can you really protect your assets being a male?

[Dazz]

Im sure kerry packer and nathan tinkler have a million ways to protect themselves, but whats the easiest way for some joe like me to do so?

Honestly - the only absolute water tight solutions to your problem are to ;

1. Zip it up and never bring it out again.
2. Pay for services rendered.

Every other consequence of your basic human need will result in a judge being able to use it against you.

Human nature vs the judges at the family law court. Both very strong forces indeed !!

 

[John_]

ok, so ive been doing a fair bit of research over the last couple of years, I got burnt big time when I split up with my partner, I ended up losing almost 70% of my assets, had to move out of home and rent a crappy unit, pay maintence, get hounded for more money while she tried to justify looking after 1 x 8 year old was a fulltime job, and that there was no way she could even work part time and ruin her latte and hair appointments, all while she worked a cash in hand job that she thought I didnt know about, plus using the kids as leverage at every moment possible, while being demanded half of the property we lived in that I had 75% paid off before I even met her, whereas I couldnt buy her out so had to get a loan, but I had to get a payrise which meant more support

anyway, enough with the nasties, Ive gotten over it, lucky she only got 70% which was $50k, because she thought she could hide the $70k odd in her personal credit card debt amassed from shopping, plus I had just started a business which was at its infancy stage

ok, since then, I have amassed a fair few properties, in light of how I got done over, I have put them in my twin brothers name, who is gay, and has never been nor wants to be in a stable relationship, we have a typical twins relationship,and are joined at the hip,

just assuming my brother stays single and doesnt run a business or get sued etc,

is this a good way for a lamans man to be able to protect himself? properites are mostly cashflow positive ,overall positive, but once you take into consideration maintenance etc. the postiive cashflow is quite minimal, to an extent that I let him keep it

Im sure kerry packer and nathan tinkler have a million ways to protect themselves, but whats the easiest way for some joe like me to do so?

for the record, for the less expereinced(lucky for you)
- BFAs and pre nups are pretty useless in this country, its more of a US thing, judges can easily overturn it if they feel its warranted
- the longer the marriage/defacto goes on, the less the argument what he vs she brought in into the relationship becomes less valid as a general rule
- in the eyes of the law, the female is entitled to continue to 'live a lifestyle she is accustomed to"
- actions such as opening a combined bank account, having her mail redirected to your house, sleeping in the same house, sleeping in the same room, all contribute against
- even things like her having her separate room, having a lease agreement,even taking a photo together may only help slightly


im not trying to start a gender war here, the above is teh facts, ive been burnt once before, I have 10x more to lose this time, so I will protect myself

what are other reasonable ways that I can protect myself and my kids future

nathan tinkler has little to protect the way he is going

 

[jim1964]

how on earth did you afford 4 weddings before 39, that means a wedding every2.5-3 years!!

Yes,looking from the outside looking in i would find it amusing.no regrets though...it is what it is.Most people that know me dont beleive it anyway.

1) 4 years

2)5 years

3)3 years

4) 4 years

Just to add a bit more lighthardeness,i married and divorced the same girl twice.2 and 3.This must be a family thing,as my grandmother and 1st cousin did the same.to different people.

 

[china]

My friend paid off his first home when he was 20. He later married and divorced, so he has a mortgage for half his house again. He is scared of losing the other half so won't let his girlfriend move in. I don't know how true it is but people have been telling him that he could still lose half his assets if they were to split up.
I bought my first property when I was 20 and had it half paid off within a couple of years. When dating I would make out I was just renting. I guess it would be harder to hide what assets you own in long term relationships.

It is sad that the laws of the land encourage deception in our intimate relationships.

 

[weg]

A friend of mine went out with a guy for a while there who was very concerned about her getting close to him and his wealth (because he talked about it she figured his net worth including super would have been less than 1M) and would sometimes comment how 'people' would marry for money.

Many a time she was very tempted to tell him he her worth, which was a few times more than his, but refrained because they knew some of the same people and she didn't want them to know the extent of her business and investment interests.

This friend doesn't want a husband or a defacto anyway, but not because they might claim some of want her wealth (she has a wealthy boyfriend now) but because she really doesn't have the tolerance for the 'warts and all' of a live in relationship as she gets older.

Why not just have a girlfriend? I think you can be committed and live apart.

Infact I know a couple who have been doing this for years. Her reason is there is never any room for a mans clothes in her bedroom wardrobe - she has an entire long wall of wardrobe cram packed with clothes .

 

[Terry_w]

I think the Family Law Act is very fair. It doesn't favour men or women, but generally the one who starts off with the most assets has to give up some of those assets. This is usually, but not always, the man and so many men feel hard done by.

If a woman marries you and lives with you for 10 years then she deserves a large slice of the house, even if she brought no assets to the marriage - in my opinion.

Keeping assets in your brother's name won't change things because he is acting as trustee for you. If you don't declare this then you would be breaching the family law act.

What happens if something happens to him? What if he dies and doesn't have a valid will? Have you looked at the intestacy rules? What if a child surfaces? (one of my friends died and children he fathered appeared out of nowhere). What if your brother has a valid will and leaves everything to you? Just as you are 2 years into a defacto relationship Your partner then leaves you and makes a claim....

What if your brother marries a Japanese woman (or man? not possible atm) and she goes Bankrupt - under Japanese law spouses are liable for the debts of the other.

What if there is a valid will but your brother had been supporting a young student who then makes a claim under the Family Provision sections.

What if he goes bankrupt?
What if you have a falling out?
And what if John Howard gets back in and legalised gay marriage and he decides to marry because it is now legal...

 

[Aaron_C]

Somehow i doubt John Howard would legalise that. But bring him back anyway

 

[china]

I think the Family Law Act is very fair. It doesn't favour men or women, but generally the one who starts off with the most assets has to give up some of those assets. This is usually, but not always, the man and so many men feel hard done by.

If a woman marries you and lives with you for 10 years then she deserves a large slice of the house, even if she brought no assets to the marriage - in my opinion.

.

Why is this fair? The woman has enjoyed free housing for 10 years and then gets a large slice forever? The man may have been also providing the housework and putting the bread on the table as well.

 

[Ideo]

I think the Family Law Act is very fair. It doesn't favour men or women, but generally the one who starts off with the most assets has to give up some of those assets. This is usually, but not always, the man and so many men feel hard done by.

If a woman marries you and lives with you for 10 years then she deserves a large slice of the house, even if she brought no assets to the marriage - in my opinion.

Keeping assets in your brother's name won't change things because he is acting as trustee for you. If you don't declare this then you would be breaching the family law act.

What happens if something happens to him? What if he dies and doesn't have a valid will? Have you looked at the intestacy rules? What if a child surfaces? (one of my friends died and children he fathered appeared out of nowhere). What if your brother has a valid will and leaves everything to you? Just as you are 2 years into a defacto relationship Your partner then leaves you and makes a claim....

What if your brother marries a Japanese woman (or man? not possible atm) and she goes Bankrupt - under Japanese law spouses are liable for the debts of the other.

What if there is a valid will but your brother had been supporting a young student who then makes a claim under the Family Provision sections.

What if he goes bankrupt?
What if you have a falling out?
And what if John Howard gets back in and legalised gay marriage and he decides to marry because it is now legal...

Kudos. Agree with that

 

[wylie]

Why is this fair? The woman has enjoyed free housing for 10 years and then gets a large slice forever? The man may have been also providing the housework and putting the bread on the table as well.

Oh please...!!!

 

[TMNT]

I think the Family Law Act is very fair. It doesn't favour men or women, but generally the one who starts off with the most assets has to give up some of those assets. This is usually, but not always, the man and so many men feel hard done by.

If a woman marries you and lives with you for 10 years then she deserves a large slice of the house, even if she brought no assets to the marriage - in my opinion.

Keeping assets in your brother's name won't change things because he is acting as trustee for you. If you don't declare this then you would be breaching the family law act.

What happens if something happens to him? What if he dies and doesn't have a valid will? Have you looked at the intestacy rules? What if a child surfaces? (one of my friends died and children he fathered appeared out of nowhere). What if your brother has a valid will and leaves everything to you? Just as you are 2 years into a defacto relationship Your partner then leaves you and makes a claim....

What if your brother marries a Japanese woman (or man? not possible atm) and she goes Bankrupt - under Japanese law spouses are liable for the debts of the other.

What if there is a valid will but your brother had been supporting a young student who then makes a claim under the Family Provision sections.

What if he goes bankrupt?
What if you have a falling out?
And what if John Howard gets back in and legalised gay marriage and he decides to marry because it is now legal...

for someone who is a lawyer and obviously quite intelligent thats a narrow minded and weird view,

so if I am worth zero and do a nothing job, and I start living rent free with some rich girl who has paid off the house, I live rent free for a few years,andthen im entitled to half of teh house!!!so if its worth $2million, I am able to claim $1m??

wow, at $200k per year x 5 years,
thats a lot more then what I would earn, or about 5 times if I were a supermarket trolley boy!

fair?!?!?!!?!?

putting whether my brother is going to get a partner or move to japan aside,

why would i be breaching the family law act on buying some assets under my brothers name, and im not even in a relationship with anybody?

the system favours the women because it encourages them to fluff away their money and do no future planning, because it automatically gives them custody when it comes to children,

Peoples attitudes would be so much different if the system would be signficantly different if the standard arrangement were changed to, custody is 50/50 or an arrangement, where she had to go out and work and not be supported by someone else or family tax beneifts

 

[Aaron_C]

for someone who is a lawyer and obviously quite intelligent thats a narrow minded and weird view,

You only need to look at the ALP with their 'diverse' range of MPs - all lawyers.

 

[topcropper]

I think the Family Law Act is very fair. It doesn't favour men or women, but generally the one who starts off with the most assets has to give up some of those assets. This is usually, but not always, the man and so many men feel hard done by.

If a woman marries you and lives with you for 10 years then she deserves a large slice of the house, even if she brought no assets to the marriage - in my opinion.

Keeping assets in your brother's name won't change things because he is acting as trustee for you. If you don't declare this then you would be breaching the family law act.

What happens if something happens to him? What if he dies and doesn't have a valid will? Have you looked at the intestacy rules? What if a child surfaces? (one of my friends died and children he fathered appeared out of nowhere). What if your brother has a valid will and leaves everything to you? Just as you are 2 years into a defacto relationship Your partner then leaves you and makes a claim....

What if your brother marries a Japanese woman (or man? not possible atm) and she goes Bankrupt - under Japanese law spouses are liable for the debts of the other.

What if there is a valid will but your brother had been supporting a young student who then makes a claim under the Family Provision sections.

What if he goes bankrupt?
What if you have a falling out?
And what if John Howard gets back in and legalised gay marriage and he decides to marry because it is now legal...

Yep. Another kudos. I agree with all that.

See ya's.

 

[John_]

I think the Family Law Act is very fair. It doesn't favour men or women, but generally the one who starts off with the most assets has to give up some of those assets. This is usually, but not always, the man and so many men feel hard done by.

If a woman marries you and lives with you for 10 years then she deserves a large slice of the house, even if she brought no assets to the marriage - in my opinion.

Keeping assets in your brother's name won't change things because he is acting as trustee for you. If you don't declare this then you would be breaching the family law act.

What happens if something happens to him? What if he dies and doesn't have a valid will? Have you looked at the intestacy rules? What if a child surfaces? (one of my friends died and children he fathered appeared out of nowhere). What if your brother has a valid will and leaves everything to you? Just as you are 2 years into a defacto relationship Your partner then leaves you and makes a claim....

What if your brother marries a Japanese woman (or man? not possible atm) and she goes Bankrupt - under Japanese law spouses are liable for the debts of the other.

What if there is a valid will but your brother had been supporting a young student who then makes a claim under the Family Provision sections.

What if he goes bankrupt?
What if you have a falling out?
And what if John Howard gets back in and legalised gay marriage and he decides to marry because it is now legal...

 

[datto]

Apologies for my last post as it was inappropriate

 

[thatbum]

so if I am worth zero and do a nothing job, and I start living rent free with some rich girl who has paid off the house, I live rent free for a few years,andthen im entitled to half of teh house!!!so if its worth $2million, I am able to claim $1m??

wow, at $200k per year x 5 years,
thats a lot more then what I would earn, or about 5 times if I were a supermarket trolley boy!

fair?!?!?!!?!?

It doesn't work exactly like that. In your scenario you probably wouldn't get anywhere close to half the asset pool.

However, there are many similar situations where the partner working the lower paid job is either looking after the children, or otherwise encouraged not to work their low paying job since the working partner brings in so much more money.

In that case the non-financial contribution of the supported partner should be given some credit, as well as their now diminished capacity to earn in the event of a break-up.

 

[Ideo]

A friend of mine recently divorced her husband.

She's a lawyer, he's an artist who also looks after the kids.

I don't know the split as percentage terms, but it would not have been any different to how splits where the mail earns more and has more assets.

It's not based on gender. It's based on earning.

 

[RPI]

Binding Financial Agreement can work, but must be done extremely well.

Bloodline trust may protect the assets you from your kids spouses, not so much yours. Then anything outside of it is fair game anyway.

 

[weg]

A friend of mine recently divorced her husband.

She's a lawyer, he's an artist who also looks after the kids.

I don't know the split as percentage terms, but it would not have been any different to how splits where the mail earns more and has more assets.

It's not based on gender. It's based on earning.

There are all sorts of scenarios too.

Another friend of mine was with a guy for about 3 - 4 years and planned to marry.

She has a paid off unit and a nice house with a small mortgage in nice middle class suburbs, while he has a nice villa, also in a nice suburb.

He always went on about investing and the most talked about idea was one of knocking down her house, subdividing and building. They would both live in his house.

Some time later she happened to stumble across his rates notice that he carelessly left lying around, and noticed it to be in his mothers name.

She raises this this with him and it turns out that he doesn't see why it should be in his name (or why he should have told her) as the plan was for it to stay in the family and would eventually go to his neice- they were not planning on having children.

Now this friend wasn't particularly interested in his assets, but was digusted with the attitude that her assets should be theirs to invest with, while his were to be safely held in mums name, unbeknown to her.

Consequently they broke up, and it later emerged that he made numerous passes at her sister.

It would have been a disasterous divorce in the making, had they ended up married.

 

[Graemsay]

And what if John Howard gets back in and legalised gay marriage and he decides to marry because it is now legal...

Gay marriage has become much more acceptable recently. To give you an idea of the speed of change, the UK brought in civil partnerships in 2004 for same-sex couples because marriage would have been too controversial. Nine years later the legislation for the latter is passing through Parliament, not necessarily smoothly, but I think that it'll get there.

I'd expect it to be an option by the end of the decade in Australia.