Prenup stay at home mum

Happier_Me

The house has to be bought together as far as I'm concerned, even if some protection for a portion of his pre relationships assets are protected in some way. Unmarried you are really vulnerable if he puts the house in his name. If you remain unmarried then talk of him losing any assets is a mute point... if you were to separate in10 years time you would potentially walk away with nothing other than minimum child maintenance for any children.

Rambosmum

So, lets say in a few years your marriage breaks down. With what he is proposing, he could kick you out (and your child) leaving you with no where to live, no way to earn money and no rights to the property or to any joint monies without a significant court battle.


I would be seriously wary of a person like that.

elsien

PasturesNew wrote: »

I'd sign it. What was his should remain his "if". That's only fair in my book.

Yes, as a couple, "what's his is mine, what's mine's his", but it'd be repugnant to me to see "what he had before he met me" as in any way mine. While he's sharing with me the benefit of what he has, within a relationship, it's fine to use/accept/enjoy that; if there's a relationship breakdown he should be able to have back what he started with.

.

He's asking for more than that though. He's asking for his name only on the deeds and his financial contributions going forwards to also be protected. Which leaves the OP very vulnerable if it goes pear-shaped in the future and doesn't acknowledge her contributions to supporting the family to allow him to carry on being a high earner.

Kildare

Can I ask why you have decided to be a stay at home mum full time? Would changing to part-time work not be an option? This allows you to keep your hand in the workplace so when the opportunity arises to go back full time or you need to work full time you're not facing a big career break.

I know there is an argument for not making any money as for the 2-3 days you work you're paying for child care, but in the long-term you are investing in yourself x

NBLondon

The child was planned right? But the buying a property together wasn't planned first? Maybe not the best way round... and if you've both been married before did you not learn anything from the experience? Maybe the first question is to ask why he has suddenly raised this pre-nup idea (after a year of engagement)... is he having second thoughts... memories of being done over in his first marriage... prompted by someone else.... or what? And as others have said... you're in a vulnerable position so you might have to think about protecting yourself and your child first. Good Luck!

kazwookie

Personally I would be telling him to 'do one' and get rid. Harsh maybe.

Tell him to be at home and you will work, money isn't everything, he can do up the house while looking after the child!

I have no idea if prenups are legal in this country, but don't sign anytihng..........

Comms69

kazwookie wrote: »

Personally I would be telling him to 'do one' and get rid. Harsh maybe.

Tell him to be at home and you will work, money isn't everything, he can do up the house while looking after the child!

I have no idea if prenups are legal in this country, but don't sign anytihng..........

Well it's legal to have one, but theyre not binding.


Courts value them less and less as time passes from the point of signature.

goodwithsaving

I can understand the prenup. I won't get married because I don't want someone to have half of my house if it goes wrong, given I earned to pay for my house and have gone without a lot to have a 50% mortgage quite young. (I'm female). I've also been through a messy separation where, thankfully we had a declaration of trust. (He had the bulk of the money, not me and that was fair because he had put it in. It made things easier knowing the money division was already outlined).
I don't necessarily agree that he should protect assets accrued whilst together, but I can understand why he wants to protect those accrued to date.

Gloomendoom

PasturesNew wrote: »

If you're sitting on the kerb with nothing to do and a boy comes up to you in the street with a football and asks "wanna play?" and you play football together.... but then it's your tea time and you want to leave and go home, he shouldn't have to cut his ball in half and give you half. Ditto if his mum calls him in for tea.

Not a good analogy at all.

Presumably, the OP will be working her ärse off caring for the child and home, not out playing football with her mates during the day. Surely it is not unreasonable for her to expect financial compensation for that. In the form of a share in her husband's assets, for example.

If I was in a similar situation I might agree to a prenup that gives me a share in proportion to the length of the marriage. After 5 years it would be 50/50.

74jax

I have a pre nup - hubby wanted one before we got married and as I wasn't bothered either way I was happy to sign.

That said, we sat down together and planned it out, if we split within 5 years due to infidelity on his part the pre-nup became void. This was a clause I wanted in if we were going to have it. I also wanted that the pre-nup became void after 5 years regardless.

Hubby came to the marriage with maybe 2-3 times what your partner has and I came to the marriage with a house worth approx 100k. I completely understood his reasoning's for wanting one.

HOWEVER, no children were involved whatsoever, and he listened to my reasoning and what clauses I wanted in etc. It was not him saying this has to be in and that has to be in, we worked it out together and I was happy with it. If i was not happy I wouldn't have signed.