Jump to content

Postnup after the prenup


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone. I need your opinion and advice. My husband and I are married now. I just finished my education because I moved to another country and started taking up more education. We are both in our 30's. When I met my husband, he was already well settled. He is not a millionaire but he is financially stable. He has a car, savings, belonging and pension. I on the other hand, I only have my books (if you can call that a property). I used to live and rent a room in apartments before I met him. Long story short, he has something while I don't.

 

The idea of a prenup never occured to me before. He mentioned it all of a sudden and I freaked out. I couldn't believe my ears. He explained everything to me and I consulted a friend who has knowledge of legal matters. I also made my rsearch online. It sounded sensible (but still, I think the prenup was one-sided and just to his own benefits). And also, the most important reason why I signed up for this agreement was to show him I am not interested in his money/property and that my pride is intact. Fast forward, now we are married for a year and together for three years. He brought up adding a new clause to the prenup stating we don't have a claim on the money we have save or earned during the marriage. My ego was wounded when I heard this.

 

I did my research and it would not be fair if I stay home and look after the kids. I wouldn't be earning by then. Up to now, my stand on the contract being one-sided, instead of benefiting both parties, does not change. No doubt, I love my husband and so does he. We travel a lot and he pays most of it. We keep a separate account and a common budget account. Everytime we discuss about money, I worry about the status of our relationship. All this money and postnup talk is taking its toll on our relationship. Please help me. What should I do?

Edited by a LoveShack.org Moderator
Link to post
Share on other sites

You got yourself in quite a pickle...

 

I went through this very thing a few months when faced with my own pre-nup. The difference being, I hired a lawyer to peruse the pre-nup the look out for my own interests BEFORE I signed.

 

I was like you in that I was willing to sign whatever had been put before me, and my lawyer insisted on several changes to ensure my safety. Apparently you did not do that.

 

Now you didn't indicate where you are living and that is going to have a huge impact on these joint marital income that he now wants to reserve for himself. Honestly, I don't see this ending well.

 

If you want to continue in the marriage, you could agree to a potential post-nup, provided you have your own legal counsel look over what he wants you to sign. You've already signed something without taking that into consideration so the best thing you can do is have lawyers beat it out. Whatever you do, DO NOT sign something he just presents to you without having legal counsel look out for your interests. You can present it to him that you are not a lawyer and it is only prudent to have someone look at it for you. From there, your lawyer can talk to his lawyer so it isn't between the two of you, but your lawyers.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, try Googling 'community property divorce [your country/state]' and perusing the results for initial guidance regarding the laws of your jurisdiction.

 

In general, I would caution against bargaining away marital income and savings, as both partners facilitate the accumulation of such assets/income, even if the actual asset/income is earned by only one partner.

 

My advice would be to obtain as much information as possible on the specifics of your case/situation and then bring this information to a local legal representative and solicit targeted advice for the specifics of your case/situation. Where I live, we can interview representatives, generally for free, and receive general answers to our inquiries during such an interview. Your jurisdiction may be similar, or different.

 

Good luck and welcome to LS :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
He brought up adding a new clause to the prenup stating we don't have a claim on the money we have save or earned during the marriage. My ego was wounded when I heard this. I did my research and it would not be fair if I stay home and look after the kids.

 

Any money earned (as in paycheck) during the marriage is community property. I know the exceptions are usually any inheritances or anything of that sort. To leave you high and dry if you were to get divorced would be pretty messed up. Consult legal assistance. In my personal opinion, I believe if both parties are working, you each take what you own and move out and move on. You should definitely be entitled to alimony especially if you have been caring for the kids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did this come up a year after marriage? He seems to be a very distrustful person. Is this marriage as healthy as you make it out to be?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

Hi again. Thank you all for your input. I really appreciate it. I think I will get me a legal counsel before I signed into anything. I think I typed the wrong info.What I meant was, he wants to add the "no entitlement to each others savings accumulated after marriage" clause. Whatever he and I have added to our savings after our marriage, we have no claim to them. I live in Denmark and the law here states that the community property is deferred. I know hiring a lawyer to this case will mean spending (don't even ask how much lawyers are paid by the hour here, too much!).

 

And no, we don't have kids yet. What I was trying to say was, I couldn't save on the days I am at home looking after our child in the future. Is he asking too much? I know he's the independent type and so do I. I've never loved somebody this strong before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand post-nup and pre-nups and agree that they have their use in protecting assets of each individual, but an asset of savings during the marriage is the asset of the marriage and NOT the asset of the individual.

 

It would also allow him to possibly build a significant savings at the cost of the marriage unless you both make so much money it doesn't matter...

 

Please do get your legal council, if signing the pre-nup addition is what you want at least you can say you did it with full knowledge of the future of your actions and you can be happy with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a lawyer because I doubt anybody here can give you meaningful advice about the laws of Denmark.

 

 

Some states in the US put less stock in the prenup the longer the marriage lasted. Others go by the letter of what it says. I don't see a problem protecting what somebody brought into the marriage. As I always say, marriage is about love but divorce is about money. I would rather talk about what is a fair division when I love the person then try to figure it out later when I hate him.

 

 

Your husband sounds very selfish when it comes to money. As you pointed out, if you stay home to raise the kids while he earns all the money, you would get nothing in the event of a divorce. That hardly seems fair.

 

 

Ante-nups can be done. Before my father died we were trying to do some elder care planning for him. Many of his assets would have been transferred to me but dad was concerned that if my husband & I got divorced, then he could take 1/2 of my dad's money. My husband was the one who suggested the ante-hup disclaiming any rights to my father's money. In that case it made sense. In your case, having your husband try to prevent you from getting money earned during the marriage when you two are supposed to be partners, that leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

 

Don't be penny wise & pound foolish. Protect yourself by talking to a lawyer. The few dollars you spend now will be way cheaper than finding out later you are being kicked out of your marriage poorer then when you went in.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you discussed with your husband why he wants this new clause added and expressed your concerns about being a stay at home mom?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

We discussed the clause yesterday. We always fight about money, always. He earns more than I do. I just finished my Master's and I quit a full-time job because of transportation issues. So obviously, he puts more money now than I do. He let go home to my country a few months ago, which is very expensive, then I will not have to put money on the budget account so that I could travel. I am waiting for my unemployed benefits in the next few days which I will receive monthly. That is only my source of income. When I was working, we have the 60-40, mine being 40, agreement on budget expenses. He earns more, so he has bigger contributions. When I will start receiving my benefits, we will change it to 70-30. His stand is that, we don't control each other's account , except for the common budget account, and it is up to the spouse how he/she spend and save his/her income. In that way, we avoid getting fights because of the other person's spending of money.

¨

He explains (and insists) that adding the clause will rid us of money fights. But the way I see it, the only change it will bring us is that we will not a have claim on each other's savings. I feel I have a right to that, or am I wrong? I agreed to our earlier prenup because if it were me, I wouldn't also risk my assets I worked hard for before marriage if the marriage breaks. For me, that was sensible. Is it wrong to say that our income/ individual savings withing marriage our marital claim or asset? Should I give it up?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

Yes, it is a healthy relationship. He is just protective of his belongings. He works in an industry dominated by men. He has several colleagues who have had a nasty, ugly divorce. I on the other hand, I don't know of anybody who has had a divorce where each party are ridding each other of money and properties. That is why, in this sense, the prenup is necessary. When we travel, he's always the one who pays for our trips. And we travel a lot. He is a diver so he travels a lot, as far as Bali, but he travels alone on diving trips. It makes him happy and we give each other spaces when the other one is travelling. But I don't say anything on his dive trips. While we still don't have a child, I always urged him to make use of our time now to travel. He can travel as much (he's a sound man, financially, so I trust him when he travels because his finances allow him to). I think, this whole thing about our views on finances, is our major flaw. In other areas, we are okay.

Edited by Cuppajoe
had to add some info
Link to post
Share on other sites
WasOtherWoman

Sorry, it does not sound ok to me. Firstly, how can you get unemployment benefits if you voluntarily quit your job? Secondly, why on earth would you have gone to the trouble to get a Masters Degree and not use it by having a career?

 

I am all in for prenups to protect wealth accumulated before marriage. My husband and I had one. But, what is earned during the marriage is both parties (although I can understand how people would have trouble with this if they married a slacker). Bottom line - a man's wallet is very closely tied to those he loves, in my humble opinion.

 

He is trying to cut you out of any of his future earnings. Why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding unemployment, one can look to Denmark's government for clarity:

 

"Unemployment benefits

 

In Denmark, you must apply for unemployment benefits if you become unemployed. The first thing you must do is to register as a job seeker on your first day of unemployment. You can do this at your local job centre or on jobnet.dk. Here, you must complete a declaration of unemployment that must be submitted to your unemployment insurance fund. You must be actively seeking employment and willing to accept offers of employment when you are unemployed and receiving unemployment benefits.

 

To be entitled to unemployment benefits when you become unemployed, you must have had at least 52 weeks of work within the last three years and been a member of an unemployment insurance fund for at least one year."

 

Source

 

Also, in my jurisdiction, even if a worker quits or is fired, they can collect on an unemployment claim if it is not denied by their employer. If it is, a hearing can resolve that issue and I've seen it go both ways.

 

OP, the question about using one's graduate degree is valid and could be relevant to the pre/ante-nuptial discussion depending upon the timing/funding/responsibility parameters in your jurisdiction.

 

As an example, not necessarily in your case, a spouse who funds their spouse to go to graduate school may have basis for action regarding the value of that contribution when negotiating an ante-nuptial contract, even if the funds used for the degree would otherwise be considered community/marital property.

 

It sounds like you both live a pretty mobile and financially secure lifestyle. If so, it should be quite easy to secure appropriate legal advice in your jurisdiction regarding this process. IMO, assign a value to the clarity your seeking, crunch the numbers and decide whether fleshing this out in complete and legal detail is worth it to you. If you intend to be married for some time to come, my general opinion is that the numbers should crunch in favor of getting that advice. YMMV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

Hi again. I just finished my education and also quit my job recently. I did studies and job at the same time. And yes, I am entitled to unemployment benefits (Danish law). I am actively looking at the moment. By the way, I got my education on a scholarship, if that's what you're asking. We talked again today. We are tired of discussing this thing. I think I'm not going to sign or agree to a new clause. He also doesn't think we should share our individual savings in the event of divorce. I may be unemployed at the moment but I take small courses and I send applications everyday. I told him, what happens if we don't agree at all to this. I work really hard for this marriage but if there is no solution, what's the point? I'm tired.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WasOtherWoman

Hi Cuppa - I totally understand that this must be tiring :(

 

The thing that worries me is the "why" he does not think you should share your savings... have you asked him this question?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

We only have one common account- the budget account. Everything is separate. As he suggests, we save and spend indvidually. These two separate savings, we are not entitled to if we go with a new clause. He has no claim on mine and vice versa. Is it normal? To add a clause like that? I mean, we are both hard working people. I hate slackers so I will never be one. Is adding new clause too much to ask? Do normal couples do that in the context of prenup? We had another fight today. We agreed not to talk about the thing for one month. I don't know what to do after that. If I do seek legal counsel, what can I get from it? Are we talking percentages from individual's savings? How can it protect me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again - agree to the concept of a post-nup, but insist on having separate lawyers hash it out. Then you two can stop having the discussion and you can have a third party represent your interests.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with CarrieT that you should hire an attorney. Your attorney will make sure that your rights are protected.

 

Is your primary concern that you may stop working at some point to raise kids, so will not be able to save money in your own account? (And then that the time you've taken off will affect your income once you go back to work?) There are certainly ways to deal with a situation like that. Have you discussed that scenario with your husband and how he views that working out?

 

Honestly, it seems like he doesn't trust you to either consistently be working or saving money. Why do you think that is?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

I discussed with him about the time when we will have a child and I am off from work. Here in Denmark, women take a maternal leave up to a year with benefits. IF that were the case, then we will , for example , share expense 70-30, mine being 30%. He assumes I will get back to the job market anyway so I should still be able to save. But it just occured to me now that what if I am still unemployed during that time (but I am still entitled to benefits) and after my leave, I couldn't find a job (it is still a tight labor market here, very tight). I found a free legal counsel who I can talk to. I will bring over my prenup papers and discuss my predicament.

 

I know my husband. He is big saver and always looks out ahead. The thing he fears is that I will not save while he will so he put his savings out there for us to share. He said he's not trying to cheat me. I understand his intentions but still, isn't it my legal right to have a claim on his savings (after marriage)? When we have a discussion/fight about the clause, I explained to him why I a have a right to his savings. I sound greedy right in front of him , like I am after his savings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand his intentions but still, isn't it my legal right to have a claim on his savings (after marriage)? When we have a discussion/fight about the clause, I explained to him why I a have a right to his savings. I sound greedy right in front of him , like I am after his savings.

 

In the U.S., yes - it is your legal right to a portion of the savings.

 

With my recent marriage, my husband has a 20+ year medical practice. He had to buy it back from his ExWife when he got divorced and he wanted to ensure that if we were divorced, that I would have no interest in HIS business. But it is that business which provides for all of his (and now OUR income).

 

I could completely understand how he wanted to protect his years' worth of hard work considering we are newly married. My lawyer re-wrote sections of our pre-nup to ensure that if we were to part, I would not be left high-and-dry without destroying his business.

 

There will be ways to compromise and that is why you need legal counsel. And please don't assume that a free service will do you justice. You may have to pay for it...

 

Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know my husband. He is big saver and always looks out ahead. The thing he fears is that I will not save while he will so he put his savings out there for us to share. He said he's not trying to cheat me. I understand his intentions but still, isn't it my legal right to have a claim on his savings (after marriage)? When we have a discussion/fight about the clause, I explained to him why I a have a right to his savings. I sound greedy right in front of him , like I am after his savings.

 

To be honest, it sound very greedy when you phrase it like that.

 

Why does he fear you will not save? Is it because you came into the marriage with nothing, even though you are in your 30s? His distrust of how you handle your finances may be the underlying reason for him wanting this postnup. You should really get to the bottom of this. Do the two of you have any longterm joint savings plans (i.e. retirement plans) in place? I'm not saying he's right, but from his perspective, he will be paying 60-70% of the household expenses throughout your marriage, so that should still enable you to save, just as it will enable him to save.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

Clia, you have a point. That 's what he has been explaining to me that with our contribution scheme, I can still save. That's why, I'm asking if it is sensible if I don't sign at all to the new clause. And, it's not the money I am fighting about but my marital rights. I feel like giving it up if I say yes. He offered a compromise that our savings our separate but our income is common. For example, if I still don't have a job one year after our baby is born, then we will share his income equally. This sounds sensible but I will still go to a lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LittleTiger

This thread confuses me. I can fully appreciate the desire for a prenup in order to protect personal assets held before marriage, or assets obtained during the marriage that are 'external', such as a family inheritance. However, it completely baffles me how anyone can expect, or even want, to keep 'marital assets' for themselves, either during or after the marriage.

 

A marriage is effectively a business contract. As unromantic as it sounds, when you sign on the dotted line, what you're actually doing is legally joining your finances. Before prenups, or in a marriage where a prenup isn't in place, that means all property becomes a shared asset from that point on. Prenups are a very new idea and are supposed to protect both parties.

 

As equal partners in the business (marriage) - and if you're not equal please reconsider your relationship - any assets built up during the life of the business (marriage) are shared. That's 50/50 shares. Even if one of you is the 'salesman' (employed) who goes out every day to drum up business to provide the income and the other partner stays in the office to manage the day to day stuff such as admin (shopping/cleaning/washing/household bills etc) and supervision of staff (children).

 

Unless you're going to be a 'kept woman' in this relationship, with nothing more to do than get your hair and nails done and spend long lunches with your girlfriends, which sounds extremely unlikely here, then you will be, and should be, entitled to half of your husbands earnings and savings. Remember, if he didn't have you at home taking care of the children you hope to have, he wouldn't be able to go out and make all that money to put in his savings account!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the judge or ruling district that decides if the contract is fair to both parties under the current contract laws.the contract is then filed in that town or district. Any addendums placed are also to be signed off by the judge in order to be legally binding. Someone isnt doing their due diligence if its one sided. Get legal counsel as none if us here are lawyers or allowed to advise you of your contractual rights. That would imply we are practicing law without a license or carry a lawyer/client confidentiality premise.

The 50/50 rule isn't written in stone. Can say this as a former wife, if you had to take three things from the marriage make sure one is your dignity and the other is your self sustaining ways, the third thing is up to you. Never felt bonded to material stuff so long as i could rebuild again . Just hope you get solid advise with counsel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...