Marriage - protecting pre-marital assets

[imjustabigpistonhead]

Hello

Yep I've created a new account for this question! :-)

I'm looking to get married to my partner but I have the following problem:

I have about £600k in net assets
My partner has about £5k in net assets (the difference is not a problem for me, she has valid reasons).
We started cohabiting when I had about £85k in a bank account and I continued to use it for salary/rent/bills.
I've since learnt that the ring fencing protection for pre-marrital assets does not begin at the date of marriage, it begins at the date that cohabitation started prior to marriage (wtf?!).
So that bank account that had £85k in when cohabiation began has become 'mingled' and will be treated as a shared marrital asset in the event of divorce.

I know £85k isn't a big portion of my total assets but I can't help but feel that I've lost a lot of trust in UK divorce law by being tripped up with a law effectively saying "marrigage begins when cohabitation beings not the date of marriage". And as I have significantly more assets than my partner I'm only ever going to lose out if any other legal 'perculiarities' occur.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I've found a decent lawyer but she wants £650 for an 'initial consultation' - I don't even know if there is a solution and how much it would cost. She did mention a prenup but the idea of it makes me feel sick and bloody offensive for my partner who obviously hasn't done anything wrong.

Also we're looking to have kids and I wouldn't feel comfortable doing that without being married, so I can't just "not get married".

Not sure what I'm expecting anyone to say really but I'd be very grateful for any advice.

Cheers,

IJABPH

[Squiddly Diddly]

Marriage, children, you cannot protect it.

That does not mean she is entitled to walk away with half of everything after one sprog and 12 months of marriage, but she could try.

[55palfers]

With this Ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow.

Other vows may be available

[mikees]

Squiddly Diddly said:

Marriage, children, you cannot protect it.

That does not mean she is entitled to walk away with half of everything after one sprog and 12 months of marriage, but she could try.

This looked into it nothing you can do.

[LimaDelta]

Marry someone you trust?

[Squiddly Diddly]

LimaDelta said:

Marry someone you trust?

Good luck with that.

[CastroSays]

imjustabigpistonhead said:

I have about £600k in net assets
My partner has about £5k in net assets
...
She did mention a prenup but the idea of it makes me feel sick and bloody offensive for my partner who obviously hasn't done anything wrong.

IJABPH

OP, if the situation were reversed, how would you feel about pre-nups then?
If your genuine answer is that you’d be happy to sign one to protect your partner and her assets then what is wrong with expecting the same in return......?

[stevensdrs]

As you are already cohabiting in a relationship the protection of your assets ship has already sailed. If you are concerned about the money then don't have kids and dont get married. Lots of threads on here where guys have been left with nothing after it all went pear shaped.

[classicaholic]

My ex had nothing when I got married & I had a million pound house, I tried putting stuff in an offshore company but she hacked my computer & found all the details & the Judge went with her, after the divorce I ended up with my company (the one I owned before her) & she had my house & car collection! The company is only worth what I do and is worth nothing to sell so basically I have nothing!
Still better off without the cow though!

[Monkeylegend]

I am surprised that with £650k of net assets, and feeling as you do, you are baulking at spending £650 for guidance from a solicitor.

Maybe you should be living on your own if you are worried about sharing your wealth.

Edited by Monkeylegend on Sunday 28th April 13:06

[Rewe]

Why not spend the £650 to find out for certain? If you find that there is no way to protect your assets, short of a pre-nuptIal, then you are left with a very simple question: would I risk everything I have for this person?

If the answer is yes, then marry her.

[Adam B]

stevensdrs said:

As you are already cohabiting in a relationship the protection of your assets ship has already sailed. If you are concerned about the money then don't have kids and dont get married. Lots of threads on here where guys have been left with nothing after it all went pear shaped.

Not true - there is no such thing as common law wife. Nothing is 100% clear but set up a co-habitation agreement now. It can form the basis of a pre-nup if you do get married. They will be taken into account if you then divorce and you both get independent advice and it’s terms are not unreasonable. All bets off if you have kids.

And yes once married a 5 year co-habit plus a 5 year marriage is treated like a 10 year marriage in divorces

Edited by Adam B on Sunday 28th April 14:08

[Squiddly Diddly]

sambucket said:

Why is this? I thought common law marriage was a bit of a myth.

Obviously the child should have rights to stay in the house along with the primary carer, in event of a split. But other than that, how is living together any different to living apart, with regards to non property assets, for an unmarried couple?

There is no such right for the child.

Cohabitation prior to marriage can be taken into account when assessing a divorce settlement.

[Brads67]

Are you worried about her skinning you before you even get married ?

Why marry her,? Just pay her off and get rid now.

Seems a strange outlook to me.

[GT03ROB]

imjustabigpistonhead said:

. She did mention a prenup but the idea of it makes me feel sick and bloody offensive for my partner who obviously hasn't done anything wrong.

Then I'm confused what you want. You don't want a prenup, but everything else you say suggest thats exactly what you want

[2Btoo]

LimaDelta said:

Marry someone you trust?

This. And very much this.

If you don't trust the person you marry then you are marrying the wrong person.

[JulianPH]

I am guessing you have looked at Hart v Hart when considering 'mingled' assets.

To avoid a mountain of legalise I'll try and summarise in simple, plain English (although this also simplifies the reality for any given case):

• There are pre-marital assets and marital assets.

• Generally, pre-marital assets are excluded from sharing under any ancillary relief (financial) claim/award. However, if the marital assets are not sufficient to support the needs of the lesser well off party then the court has the discretion to factor in pre-marital assets (though not at the same split as with marital assets, if this is not required to meet such needs).

• 'Mingled' assets are altogether different. This is generally the notion that over the passage of time the relative value of pre-marital assets diminishes. The fact you provided £600k of this (and she provided only £5k) remains very relevant at the beginning of the marriage but is far less relevant as time passes.

The problem is that the court can pick and choose between these interpretations at its discretion (there is no statute or legaly binding definition).

It is also worth pointing out that if you are engaged then your partner already has the same rights over the family home as if you were married (but no rights on any other personal assets you own).

I would strongly recommend you have a prenuptial agreement put in place in any event. You can call this by any name you wish (Financial Undertaking Agreement, for example) and cover what you seek to protect by 3 simple statements:

1) All pre-marital assets (and any future income or growth derived from them, whether reinvested in other assets or not) shall without exception always remain the property of the relevant owner prior to the marriage.

2) All marital assets accrued by both parties upon commencement of the marriage shall be deemed as being equally owned by both partners in perpetuity.

3) All assets whatsoever (whether pre-marital or marital) shall in the event of the death of one partner during the marriage be deemed as belonging solely to the surviving partner and shall only be inherited by the children of both partners.

This is just a simple guideline, but whatever you have drawn up please ensure you both seek separate legal advice prior to signing.

[Rewe]

Rewe said:

Why not spend the £650 to find out for certain? If you find that there is no way to protect your assets, short of a pre-nuptIal, then you are left with a very simple question: would I risk everything I have for this person?

If the answer is yes, then marry her.

Actually, just another thought and I'm genuinely not trying to be judgemental, but do you think that the fact you have started this thread suggests that you are not quite ready for marriage yet?

[Adam B]

JulianPH said:

It is also worth pointing out that if you are engaged then your partner already has the same rights over the family home as if you were married (but no rights on any other personal assets you own).

I do find this bit very weird law (not doubting you(

So someone gets engaged and then decides to break it off the other party can get half your house despite (for example) never xo tribute fro its purchase or mortgage!

[MitchT]

Just give half of your stuff to a woman you don't like and the other half to a random lawyer. Same effect but without the wait and the fighting.