, the Judge's remit is to come up with a financial settlement which is fair to both parties, taking into account all the relevent circumstances.

What is relevant will include things such as the length of the relationship, each party's financial needs, income and earning capacity, the neds of any children etc.

The exisance of a pre-nup is a relavant circumstance.

Very broadly, where there is no pre-nup, the Judge will start at a 50/50 split and will look at the other factors (age, needs etc) to see whether that is fair, or if it needs to be adjusted.

Where there is a pre-nup, the Judge will start with the pre-nup and then consider whether following the pre-nup will be fair, or whether there needs to be an adjustment. In practice, the person saying that they should not be bound by the pre-nup will have to convince the jusge that it is fair to disregard it.

Over time, less weight will be given to the pre-nup, so it is a good idea to review it regularly - sayevey 5 years, or whenever there is a significant change in circumstnaces (e.g. if you had a child)

It's also sensible to try to be fair - so for instance, if your fiance has nothing, think about what they are gving up - (e.g. secure tenancy) and what they would realistically need to be able to move on if you separated.

So a pre-nup which provided for them to have a lump sum equivlalent to (say) depaosit and 6 months rent, so that they could move into altenative accommodatin, is more likely to be seen as fair and reasonable than one which gives them nothing.

I'd recommend that you go and see a solicitor (look for one who is a member of Resolution, preferably one who is a collaborative lawyer)

goodwithsaving

You know, I was expecting the OP to receive the usual 'marriage means what's yours is mine, what's mine is yours' and they did.
It isn't unromantic to want to protect what is yours and what you have worked for. It's called being realistic. If you've been together twenty years and then get married, fine. If you built the bulk of your assets before getting married, I don't see why the other person should be entitled to receive any of them upon divorce.
I don't have the answers for you OP but support your question and thinking one hundred percent.

LilElvis

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Does it make any difference if the marriage ceremony itself is in a different country? Just wondering if that would affect things at all...

I got married by Elvis in Las Vegas - totally legal and recognised in this country. It would have to be a non-official ceremony to not count - see what happened to Jerry Hall when she went to divorce Mick Jagger and discovered they weren't actually married.

tea_lover

goodwithsaving wrote: »

You know, I was expecting the OP to receive the usual 'marriage means what's yours is mine, what's mine is yours' and they did.
It isn't unromantic to want to protect what is yours and what you have worked for. It's called being realistic. If you've been together twenty years and then get married, fine. If you built the bulk of your assets before getting married, I don't see why the other person should be entitled to receive any of them upon divorce.
I don't have the answers for you OP but support your question and thinking one hundred percent.
Responders; back off with the emotional rubbish and view this in a rational, sensible and savvy way.

Marriage is a legal contract - doesn't get much more rational and sensible than that. There is no obligation to get married, and people can very easily live together and maintain greater control over their own assets if they so choose.

If, however, they choose to marry, then they need to realise the full implications of this. Which is what people on this thread are pointing out. Nothing whatsoever to do with emotion, everything to do with cold, hard, legal facts.

Quite simply, you cannot have it both ways.

Georgiegirl256

goodwithsaving wrote: »

You know, I was expecting the OP to receive the usual 'marriage means what's yours is mine, what's mine is yours' and they did.
It isn't unromantic to want to protect what is yours and what you have worked for. It's called being realistic. If you've been together twenty years and then get married, fine. If you built the bulk of your assets before getting married, I don't see why the other person should be entitled to receive any of them upon divorce.
I don't have the answers for you OP but support your question and thinking one hundred percent.

I totally agree with you. It's not unromantic to want to protect what is yours etc, it is wise and like you say, it's being called a realist. Nobody goes into a marriage wanting to fail, but the truth is, so many unfortunately do, and people need to realise it isn't always all hearts and flowers.

However, if it means that much to the OP to protect what is hers, the only way is not to get married unfortunately.