Pre-nuptial agreements

[Power King]

Interested on people's thoughts on these.

I'm a believer in them, because if a guy has worked his arse off to create some financially big assets for himself, I really think it's ****ed if a woman can take half (or a ridiculous amount) of everything he has because of marriage.

I know to some people (probably more so women) that the idea is insulting, but to quote Donal Trump, "if we don't get divorced, then it's not an issue, but if the woman hates the idea, then it says more about her than it does of you".

Now I know once marriage occurs, sometimes big assets are obtained via an equal sharing of both the man and woman, however my idea of a prenuptial agreement relates more to everything the man has worked so damn hard for prior to the marriage, eg house, car, business etc. The woman would not have had access to these in the first place had he not married her, so...

Also, I know the idea is about trust and love etc, but the reality is 50% of marriages end in divorce, and whilst it's a nice thought that yours won't end up as such from the outset, I'd say such agreements are just using your brain by covering for the possiblity which people would still be aware of if a prenuptial agreement was not formed. Plus, like Trump said, if you don't get divorced, then it's a non-issue, and the romantic thought can be kept.

Interested in your thoughts.

How common is this in Australia? (seems quite rare, but I wouldn't know)

Do you know of any couples that have one, and what does it involve?

 

[notting18]

Just a slightly gendered argument there

 

[mantis]

Just a slightly gendered argument there

Was thinking the same.

There are a lot of rich women out there as well. My take on it is, if you are rich & are looking for a partner, then you have to be careful who you choose, let's face it, how many rich people marry much younger attractive people, surely they must realise they are only marrying for their money & not their looks.

I think if someone is willing to marry an old wrinkly, male or female & share their bed, then they deserve whatever they can get, should the marriage break up.

 

[Power King]

In relation to my opening post, then yes, same goes for a well-off woman.

I'm not asking for opinions on pre-nuptials regarding celebrities or big-time mining executive billionaires, but more so ppl in everyday life that would have considerable assets.

 

[mantis]

In relation to my opening post, then yes, same goes for a well-off woman.

I'm not asking for opinions on pre-nuptials regarding celebrities or big-time mining executive billionaires, but more so ppl in everyday life that would have considerable assets.

I think you will find, that type of person wouldn't have a pre-nup, they are the domain of the rich & famous.

 

[Power King]

^I just think it's ****ed how many people end up getting robbed through marriage in everyday life though.

I would feel even worse if I had worked so damn hard to buy some nice luxurious things for myself, especially if I owned my house, car, my own business, got married, and then an ex could take this away.

Why is this not done more often, when the terrible consequences of not doing so are such a painful and common part of our society?

 

[Mario the Lothario]

I wouldn't put much faith in them.

Learn about trusts, they have saved me big time.

 

[TorresIsGod]

Was thinking the same.

There are a lot of rich women out there as well. My take on it is, if you are rich & are looking for a partner, then you have to be careful who you choose, let's face it, how many rich people marry much younger attractive people, surely they must realise they are only marrying for their money & not their looks.

I think if someone is willing to marry an old wrinkly, male or female & share their bed, then they deserve whatever they can get, should the marriage break up.

Uh-oh, we're in trouble.

 

[Brad Goodman]

I think you will find, that type of person wouldn't have a pre-nup, they are the domain of the rich & famous.

I know of a couple who have just bought a house. Their deposit was 80k, of which one of them contributed 75k. If they were to split and the house divided equally (as I assume it would be without a pre-nup), that is very harsh on the 75k'er.

 

[GPW1]

^I just think it's ****ed how many people end up getting robbed through marriage in everyday life though.

Yep, a guy at work is getting screwed like this at the moment. The missus told him she'd met someone else, asks him to leave, new guy moves in and he's stuck still paying the mortgage. There's kids involved so that blurs the situation a bit, but its still shithouse.

 

[cammo84]

I know of a couple who have just bought a house. Their deposit was 80k, of which one of them contributed 75k. If they were to split and the house divided equally (as I assume it would be without a pre-nup), that is very harsh on the 75k'er.

That's a bit different. It's only a deposit of 75k, all they'll be losing is $35k which isn't a lot of money. The OP is probably talking about $200k+ of assets, and in these cases I think a pre-nup is needed. If I were well off or rich, I don't care how much I trust my partner, what I earned pre-marriage is mine and everything we acquire afterward is ours.

Donald Trump is 100% correct. If the future spouse is serious about the marriage then he/she shouldn't have a problem with signing a pre-nup, as the point of marriage is to be together for the rest of your lives. If a girl didn't want to sign one if I asked her to, I'd have doubts about what her intentions are.

 

[Power King]

^Yeah, this post in its entirety reflects what I'm thinking, except for the first sentence, where $35k might mean a lot to the man in abba lonie's post (it's all relative).

But yeah, am talking more about an owned home, car, business etc

 

[Brad Goodman]

If that 75k is your life savings, you'd feel a touch hard done by if it was effectively halved.

 

[Niximus]

IMO - no offence intended but if you feel the need to have one you should probably rethink marrying this person.

 

[Power King]

^I'm not thinking of getting married, just curious about the issue.

99.9% of engaged couples would like to believe they will be together forever, happy and perfect.

The reality is, half of these couples are wrong.

 

[Niximus]

^I'm not thinking of getting married, just curious about the issue.

99.9% of engaged couples would like to believe they will be together forever, happy and perfect.

The reality is, half of these couples are wrong.

That is true but if you don't have trust in the person and your relationship you shouldn't get married, even if it turns out that that trust was misplaced.

 

[Power King]

^So would you say that covering your bases entails no trust?

Interested in females opinions too (please state you're female in your post, so I can tell I'm reading a female opinion).

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

A good friend of mine worked his ass off for years, going wherever his company sent him, often meaning lots of weekends away from his wife and kids.

For close to 5 years she was having an affair with a local lawyer. He eventually found out, and wanted a divorce.

Before the marriage, he owned his house, his car, and a few bits and pieces. They had two kids, she worked as a legal secretary. When they married he bought a huge house.

She was an alcoholic, adulterer, ignored the kids (live-in nanny), and didn't pay a cent towards the house - keeping her money in her own account.

She took him for everything. She got the new house (forcing him to refinance the debts to other assets and an $100k unsecured loan at nearly 14%), and ALL of their savings (about 25k in an offset account). He pays nearly 30% of his income for child support. He pays nearly 45% in repayments for a house he will never own. He can no longer afford to have his own place, and lives in cheap student accomodation (despite earning 75k per year). He sold his car, and relies on walking/public transport.

His kids (10/14) aren't interested in him as he doesn't have any material goods - so he moved to the west coast, partly as they used to like nature walks. He's now living 2 hours away, so doesn't see the kids at all - despite paying for all their private schooling.

His wife now lives with her partner - they won't get married as it stops his child support. Being lawyers they've worked it all out, but I believe they say one of them lives in the holiday house on the Gold Coast. Her new partner 'buys' the affection of the kids - Xbox, huge TV, Disneyland (US), etc.

Basically, his entire life is ruined, because he forgave his wife's indiscretions, and tried to 'fix' problems by giving his kids the best he could.

Pre-Nup's should be standard practice. (I don't have one).

 

[Niximus]

^So would you say that covering your bases entails no trust?

Interested in females opinions too (please state you're female in your post, so I can tell I'm reading a female opinion).

Not no trust but not trust to the level where you should be marrying this person.

 

[Power King]

^And I would bet a shitload of money that he trusted her with all that he had when they were engaged.

Examples like these are so damn common I really cannot understand why, as Simon says, pre-nups aren't common practice.

The only reason is because the other partner gets offended (usually female, yeah that might be sexist), and (would) gets pissed at the man, so he just obliges and doesn't bother. That, or he's doesn't even consider the possibility because, "even though half of all marriages fail, that could never happen to ours because we love each other!"

Not no trust but not trust to the level where you should be marrying this person.

^I still disagree. I really don't see anything wrong with a, 'just in case' plan. If a woman prenupped me, I have absolutely no issue with it, so long as I believed we would genuinely try our best to be committed to each other for life.

 

[Niximus]

^I still disagree. I really don't see anything wrong with a, 'just in case' plan. If a woman prenupped me, I have absolutely no issue with it, so long as I believed we would genuinely try our best to be committed to each other for life.

IMO if you don't have that level of trust why would you bother getting married?

Normally the religious folk would get their backs up at me for 'ruining marriage' because I believe it should be extended to all relationships but regardless of whether you're gay or straight IMO marriage still implies a commitment above and beyond a normal relationship.

BTW I am in a 5 year relationship and am not even close to being ready to get married, probably not even for another 5 more. If people put a bit more thought into their decision to get married then the 50% fail rate would be far less.

 

[Power King]

^Yeah, your post is fair and I agree with your last paragraph.

The thing is, marriage is intended to be life-long, and who knows what would happens years down the track.

I'm of the opinion that having a prenup doesn't entail that you have a lesser level of trust than if you otherwise didn't have a prenup. It ties in with my view of, 'just in case, as you never know what will happen in the future, but if we maintain our trust and committment as is today, then it won't be an issue'.

If a girl wanted me to sign one, I would do it immediately, as I believe she is entitled to keep everything she worked her arse off for, prior to us getting married.

 

[FrankGrimes]

A good friend of mine worked his ass off for years, going wherever his company sent him, often meaning lots of weekends away from his wife and kids.

For close to 5 years she was having an affair with a local lawyer. He eventually found out, and wanted a divorce.

Before the marriage, he owned his house, his car, and a few bits and pieces. They had two kids, she worked as a legal secretary. When they married he bought a huge house.

She was an alcoholic, adulterer, ignored the kids (live-in nanny), and didn't pay a cent towards the house - keeping her money in her own account.

She took him for everything. She got the new house (forcing him to refinance the debts to other assets and an $100k unsecured loan at nearly 14%), and ALL of their savings (about 25k in an offset account). He pays nearly 30% of his income for child support. He pays nearly 45% in repayments for a house he will never own. He can no longer afford to have his own place, and lives in cheap student accomodation (despite earning 75k per year). He sold his car, and relies on walking/public transport.

His kids (10/14) aren't interested in him as he doesn't have any material goods - so he moved to the west coast, partly as they used to like nature walks. He's now living 2 hours away, so doesn't see the kids at all - despite paying for all their private schooling.

His wife now lives with her partner - they won't get married as it stops his child support. Being lawyers they've worked it all out, but I believe they say one of them lives in the holiday house on the Gold Coast. Her new partner 'buys' the affection of the kids - Xbox, huge TV, Disneyland (US), etc.

Basically, his entire life is ruined, because he forgave his wife's indiscretions, and tried to 'fix' problems by giving his kids the best he could.

Pre-Nup's should be standard practice. (I don't have one).

why would he be paying off a house he doesn't own, or gave to his wife? doesn't make sense?

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

The agreement he signed was written up by her lawyer (coincidentally the guy she's now 'not' living with).

He gave her full title, unencumbered.

There was about 250k owing, which the bank of course wanted security for. He couldn't provide it over the whole lot, so they forced him to take on a massive unsecured loan at high interest. (about 100k).

 

[Mario the Lothario]

The agreement he signed was written up by her lawyer (coincidentally the guy she's now 'not' living with).

Unbelieveably stupid.

No offence, but your mate deserved everything he has copped. Someone else would have relieved him of his money anyway.