FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Prenuptial Agreements. What's your view?

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Prenuptial Agreements

They apparently arn't just for celebrities and the filthy rich anymore. More and more people like us are taking them out or considering it to safeguard their estate.

What do you think to them?

Do you think it's a sensible thing to do to safe guard your money/assets etc?

Would you consider one yourself?

And what would you think if your partner mentioned that they wanted one?

Or do you personally think it's an appalling thing to do?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is this a sneaky way to suss out who's rich on Fab?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Is this a sneaky way to suss out who's rich on Fab?

"

Lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I'm open-minded on this, as it's really up to the people involved within the relationship to find whatever works for them.

With all the money that's shifted to tax havens, I'm sure there's some of it that's also to keep it away from potential partners who may have some future claim.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If you have anything worth keeping its a good idea

If your not after your partners money you should have no problem signing one

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

ding ding....round 3!!!

parades round the forum holding a placard aloft, wearing nothing but skimpy shorts and heels

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If you have anything worth keeping its a good idea

If your not after your partners money you should have no problem signing one "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

I thought pre-nuptial agreements had no force under UK law?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *plpxp2Couple
over a year ago

Middlesbrough


"I thought pre-nuptial agreements had no force under UK law?"

They don't

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Good idea something I would have considered.

As long as everything is taken into account in regards to what you have put into the relationship along the way.

I don't agree with people having access to their partners pension fund.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"I thought pre-nuptial agreements had no force under UK law?

They don't"

Then it's an irrelevance - get a good divorce lawyer, OP

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

When I was younger I wouldn't have even entertained the idea however now being older, with children and considerably greater assets than I had at 25 I would give an agreement of sorts some consideration.

I hope I'm never in the position to have to think about it but I've seen too much and lived too long to know that protecting your own interests is the sensible way to go.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought pre-nuptial agreements had no force under UK law?

They don't"

They can have weight under certain circumstances. For a short marriage with no children, they are likely to prevail.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I don't agree with people having access to their partners pension fund. "

Why?

If for instance a couple have been "traditional " man works/wife kids then why shouldn't she have access?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the only thing I would consider is my home bought and paid for by me over many years hard work however it all depends on the circumstances of a "legal" partner if I were to consider a pre nup being drawn up x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It sickens me that people think they have any claim on their partner's money when they split.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"It sickens me that people think they have any claim on their partner's money when they split. "

Guess what - divorces can get very acrimonious, especially if one partner has been doing things behind the other's back or large amounts of cash are involved...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's probably a good idea in some situations, especially if they are children involved from previous relationships.

However, if it's an excuse to just be tight, then what's the point in even getting married? You clearly don't see them as your equal.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iscean MaleMan
over a year ago

Darlaston

Its a wierd conversation to have with a partner... lets do one of these agreements incase we split up.

Btw I wish I did one with my ex...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

I had an Islamic wedding. It's traditional for the groom to promise the bride a pay off in case things don't work out. We agreed a nominal amount just to fit in with the tradition.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

makes sense if its very one sided - but part of me says go into a marriage to share equally - so splinter time for my arse

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

I personally would consider a prenuptial.

To protect what I have and for the other person to protect what they had before we got together.

I wouldn't have a problem if a future partner wanted me to sign one etc .

I'd be with that person for them not what they are worth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 01/05/16 15:09:41]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You can look at it lots of ways. Previously I would have said no to one. But the house I have was pretty much rebuilt by mrNotts and to think of having to leave would devastate me. Then again it's still early days and I couldn't even consider having another person love here anyway.

I'll stick to just shagging I think

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Other then a few guitars we don't have much of value so would be pointless. If we ever split as long as I left with what I started relationship with would be enough for me. X

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It sickens me that people think they have any claim on their partner's money when they split.

Guess what - divorces can get very acrimonious, especially if one partner has been doing things behind the other's back or large amounts of cash are involved... "

You go into it with your eyes wide open! And you come out of it, with them even wider!

Children and custody, make it harder to settle things... But I wouldn't of even considered a pretty nup. Trust, loyalty and love... Should be the basis of any marriage..

Like, they say; what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I had a few Bob I wouldn't feel bad about splitting it with somebody I've whiled away the years with!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

eddie murphy said it best in RAW

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though. "

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married. "
this would be my only concern if we split up is having to sell my home and share half of it when its wot I had as a single person x don't see why I should have to

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married. "

Lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married. this would be my only concern if we split up is having to sell my home and share half of it when its wot I had as a single person x don't see why I should have to "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married. "

There is no "automatic entitlement." If the settlement of the finances is disputed, the court looks at the factors set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act.

All in all, they are what I would consider to be relatively equitable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arry247Couple
over a year ago

Wakefield

To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I can understand why some have one. Especially if you don't have children together but separately you have them. If you want to protect your assets for them rather than losing them to an ex.

Good wills are also important to ensure your legacy goes where you want. I'm constantly surprised by the number of over 40's who haven't written one yet. Get it done. It's not expensive.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married."

Lots of people feel the same. A few think differently. They think that relationships can fail and want some certainty/probability in the event of that happening. I don't criticise either point of view.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married.

Lots of people feel the same. A few think differently. They think that relationships can fail and want some certainty/probability in the event of that happening. I don't criticise either point of view."

Yeah having been divorced and witnessed a man I once loved and intended on spending the rest of my life with, turn into a nasty vindictive little cock, my faith in humanity has dwindled somewhat

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married.

Lots of people feel the same. A few think differently. They think that relationships can fail and want some certainty/probability in the event of that happening. I don't criticise either point of view.

Yeah having been divorced and witnessed a man I once loved and intended on spending the rest of my life with, turn into a nasty vindictive little cock, my faith in humanity has dwindled somewhat "

People can turn into someone unrecognisable when a relationship ends and money is involved can't they unfortunately.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married.

Lots of people feel the same. A few think differently. They think that relationships can fail and want some certainty/probability in the event of that happening. I don't criticise either point of view.

Yeah having been divorced and witnessed a man I once loved and intended on spending the rest of my life with, turn into a nasty vindictive little cock, my faith in humanity has dwindled somewhat "

Dont judge us all ........ Please xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eavenscentitCouple
over a year ago

barnstaple

I would get one (f), I have assets to protect for my kids. Why should anyone object ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx"

Can I have a pre nap

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married.

Lots of people feel the same. A few think differently. They think that relationships can fail and want some certainty/probability in the event of that happening. I don't criticise either point of view.

Yeah having been divorced and witnessed a man I once loved and intended on spending the rest of my life with, turn into a nasty vindictive little cock, my faith in humanity has dwindled somewhat

Dont judge us all ........ Please xx"

Judged you are all potential future cocks

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To us a pre-nup would simply be an admission that the other party had no confidence that the relationship would last, therefore there would be no point in getting married.

Lots of people feel the same. A few think differently. They think that relationships can fail and want some certainty/probability in the event of that happening. I don't criticise either point of view.

Yeah having been divorced and witnessed a man I once loved and intended on spending the rest of my life with, turn into a nasty vindictive little cock, my faith in humanity has dwindled somewhat

Dont judge us all ........ Please xx

Judged you are all potential future cocks "

Got a cock.... Lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap "

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom "

Deal ....... Where do I sign

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign "

On my pussy with your tongue

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue

"

Get a room ffs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married.

There is no "automatic entitlement." If the settlement of the finances is disputed, the court looks at the factors set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act.

All in all, they are what I would consider to be relatively equitable."

Really? There's often stories about celebrities getting divorced and having to give their ex half of their fortune.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married.

There is no "automatic entitlement." If the settlement of the finances is disputed, the court looks at the factors set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act.

All in all, they are what I would consider to be relatively equitable.

Really? There's often stories about celebrities getting divorced and having to give their ex half of their fortune. "

You hear a lot reported but rarely the details.

In a disputed case the court (in this country) looks at

The income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future including;

• The financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

• The standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage;

• The age of each party to the marriage and the duration of the marriage;

• Any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage;

• The contributions made by each of the parties to the welfare of the family, including any contribution made by looking after the home or caring for the family;

• The value to either of the parties to the marriage of any benefit (this can include pension arrangements) that (as a result of the divorce) the party will loose the chance of acquiring.

What do you think should be altered to make it fairer?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married.

There is no "automatic entitlement." If the settlement of the finances is disputed, the court looks at the factors set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act.

All in all, they are what I would consider to be relatively equitable.

Really? There's often stories about celebrities getting divorced and having to give their ex half of their fortune.

You hear a lot reported but rarely the details.

In a disputed case the court (in this country) looks at

The income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future including;

• The financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

• The standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage;

• The age of each party to the marriage and the duration of the marriage;

• Any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage;

• The contributions made by each of the parties to the welfare of the family, including any contribution made by looking after the home or caring for the family;

• The value to either of the parties to the marriage of any benefit (this can include pension arrangements) that (as a result of the divorce) the party will loose the chance of acquiring.

What do you think should be altered to make it fairer?"

Most of it. 2 people married for a couple of years. No kids. The non-celeb half can claim against the celeb's wealth. The law is bollocks.

Unless they have kids together, they don't owe each other anything.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If and it's a big if, I ever had a new relationship I would want to protect what me and my late husband built up between us. So prenup would work in that scenario and I don't see it as being wrong. Likewise I would not expect anything from them though.

This is what I mean though. What kind of evil freak would demand anything from you - such as your house- if you married then split up.

It's yours. Getting married doesn't automatically entitle the other person to your possessions that you had before you were married.

There is no "automatic entitlement." If the settlement of the finances is disputed, the court looks at the factors set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act.

All in all, they are what I would consider to be relatively equitable.

Really? There's often stories about celebrities getting divorced and having to give their ex half of their fortune.

You hear a lot reported but rarely the details.

In a disputed case the court (in this country) looks at

The income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future including;

• The financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

• The standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage;

• The age of each party to the marriage and the duration of the marriage;

• Any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage;

• The contributions made by each of the parties to the welfare of the family, including any contribution made by looking after the home or caring for the family;

• The value to either of the parties to the marriage of any benefit (this can include pension arrangements) that (as a result of the divorce) the party will loose the chance of acquiring.

What do you think should be altered to make it fairer?

Most of it. 2 people married for a couple of years. No kids. The non-celeb half can claim against the celeb's wealth. The law is bollocks.

Unless they have kids together, they don't owe each other anything. "

You seem to have missed that the length of the marriage is taken into account. That was included, honest. No one married for just a few years with no children will manage a sizeable claim.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anillanomoreCouple
over a year ago

Chichester

I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair."

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anillanomoreCouple
over a year ago

Chichester


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?"

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs) "
I concur with this view point it is self explanatory so need to elaborate I don't feel x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ensualtouch15Man
over a year ago

ashby de la zouch


"I thought pre-nuptial agreements had no force under UK law?

They don't"

One reason I have not married and most probably won't in the future

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs) "

What if the partner looking after the children has little earining capacity and a need for housing? The other has major capital from before the marriage? Or inherited? Kick the custiodial partner and the kids out of the house to live in B&B?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anillanomoreCouple
over a year ago

Chichester


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs)

What if the partner looking after the children has little earining capacity and a need for housing? The other has major capital from before the marriage? Or inherited? Kick the custiodial partner and the kids out of the house to live in B&B?"

Then they should get the majority of the joint cash and child maintenance. The longer the marriage the more joint money would be available. I still don't see why they should take money earned before the marriage

However I think there should also be more equality in child rearing so both parties can maintain their careers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs)

What if the partner looking after the children has little earining capacity and a need for housing? The other has major capital from before the marriage? Or inherited? Kick the custiodial partner and the kids out of the house to live in B&B?

Then they should get the majority of the joint cash and child maintenance. The longer the marriage the more joint money would be available. I still don't see why they should take money earned before the marriage

However I think there should also be more equality in child rearing so both parties can maintain their careers. "

Where does the "joint cash" come from? One partner has none and will be in dire straits. With no career. The other has much.

Why ring fence before and after? Is that not more inequal than taking the MCA factors into account?

Rich woman. Loads of money, earned before marriage. 3 children. Heavily mortgaged house. Divorce. Husband stay at home, looked after kids for 7 years and sacrificed his carreer.

Kick him out? Our support him?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anillanomoreCouple
over a year ago

Chichester


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs)

What if the partner looking after the children has little earining capacity and a need for housing? The other has major capital from before the marriage? Or inherited? Kick the custiodial partner and the kids out of the house to live in B&B?

Then they should get the majority of the joint cash and child maintenance. The longer the marriage the more joint money would be available. I still don't see why they should take money earned before the marriage

However I think there should also be more equality in child rearing so both parties can maintain their careers.

Where does the "joint cash" come from? One partner has none and will be in dire straits. With no career. The other has much.

Why ring fence before and after? Is that not more inequal than taking the MCA factors into account?

Rich woman. Loads of money, earned before marriage. 3 children. Heavily mortgaged house. Divorce. Husband stay at home, looked after kids for 7 years and sacrificed his carreer.

Kick him out? Our support him?"

That doesn't make sense. If she had loads of money before the marriage and earned loads during why would the house be heavily mortgaged? If she wasn't earning loads why didn't he get a job too? Where did all the money go?

My idea would focus more people's attention on being able to provide for themselves. You would need to have to have equality of pay between the sexes and shared child care so it wouldn't work properly as things stand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue

Get a room ffs "

You wAna watch if we do get a room??

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue

Get a room ffs

You wAna watch if we do get a room?? "

Can I eat crisps and drink fizzy pop while I'm watching please ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The op is always posting about money and possessions and is obviously telling us he has money.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The op is always posting about money and possessions and is obviously telling us he has money....."

Why the interest??

Would you like to borrow some ??

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anillanomoreCouple
over a year ago

Chichester


"The op is always posting about money and possessions and is obviously telling us he has money....."

It seems a fairly substantial chip on his shoulder too, from reading some of his other posts.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue

Get a room ffs

You wAna watch if we do get a room??

Can I eat crisps and drink fizzy pop while I'm watching please ? "

Crisps and fizzy pop ???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The op is always posting about money and possessions and is obviously telling us he has money.....

It seems a fairly substantial chip on his shoulder too, from reading some of his other posts."

That's right xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The op is always posting about money and possessions and is obviously telling us he has money.....

Why the interest??

Would you like to borrow some ?? "

Id rather go to Wonga

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue

Get a room ffs

You wAna watch if we do get a room??

Can I eat crisps and drink fizzy pop while I'm watching please ?

Crisps and fizzy pop ??? "

It's my guilty fetish

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think anything you had before the marriage and any inheritance should be yours on divorce. Anything earned within the marriage should be split. It seems fair.

After a 30 year marriage where one party has stayed at home to raise the children? After a 10 year marriage where one partner is looking after very young children?

Yep, even in those circumstances. It should be a clean slate when you marry and everything you earn together should be joint.

The split doesn't have to be 50/50 if there are kids involved or if one party has less earning power due to being more of the homemaker. It isn't fair to include the money you made before marriage or money inherited from dead relatives. Just my point of view.

(Mrs)

What if the partner looking after the children has little earining capacity and a need for housing? The other has major capital from before the marriage? Or inherited? Kick the custiodial partner and the kids out of the house to live in B&B?

Then they should get the majority of the joint cash and child maintenance. The longer the marriage the more joint money would be available. I still don't see why they should take money earned before the marriage

However I think there should also be more equality in child rearing so both parties can maintain their careers.

Where does the "joint cash" come from? One partner has none and will be in dire straits. With no career. The other has much.

Why ring fence before and after? Is that not more inequal than taking the MCA factors into account?

Rich woman. Loads of money, earned before marriage. 3 children. Heavily mortgaged house. Divorce. Husband stay at home, looked after kids for 7 years and sacrificed his carreer.

Kick him out? Our support him?

That doesn't make sense. If she had loads of money before the marriage and earned loads during why would the house be heavily mortgaged? If she wasn't earning loads why didn't he get a job too? Where did all the money go?

My idea would focus more people's attention on being able to provide for themselves. You would need to have to have equality of pay between the sexes and shared child care so it wouldn't work properly as things stand. "

I am suggesrting that the things set out in the Matrtriomal Causes Acr are not a bad starting point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *urvymamaWoman
over a year ago

Doncaster

Before having my children it's not something I ever said I'd do, now if I were to ever marry if want want to protect their financial futures more than my own

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Id be more than happy to sign a pre nup

Xx

Can I have a pre nap

I'll let u pre nap on my bottom

Deal ....... Where do I sign

On my pussy with your tongue

Get a room ffs

You wAna watch if we do get a room??

Can I eat crisps and drink fizzy pop while I'm watching please ?

Crisps and fizzy pop ???

It's my guilty fetish "

Well we will be making enough noise I'm pretty sure you rattling a packet won't distract us

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *urvymamaWoman
over a year ago

Doncaster


"Before having my children it's not something I ever said I'd do, now if I were to ever marry if want want to protect their financial futures more than my own "

Well grammar in that post went tits up!

I apologise

I meant I'd now want one to protect their financial futures

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought pre-nuptial agreements had no force under UK law?

They don't

One reason I have not married and most probably won't in the future

"

Up until this point I'd have had a pre nuptial drawn up, now I'll just live in sin if I ever meet anyone

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The op is always posting about money and possessions and is obviously telling us he has money.....

Why the interest??

Would you like to borrow some ??

Id rather go to Wonga "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London


"It's probably a good idea in some situations, especially if they are children involved from previous relationships.

However, if it's an excuse to just be tight, then what's the point in even getting married? You clearly don't see them as your equal. "

Why I won't remarry.

The house, money etc all mine. I've no intention of bankrolling the next partner, it all goes to my kids.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"It's probably a good idea in some situations, especially if they are children involved from previous relationships.

However, if it's an excuse to just be tight, then what's the point in even getting married? You clearly don't see them as your equal.

Why I won't remarry.

The house, money etc all mine. I've no intention of bankrolling the next partner, it all goes to my kids."

Fully agree with you

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top