Pre-nuptial

[midnightgirl]

I'd like to ask what is your idea about pre-nuptial agreement. Do you think if a man let you sign a pre-nuptial agreement, does he really loves the woman or what?

I ask this because i've known for a friend , a very bestfriend of mine, she never even told me when we were still in the Philippines and i just known it from my other friend. She signed an agreement  that if they get divorce she will not receive anything from the man. I've been thinking of her a lot , how she's doing now with her husband. You know what, for me it is a disgusting on her part, she is just putting herself down.

If i could just talk to her.........

[alex]

... in response to Pre-nuptial, posted by midnightgirl on May 31, 2001

I married an AW, she shacked around in my house when I was working, sold the house, she got half.

Engaged again, asked 3 lawyers (Texas) about pre-nupt, said don't bother unless you have something worth saving and fighting for. Broke off engagement, she married three times since.

Good bet, run fast

[Jeff S]

... in response to Pre-nuptial, posted by midnightgirl on May 31, 2001

As I understand it and as Patrick and Stephen (both from California) have pointed out below, Your assets before you were married remain your separate assets in the event of a divorce. Any assets acquired DURING your marriage (including appreciation on your separate property) are community property and have 50/50 ownership of the two parties, irrespective of who worked harder or contributed more or less, or contributed to the demise of the marriage, for that matter. It's treated like a business partnership. A piece of paper signed by both parties prior to marriage will not ever be able to rescind these basic concepts, and if it does, it will be considered unfair and probably be tossed out of court.

Child support and spousal support (in California at least) are calculated based on a formula. I've had friends who spent HUNDREDS of thousands on high powered attornies to hire investigators and fight for months and months in court battle after court battle only to have the EXACT amount awarded that would have been awarded had the two parties gone to the judge with their hats in their hands in the first place. It's not about who's screwing who or who upheld higher moral standards - it's a simple, unemotional businesslike procedure that follows basic formulas and all the crying, screaming, private investigator dirt and attorney posturing does nothing to change that.

As Patrick said, in California at least, there is very little reason to have a prenup, other than to feed your ego.

-- Jeff S.

PS - Don't let Stephen try to tell you he's not a high powered attorney. Imagine Clarence Darrow with an okie accent - that's the ticket. LOL

[humabdos]

... in response to Community property vs Separate property, posted by Jeff S on Jun 1, 2001

Thats not the case in oregon or Cal I didn'nt have much before we got married. most of waht I have now we got while we were married.  I proved I paid for it all  she had her own banking. She got the TV because she paid for it. That was the only thing she ever paid for. The judge gave her the vaccume cleaner because I have central vaccume system and didn't need it. Its all up to the judge... And the judge I got didn't like my ex at all!

[Jeff S]

... in response to Re: Community property vs Separate prope..., posted by humabdos on Jun 1, 2001

So the key to getting what you want is to get a judge that likes you and not your ex, then kiss his a** and everything will be allright. OK, I believe that - good advice.

[humabdos]

... in response to Re: Re: Community property vs Separate p..., posted by Jeff S on Jun 1, 2001

Jeff besides the judge not liking her all the facts where in my favor In the judges own words: "The court finds that respondent has rebutted the presumption of equal contribution by petitioner to the family residence".

The Judge saw right through her B.S.

[cc]

... in response to Community property vs Separate property, posted by Jeff S on Jun 1, 2001

The main thing I got out of this discussion is that a prenup is useless in most cases and wouldn't have protected Humabdos for example, since his wife could still have contested it and he would have still incurred the $15,000 or so in legal fees?

I apologize to the lawyers on this board for saying so, but it seems to me that prenups then are just another means for lawyers to extract money from their clients and to give them a false sense of security, isn't it!? (Excluding the proper prenup for business owners etc.)

[Patrick]

... in response to so a prenup is mostly useless?, posted by cc on Jun 1, 2001

Consider a man involved in a family business.  Say he owns 50%.  If he gets divorced and the business has grown significantly duing his marriage.  She's entitled to 1/2 the increase in value of his share.  If he can buy her out, fine.  If not, she could become a part owner of the business and that could damage not only the man, but the other partners involved since she could have influence over decisions.

Consider also a man with children who wants to leave them something in his will.  If he marries, then dies, I believe the surviving spouse can assume complete ownership of everything and choose to leave the heirs that the man wanted to take care of high and dry.

Those are two very good reasons for a prenuptial agreement, but how often are they what the man wants from one of these contracts?  Typically, the man wants to insure that the woman gets nothing in the event of a divorce.  Not only is this unethical, it's also likely to be thrown out of court if contested.

Anyone interested in prenuptial aggreements should contact a lawyer for advice and not rely on what they read here.  I did just that several years ago and all three lawyers I spoke with provided several minutes of telephone time free of charge as initial consultation.  They also were of the opinion that a prenuptial agreement was not a good idea for me.  I was not interested in protecting my earnings during marriage from my wife.  I believe it's half mine and half hers.  That, and protecting passive accumulation on pre-existing investments were all these guys told me I could do with a prenuptial agreement.  I had money in a 401K and one additional investment.  I didn't think that trying to protect half the returns made on these DURING THE MARRIAGE was worth the damage to the relationship that a prenuptial agreement would do.  I simply documented my net worth just prior to marriage and filed it away.

Check with a lawyer in your area for accurate advice pertaining to the state in which you live.  That's what I did.  But after 4 years of marriage, I'm no longer too concerned about being used.  I also did not pursue a woman far younger and more attractive than the women I had been dating here in ther US.  I went foreign simply because I liked the values that were MORE LIKELY (not guaranteed) to exist in women from her culture. I took my time in finding her and getting to know her.   For the guys asking themselves, "Why should I marry a foreign woman that looks like someone I could get here?" I would say they may need to re-evaluate their decision to look overseas.  They just might find themselves less satisfied married than they were single if looks were their primary motivation for marrying someone.  Looks fade, and the effect they have on you fade even before the looks do.

[Ray]

... in response to No, it depends on your situation, posted by Patrick on Jun 1, 2001

Also, my understanding is that if she doesn't have legal representation and advice when she signs it, the pre-nup is sure to be thrown out. Another consideration is having the pre-nup translated into her native language before she signs. Otherwise, she can always say she didn't understand what she was signing.

Personally, I would feel very uncomfortable asking my fiancee to sign a pre-nup before the marriage. My thinking is that if you have serious doubts about her motives, you shouldn’t even be considering marriage. Better to wait until the level of trust is sufficient that you don’t feel the need to protect yourself from her.

Ray

[john miller]

... in response to Good Advice Patrick!, posted by Ray on Jun 2, 2001

Is there a way to protect your assets in, parhaps a different corporation or under a different name, etc??

[Dave H2O]

... in response to Good Advice Patrick!, posted by Ray on Jun 2, 2001

Ray,

I feel the same way. If I don't trust her, I have no business marrying her. I look at a prenuptial as the first nail in the coffin toward divorce. But, my circuimstances are different from others.

I always try to do my homework. But as you know, time has a way of changing things. When my ex and I divorced, I told her to take everything she wanted. The only thing I had a hard time parting with was my barbecue grill. I finally turned away so I wouldn't see it go out the door. Things left by the truck load. Some stuff even came back. I knew that being agreeable would be cheaper in the long run than added legal fees and a forced property settlement. Her sister was getting a divorce at the same time. She and her husband fought over every material possession and issue. They spent over $10,000 each on legal fees and are now back together. They had yard sales to help pay legal bills. My ex and I used the same attorney, which cost me $700. Within 6 months I had a better barbecue. After a year I had bedroom furniture. After several years I was better off financially. At least my kids can still enjoy the things that left our house. When they go to their mother's house, they have familiar furniture and  barbecued food to eat. Besides, I got to keep what mattered most, my sons. ;oD

Dave H.

[Terry C]

... in response to I agree!, posted by Dave H2O on Jun 2, 2001

I have mixed feelings on pre-nups...did look into one this time but didn't do it. I agree about being agreeable. When I got divorced, I let her have all the furniture, even some "priceless" items that had been in my family for over a hundred years. She kept the best car. I found her an apt. and paid the deposits, etc. But in return, I got full custody of my son, and my profit sharing (worth about 1/4 mil at the time)was left untouched. Like you, it hurt to see some of those things go, but in the end you can always buy more "stuff".

Terry

[Stephen]

... in response to I agree!, posted by Dave H2O on Jun 2, 2001

This is a great example.

When considering legal matters....you've gotta ask yourself, "Can I really AFFORD to WIN this issue".

You gave it to her, and came out ahead.

[Stephen]

... in response to so a prenup is mostly useless?, posted by cc on Jun 1, 2001

Prenuptuals are not always worthless.

Let's face it.  They work some of the time.....even the majority of time.

But to guarantee you that this prenuptual will take care of you is something I can't do.  You don't know for certain until it is contested and you have a trial.  And even if you win the trial you can have $15,000 in attorney fees like Hum did.  (You won't feel like much of a winner when you have to pay that bill.)

Also, keep in mind that marriage laws differ from state to state.  (Yes, they differ radically in even community property law states.)  Jeff has done a good job of stating California basics in a nutshell.

[Jeff S]

... in response to Re: so a prenup is mostly useless?, posted by Stephen on Jun 1, 2001

.