asset protection during dating

[cadence]

Hey everyone

Heard a shocking story from a friend a few months ago. His friend was dating this girl for 9 months and she was staying over / living at his apartment a lot over that period. They split up and the girl engaged a lawyer who said she was de-facto. He wanted to fight it and tried, but all the stress of it and the legal costs got too much, so he ended up handing over 50% of property (not sure of the details, eg: whether he transferred half title or handed over some monies etc).

Can this actually happen in NSW?????

He obviously loved the girl when they were going out and didnt think it would end so bitterly. But noone knows what would happen to a relationship over time. If merely living with someone for a few months entitles that person to half your assets ... what measures can you take to protect yourself (if all your assets are held in your own name).

 

[buzzlightyear]

Sounds like an urban myth to me. Law Society of NSW De Facto FAQ's

 

[coastymike]

A good reason not to live together. Agreed with buzz she probably had a tough time fighting it but can also understand from jiggly that she may have tried it on. Maybe she argued she contributed financially, maybe they had a child together who knows. Just reinforces my view that when things go pear shaped things can get nasty.

 

[Terryw]

If it didn't go to court it was his choice in gifting 50% of the properties to his lovely defacto.

The Family Law Act has changed the definition of defacto so that a minimum period is not necessary. But, as pointed out by a forum member (sorry, can't remember who), for a property settlement the couple needs to have been defacto for a period of 2 years - unless children invovled i think.

 

[cadence]

" The law will recognise your relationship as de facto if you and your partner:
•live together in a de facto relationship (either opposite-sex or same-sex relationship) as partners on a domestic basis for a qualifying period, or
•have a close personal relationship which is between two adult persons, whether or not related by family, where one or other provides domestic support and personal care, which must not be for fee or reward."

So am I correct in thinking that the best and simplest way to protect your assets when you are dating is to make sure you dont live with each other and keep your finances separate? And this is regardless of how long the relationship lasts, eg: you can date like this for 20 years and still not be de-facto ?

 

[Terryw]

" The law will recognise your relationship as de facto if you and your partner:
•live together in a de facto relationship (either opposite-sex or same-sex relationship) as partners on a domestic basis for a qualifying period, or
•have a close personal relationship which is between two adult persons, whether or not related by family, where one or other provides domestic support and personal care, which must not be for fee or reward."

So am I correct in thinking that the best and simplest way to protect your assets when you are dating is to make sure you dont live with each other and keep your finances separate? And this is regardless of how long the relationship lasts, eg: you can date like this for 20 years and still not be de-facto ?

JP, its not as simple as that. You could be defacto even if you never live together.

See the definition of defacto in the Family Law Act
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/fla1975114/s4aa.html

 

[cadence]

so it ends up being a caveat emptor situation ... person with the assets beware when entering any sort of relationship with another who holds less or no assets ....

 

[Bigtone]

so it ends up being a caveat emptor situation ... person with the assets beware when entering any sort of relationship with another who holds less or no assets ....

a co-habitation agreement works well in victoria.

in vic not sure about nsw ur friend in all likelyhood would have won unless the girl was contributing to the purchase deposit, mortgage and household bills during the relationship and then it would have been as a %.

if kids involved you might as well just hand over the title

rod stewart said it best (paraphrase) ' rather than get married, just find a woman u hate and give her a house"

 

[Piston Broke]

It's not defacto if rent is paid.
So charge or give rent and give receipts or statements.

As for de-facto the words "couple living together", " the nature and extent of their common residence", so I'd say it would be hard to claim a longterm weekend shag as de-facto.
You could even say you paid for her professional services in $$, gifts dinner & chocolates.
And of course never let them pay any of your expenses.

As for your friend, unless there's missing info it seems he got played by her and the lawyer.

 

[Terryw]

Didn't a late and rich tycoon have a prositute make a claim recently that she was a defacto?

Also interesting to note that in NSW under the Succession Act you can have both a spouse and a defacto at the same time.

 

[Piston Broke]

I doubt she would've got a happy ending...

 

[RumpledElf]

Also interesting to note that in NSW under the Succession Act you can have both a spouse and a defacto at the same time.

That recent change got dubbed the 'mistresses act' and yes, some long-term mistresses have been able to claim under it.

It also protects polygamous relationships, since you can split assets more than just two ways now.

Just a warning for you tycoons with a squeeze or three on the side

 

[Terryw]

Its not just mistresses (or toyboys) that could get at your estate.

There are many instances where someone, X, is married to A, but separates without getting a divorce. X then goes and live with B without getting married. X later dies intestate. Both A and B will have to share the estate 50/50. If there are children involved it gets a bit more complicated.

So if you have a mistress or a toyboy (a materess?) do a will asap. But be aware that a mistress or a spouse can still make a claim under Family Provison sections of the Succession act if you do not adequately look after them in the will.

 

[Casserole Dish]

How awful would it be to not only lose a husband but then find out about a mistress who then claims half of his estate!

Not good at all

 

[Terryw]

How awful would it be to not only lose a husband but then find out about a mistress who then claims half of his estate!

Not good at all

I am just reading a book by Felix Dennis, How to get Rich, and he mentions that at one time in his life he had 14 mistresses which he was supporting (all at the same time)!

 

[Piston Broke]

It really depends on the situation and what was being provided.
If the "tycoon" was providing for the SS (sideshag) a certain lifestyle and expenses paid for a long period of time, then they may have a case that they are owed something as a de-facto relationship.
Otherwise I don't think they would get much.
Parabole: Keep your service receipts and diversify lol
And of course a pre-nup.

 

[the helix]

I am just reading a book by Felix Dennis, How to get Rich, and he mentions that at one time in his life he had 14 mistresses which he was supporting (all at the same time)!

Sounds like a way to not get rich if you ask me.

 

[Ed Barton]

I am just reading a book by Felix Dennis, How to get Rich, and he mentions that at one time in his life he had 14 mistresses which he was supporting (all at the same time)!

i think you should post that in the 'what makes someone wealthy' thread!!