Asset Protection Advice

[Piston Broke]

The prenup is generally useful when the to parties have a large difference in asset base. No point imo if one has 2xIP and another 3xIP.
But if one has 10 IPs and the other none, then "Don't you love me" can be easily answered with "Do you love me or my money?"

When you accumulate the most you feel possible, go set up a few trusts and shelf companies.
at this point get a prenup, saying she will not touch your property, company or trusts, or any of the trusts or companys assets or future assets.
Then start buying in the co and trust.

Whatever portion of loans paid off while together could be considered 50/50, so I agree with the "accumulate" as much net equity as you can before as I
don't think future earnings will will hold up in the family court.
Anything after is up for grabs, anything and everything. you only have a swing at what was brought in before the union, plus a % of what was accumulated after.
Even better if the trust has assets unencumbered in any way, as any debt repayments would likely be deemed to be 50/50 contributions.
And still needs to be at arms length, so you need a non related person or entity else to be the trustee.
Yep, it's complicated

 

[skater]

Call me old-fashioned, but I don't think that you should live together until you're either married, or have made a "marriage-like life-long commitment" to each other (if you have a problem with the institution of marriage, or current laws unfortunately don't permit you to marry).

I also believe that marriage should be a life long committment and that too many people enter into it too lightly. If you enter the relationship with the thought that "If it dosen't work, I'll just get a divorce" you are setting yourself up from failure from the start. I also believe that if you live with someone it should be the same kind of committment, not a casual relationship of convenience.

This aside, the PPOR, if both parties are living there, and especially when it is a realatively recent purchase should be split in the case of a relationship break-up. I would think it very unfair if you wanted to shield the PPOR from your partner.

I have a female friend, in her forties, with considerable assets. This is what she did when the subject of her and her boyfriend co-habiting was discussed. The only assets the boyfriend had at the time was a car with a loan in excess of the value of it and was renting a house that he could ill afford. He was on a low income, she on a high income. He was unaware of the extent of her assets.

They sat down together and she told him that he could not move in because of what she had built up and that even though she loved him, could not put this at risk. He had a relative living with him (and sponging off him at the time), so a plan was put in place.

First, they had to wait until they could encourage the relative to find alternate accommodation. Once this was done, she moved into his rented home & turned her PPOR into an IP. All finance to be kept separate and she would pay half the rent and expenses for the rented home. I'm not sure, but I think they documented somewhere (pre nup perhaps, I don't know) that what was hers before the start of the relationship, was hers to keep.

Next step was to teach her boyfriend about money, as he was totally clueless. Step-by-step she slowly helped him to pay down the loan for the car by explaining how much better off he would be with every extra payment. She stopped him from buying lunch every day and the savings went straight into the loan. She also talked about his purchasing his own home, which he believed to be impossible for someone in his situation.

As the interest rates came down and rents came up, she was eventually able to show him that the cost of purchasing a very small, modest home, in a not-so desirable area, was around the same cost as the rent they were paying. This was enough for him to agree that he would be able to purchase a property.

He has now bought a house. It is his, and she pays him "rent". Their finances are still completely separate. They are going to renovate this home and sell it. The aim now, she says is that they both sell their respective PPOR's and purchase something nicer, together. I believe that once they have done this, the relationship will be "formalised".

 

[Nathan]

Im pedantic of prenups.

If I broke up with the girl today, she would get nothing. However, If I met a new girl, I would make her sign a prenup within 6 months of going out. Its iminent to have this. Tell her she wouldnt drive her $10-20k (assuming) car uninsured so why should you be uninsured for 1-2-3-4-5-6 mill/..

As far as i see it, if woman wasnt to sign prenup then i wouldnt want to be with her, a) because i would feel issue in future, b) i would consider her as stubbon b*.


But as we know i am harsh on myself so im harsh on others and thats the way it is i guess. every relationship different.

 

[xcesiv]

I think If i did ask for it then it would be the end of us. This isnt a bad thing as u just said Nathan.

If she wants me for me then a prenup doesnt stop this. She will get all the love stuff she wants, presents, holidays or anything i wanna give, but the investments are my future security. If she doesnt want to hang around then she doesnt get the benifits.

PB. like u said, if we both had similar assets i wouldnt worry, but im walking in with nearly 1mill in assets, (2xIPs, PPOR and 2xCars) and she is walking in with an old commodore and her shoes.

She thinks im all about money which will be our problem with the prenup. But it isnt 100% correct. Yes its money/investments, but its my financial security and future early retirement, for me and my partner.

If she wants to be the girl in my life then she has to be there. If she wants to leave she leaves with the assets she came in with.

 

[Piston Broke]

Nathan, in your favour there is a different dynamic these days between the sexes and these issues seem to be easier addressed than in times gone by.
On the other hand a person in your situation will have a hard time "insuring" for future gains, and because of the high leverage most your planned gains would likely be future gains.
So you'd still have much to lose in an unequal relationship.
Another reason why it's nice to be anonymous and not tell anybody what you do or what you have.
And it's rather amusing when people wonder how you can afford things when they don't even think you work.
There's much somber reading on the family court past cases, and I know a few friends who went through it too.

xcesiv, nothing beats the truth as you stated above.
and btw don't forget you come in with net assets not gross. Anything gained during is 50/50.

 

[Leikela]

On the other hand a person in your situation will have a hard time "insuring" for future gains, and because of the high leverage most your planned gains would likely be future gains.

This would be enough to discourage me from getting married to someone with much fewer assets. So one needs to either find a partner with equal wealth, or do a Darryn Hinch (minus the marriage) and just live almost together in separate apartments.

 

[xcesiv]

Im just letting my thoughts flow here, so dont attack me here.

I make nearly Tripple her Annual Income Per Year. Almost 4 times if things go well this year

Im paying the Gap in the 2x IPs, Im paying down the PPOR and the Cars.

If she wants 50/50 of the growth then she should be paying 50/50 of the out of pocket expenses.

If im on 80k per year and she is on 20k per year she is 1/5th of the income, she should only get 1/5th of the growth in that time.

She would still walk out with a good chunk if she did leaves me.

The more i think about it the more i think i should just be a bachelor and have all the fun i want...lol

 

[wylie]

The simplest thing is to simply not move in together. That will not stop your relationship from progressing and time will tell whether she is "the one".

I find this thread interesting because I had a house when I met hubby of which I had only about $20K equity. He had $20K in cash sitting in his sock drawer , so I felt quite happy that we were entering our relationship and marriage equally.

I felt very happy that I was not jeopardising what I had worked very hard for.

When you think about the very rich, I feel quite sure that anyone marrying into those families would not get half of the assets brought to the marriage. Sure, kids change things, and mean the ex-wife and the kids would be looked after, but the pre-nup would be signed well before they moved in (and rightfully so, in my opinion), regardless of the sex of the one with the money.

If I was "in the market" now for a husband, I would certainly put things in place to protect what I have for myself and the kids, but mostly for me because chances are that women in their 40s and above will find it harder to find a new partner than men of similar age and I would hate to lose the opportunity of having a comfortable old age that I/we have worked hard for.

Though it may be seen as terribly unromantic, I think your $1M of assets needs to be protected. I am all for both sharing in what you work for TOGETHER, but why hand it over on a platter simply because you let your nether regions rule your head .

 

[skater]

The simplest thing is to simply not move in together. That will not stop your relationship from progressing and time will tell whether she is "the one".

Exactly! It dosen't sound like either one of you is ready for a "marriage-like" relationship, so why put yourself at risk. Just live separately. I am sure that won't stop you from enjoying each other's company.

 

[xcesiv]

We are not ready to move in together. but its something that will come up and i want to have things planned for when they do. I want to have the talks and stuff early so its not a supprise down the track.

And my assets are for me and My Future Kids, Im not trying to be greedy, I just know i have worked hard for what i own and it is there for me to spoil myself, my parter (while she is with me) and Kids if and when i have them.

I think its something i need to bring up sooner rather than later. If its clear early up then there is less chance of WW3 later when it comes to signing.

 

[Sheryn]

I find this thread interesting because I had a house when I met hubby of which I had only about $20K equity. He had $20K in cash sitting in his sock drawer , so I felt quite happy that we were entering our relationship and marriage equally.

Hubby and I married with approximately the same amount, he had block of land and half a car, I had the equivalent in cash and we are still married after 31 years.

I felt very happy that I was not jeopardising what I had worked very hard for.

When you think about the very rich
http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/...-me-poorer-than-her-cleese-20090818-eo2c.html

I was reading about John Cleese today and his divorce settlement - sometimes you have to question people's principles, morals, ethics etc (ex wife).


Regards
Sheryn

 

[wylie]

Hi Sheryn. I also read the news story on the net and was thinking of this thread.

 

[xcesiv]

This morning on Nova this issue has come up with a Comedian and his partner,

Someone brought up the question why didnt they have a pre nup.

 

[cu@thetop]

Wealthy man has a new girlfriend move in. He works she doesn't. She needs living money but instead of giving her cash he says "I will need to pay you by cheque- but if you take it down to the bank and tell them you are my hired live in domestic help they will clear the cheque straight away."

She does this and the funds are cleared. Continues to do so every week.


After a few years she busts up and tries to go him half of his portfolio.

He denies there was ever a relationship and he's got multiple bank staff to back him up.

 

[willy008]

Has anyone here gone through this before. How did you ask your partner to sign a pre nup/

When I seen my accountant the other week I asked about a pre nup or trust to keep my assets safe from a break up in future
I was told once you have kids together the family court can over ride what you have in place to
protect your assets

 

[RumpledElf]

You need some good legal advice. I have also seen both parties (not just females) enjoy the fruits of anothers labour.

I dated a chap a few years ago (for about 4-5 months) who thought it might be a good idea to try and take me for half. He didn't try, but he did try and get a few $1000 out of me. With an undated letter with almost no details on it clearly printed out from Notepad, but it was a try ...

Best thing is he inadvertantly introduced me to my current partner

I came into this relationship with a car, house with a small debt, super, money in the bank, renting a place, and all the furniture in both places. He had the clothes on his back and a computer.

No prenup and a few years later he is now ahead by half a house and has his name on the paperwork for a block of land. And of course the small curly noisy person and the cat ...

 

[vincenzo]

I'm glad i met my woman when i was young, and we both had nothing.
Getting a pre-nup means "I don't completely trust you" There's no way around it, that elephant is always going to be in the room. It's not as bad as sleeping with her sister or best friend or anything like that, as in these cases you've already proven that you can't be trusted. A pre-nup is probably about as bad as getting busted perving on her sister getting changed.

 

[Rob Williams]

You're all scaring me, now. I'm taking myself off the market and staying single.
Thanks for the advice!

 

[kissfan]

Getting a pre-nup means "I don't completely trust you"

I look at it a little differently. I think a pre-nup covers ones a s s 'just in case'.

You never know what a partner may choose to do later in life. I don't know the exact percentage, but a lot of marriages do end in divorce for one reason or another. Maybe my comment above should read 'a pre-nup covers ones 'a s s 'ets.

In saying that, I don't have a pre-nup in place and my comments/thoughts are more aimed at those that enter into a marriage/relationship where one of the partners has substantially more, asset wise, than the other partner.

Regards
Marty

 

[graisme]

hi all
have listed a question on pre-nups on another listing but not got the replies i had hoped for.

assuming that being older and wiser, we are going for a pre-nup out of wisdom, not distrust, does anyone know of any clauses that need to be included?

this is not about trust. we wouldn't be marrying each other if it were. it is about succession planning. i have substantial assets which i want to protect for my children, hence the pre-nup. i'm not protecting them from him but rather, crossing the t's for after my/our demise, just in case....