Called off the wedding

[parsnips]

Thanks for all the replies guys.

I have visited my own Solicitor to see if there is a way I can sign away any rights to his property and basically under my country's constitution, there isn't. There is a lobby group trying to change that law I believe, but for the moment as things stand, if I die, he inherits my house (yes I do own my own house, so not quite the opportunist some of the guys have hinted at on here thank you) and vice versa. I loved the guy and was prepared to marry him regardless of all that. Clearly he wasn't. I agree wholeheartedly and did laugh at somebody calling him a "mommas boy", because tbh, I have always thought that to a degree anyway. There are huge question marks hanging over our relationship now. We are going to see a Counsellor, but I have to wonder if there is any point. I only have his word for it that it is the property issue thats caused him to call the wedding off. I've asked him if there is another reason, which he's denied. Incidentally, he had a major illness last year and required a ten hour operation to remove a tumour, followed by radiotherapy. I stood by him throughout the op and nursed him in my home for a few weeks afterwards. Neither his mum or his family came near us once, not even to the hospital. They were more than happy for somebody else to be there for him. Which makes the revelation that he won't marry me because they won't get his houses totally baffling. I'm kind of done with racking my brains over it. I think he's happy enough to have me as a girlfriend to go out with and happy to have his own house to disappear back off to every few days. Not really how I pictured things would pan out. To add insult to injury he dropped the bombshell that he's booked a trip to the US on his own at the end of April. I think the writings on the wall really.

[d0nnivain]

Him running off to another country alone does put a different spin on this.

 

 

For now, if you want to try see if you & him can get more involved with the group trying to change the law.

 

 

Good luck.

[PegNosePete]

Yeah, actually I've thought about this before and I can see where he's coming from. My sister owns her own house, but her boyfriend doesn't own anything. If they were to marry, and she were to die, then her house would pass to him. And then he could do what he pleased, he could write a will that discounts their daughter and gives the house and all the assets to his kids from his previous relationship. So if they were to marry, my sister's own kid might not get ANY inheritance at all, despite my sister being quite well off, and her BF being broke. Is that fair?? That is nothing to do with how much they love each other, what they "prioritise" or anything else; it is simply how the law works.

 

Most countries have a way around it, but you don't say which you're in. You mention solicitor which suggests maybe it is the UK. In the UK a pre-nup is not 100% watertight but it does carry a lot of weight, and a will written after marriage (and updated after major financial changes eg. buying a house) will carry a lot of weight too.

 

I think as we get older, this kind of issue becomes more and more important, especially if he's been married before. I don't think it's fair to say he doesn't love you enough or whatever. There are practicalities to think of here and this is a legitimate concern, especially as you say he had a tumour removed last year! If there is no way around it in law then I can certainly see why he doesn't want to sign this type of legal contract with you (or anyone for that matter). It's nothing to do with you, it's the law he doesn't love. Many young people see marriage as purely romantic but in your 40's the legal side becomes more apparent.

 

He really should have researched this properly before proposing and ordering the dress, though.

 

To add insult to injury he dropped the bombshell that he's booked a trip to the US on his own at the end of April. I think the writings on the wall really.

Well on the other hand, this is certainly not a good sign...

Edited February 20, 2017 by PegNosePete

[Tribble]

Of course people can see where he's coming from. Marriage is a legal agreement with quite hefty risks. No one is denying this. It is perfectly reasonable that OPs bf wants to protect his inheritance for his family. But we're forgetting here that the OPs daughter could similarly be left with no inheritance if the bf so chose. She was willing to take that risk, trusting her partner.

 

But the bf doesn't want to take that risk. Again, no-one can be annoyed with him for this. But why is it only coming up now?? If it was such a big deal, he should have figured this out way before the proposal and discussed it with the OP. Instead, they get engaged, tell everyone, make arrangements, pay for things for him to do a 180 and say nope, sorry, the risk to my property has suddenly become too great for this to work.

 

Add in that he doesn't want to live with the OP, he's being less than sympathetic in such a horrible situation and he's swanning off on holiday alone, this is done. Even if he doesn't secretly want out of the relationship OP, you'll be building up so much resentment, it isn't going to work. I'm so sorry this has happened to you, you must feel like the rug has been swept out from under your feet!

[PegNosePete]

But why is it only coming up now?? If it was such a big deal, he should have figured this out way before the proposal and discussed it with the OP.

Well my guess would be that at the time of proposal and organising the wedding, he was unaware of the law, but a friend or relative only recently told him the possible legal repercussions of marriage. He checked to see if they were right by seeing the solicitor, and found that they were.

 

To apply some cold hard logic. OP stated that he has had a tumour removed. Chances are reasonably high that he will die first, so the chance that his nieces/nephews will get nothing is quite high (>50%). Especially since OP will likely be at an age where remarriage is likely... so even if she promises not to leave his relatives high and dry, and sticks to that promise to the best of her ability over the course of the next 30-40 years despite having a new husband and new family, the fact is his assets will simply be spread thinner if there are more mouths to feed (new husband's kids, relatives etc). And not to mention if she then dies before her new husband... he will inherit it all, and even the nicest guy is pretty unlikely to give assets to his wife's ex-husband's nieces.

 

To me, it's a solid reason not to marry and has absolutely nothing to do with trust, priorities, love or risk. Quite the opposite in fact. The opposing logic is "If you loved me then you wouldn't care if your assets ultimately get inherited by a total stranger and your own relatives get nothing"...? That makes no sense to me.

 

Add in that he doesn't want to live with the OP, he's being less than sympathetic in such a horrible situation and he's swanning off on holiday alone, this is done.

Yeah, can't argue with that though. It does make it seem that although his logic regarding the inheritance laws is sound, there may be other reasons for him pulling the plug.

[SoleMate]

As Mr. Lucky said, it is inconceivable that this property transfer is absolute and immutable. Wealthy people in OP's country wouldn't stand for it! I understand prenups may be legally invalid, but again, I find it very difficult to believe that there is no mechanism - such as a trust, partnership, grant of life estate, or whatever - to provide for the desired outcome. OP, what country is this, anyway? Have you yourself consulted a lawyer with all the facts in hand to get complete advice? (Although with the April trip, I could understand you seeing the whole question as moot due to r/s being moribund.)

 

Unlike some others, I don't agree that people with existing assets should marry and trust to the other partner to take care of heirs properly in case of death. Even with the best of intentions, life gets in the way of this. (And some people don't have the best intentions.......I'm looking at you, Great Uncle Ernie and also cousin David F.) As another factors, elderly people can become incompetent and lose their ability to direct assets.

 

When people with assets marry, intended heirs should always be protected by irrevocable arrangements IMO. This is not a simple matter and needs competent legal assistance in the jurisdiction in question.

 

But OP, sadly it seems like this is academic for you at this point. The love and care you have given to this man does not appear to be reciprocated.

[parsnips]

[FONT=Calibri][sIZE=3]Pegnose, I would wager that’s what happened. The night before his surgery, he drafted up a rough will from his hospital bed with both myself and his brother present. His brother wrote it at his instructions. He stated that he wanted the larger of his two properties to go to his sister and therefore her children and the other of his properties to go to me. I was distraught. I didn’t know if he was going to come through the surgery and if he did, what version of himself he would be afterwards. At the time I didn’t give it much thought (the will that is) because I was focussed merely on him and the op and his recovery. With hindsight, maybe his brother told his mother of the wills contents and they advised him when he had recovered. I do know that days before he pulled the plug on the wedding, his brother recommended his lawyer to him and he went to see him. Btw Pegnose, I am in my late 40’s. I will not be remarrying after anyones death and having a family lol. My, you do flatter me !!!! [/sIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri][sIZE=3]Tribble, yeah I feel as tho’ the rug has been well and truly pulled from underneath me. But not for the first time. I’ve had plenty of practice with him pulling the rug. [/sIZE][/FONT]

[sIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]Solemate, I’d sooner not say where in the world I am. I’m in Europe and that’s all I’ll say [/FONT]J[FONT=Calibri] [/FONT][/sIZE]

[sIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]I have indeed consulted a Solicitor and really there is no way around it. The laws the law here and it is what it is. [/FONT][/sIZE]

[sIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]He goes away every year on his own on holiday. We do go away together also, but he likes to get away on his own too to sightsee. Or maybe I’ve been blind all these years. He had planned this upcoming trip prior to breaking off the wedding. Poor timing. I just can’t countenance it on the back of a broken engagement. [/FONT][/sIZE]

[d0nnivain]

Well if this solo trip is something he's done before without objection by you, then maybe it's not as much of a harbinger of doom.

 

 

As for the immutable nature of the law, what about things like putting the property in trust for the sister & her kids or giving you a life estate in it, but have it go to them upon your death? Lawyers can find creative loopholes. Have them look.

[Mr. Lucky]

I have indeed consulted a Solicitor and really there is no way around it. The laws the law here and it is what it is.

 

How do you trust someone enough to commit to them in marriage, sickness and health, better or worse - but then believe they wouldn't follow through on your wishes? Seems to be a question of faith, something lacking here.

 

If this is such a big deal, give the house to the sister now with a lease-back arrangement providing your BF rights until his death. Unless he doesn't trust her either ?

 

Mr. Lucky

[parsnips]

Mr Lucky, I suggested that to him. I suggested he sign the houses over to the sister and move in with me. He absolutely would not hear of it.

Its like this, my house is in a more desirable area than his and worth twice the price of his. Yet I was prepared to marry him and we would have joint assets if you want to call it that. Whats mine is yours, whats yours is mine etc. I turned my nose up at well meaning friends and family who advised me that I was mad and was doing my kid out of her full inheritance. Is that all there is to life ? If his mother and brother got in his ear, well more fool him because he's lost any respect I had for him and messed up any future we had together. I could never trust him after this. No matter how much I could try to get my head around this, I would always feel that his family had been in cahoots about this behind my back. I couldn't live like that. They are all best left to it. I want no part of it.

[ChatroomHero]

How do you trust someone enough to commit to them in marriage, sickness and health, better or worse - but then believe they wouldn't follow through on your wishes? Seems to be a question of faith, something lacking here.

 

If this is such a big deal, give the house to the sister now with a lease-back arrangement providing your BF rights until his death. Unless he doesn't trust her either ?

 

Mr. Lucky

 

It's not just either partners wishes, they might both die at the same time and the daughter and nephews may hate each other or have different intentions. He might pass and she becomes destitute with no money and may change her mind and sell the land out of perceived necessity. She might die and when he is older someone else with different ideas might have control of his assets.

 

It sounds like the laws in a situation where one partner would want to keep certain assets in the family, are directly in the way of a marriage with beneficial financial arrangements.

 

Nobody is saying OP is trying a money grab as she has pointed out she is not, but it sounds like marriage is a poor choice for both of them financially.

 

As far as his other behavior, it doesn't sound like a good fit and I am surprised OP would want to expose her house to that to begin with.

[parsnips]

Chatroom, thanks for acknowledging that I'm not a moneygrabber :-)

In terms of it not being a good fit, do you mean the trips overseas on his own ? Thats always bothered me, but he's always rationalised it. He used to take trips alone when with his previous partner too and she didn't like it either. He always insists that its about sightseeing etc.

[ChatroomHero]

Chatroom, thanks for acknowledging that I'm not a moneygrabber :-)

In terms of it not being a good fit, do you mean the trips overseas on his own ? Thats always bothered me, but he's always rationalised it. He used to take trips alone when with his previous partner too and she didn't like it either. He always insists that its about sightseeing etc.

 

That is definitely bad in my opinion. I could understand not getting married, but if it were me, I would bend over backwards to let you know I wanted to marry you. I would want to take trips with you to spend time with you. If I enjoyed sight seeing, I would want my SO to be with me to make it that much better.

 

I could see if you both took trips as a get away once a year, or if he had the occasional trip with friends that was a guy trip thing. But to me there is something very odd about what he is doing.

[BluEyeL]

The way I see marriage the husband and/or wife are always more entitled to assets than siblings. when someone marries that becomes his family and he leaves behind the birth family. If he doesn't see marriage that way he's not ready to really be married and he's clinging to his family of origin. That attitude is always bad for a marriage even if there are no assets. The spouse is not a "stranger".

[BettyDraper]

Seriously? It sounds like he had notable property that he had before her and wants to make sure it goes to his family, as it should if that is what he wants, it belongs to him. He owns it. He worked for it....it is his. It's pretty bad to blame someone for not wanting to have the financial obligation of marriage when that person is the one that actually has the financial obligation.

 

 

I went through this when I was engaged. She moved in, I paid for the house, I paid for food for her and her kids, I paid her last two months rent, I paid all moving costs, I paid all bills, I bought a car and paid for the insurance for her to drive exclusively. Despite working she paid nothing, provided no payments, had 0 financial obligations. If I had married her she would be entitled to a good portion. Why? She was mad because after a year and a half when I made her move out I wouldn't let her take the car that was in my name and I was paying for, claiming after 18 months she would now find a way to make the payments when she always claimed poor. She even called the police department to see if she could take the car behind my back and keep it without her getting in trouble.

 

 

Please tell me, the guy in this situation, what convenience of marriage does he exactly get? Nothing different in the relationship than a piece of paper that says everything he owns goes to her and her daughter upon his death? What benefit is there for him to do that? What is the OPs stake in all of this? What property of the OPs would be up for grabs by his family?

 

 

In 10, 20, 30 years she could easily feel entitled to his property and not want it to go to his family. It's a very one-sided deal...if you sign this paper you give away everything you already own and worked your entire life for, to someone who may one day not want to be married to you anymore and has no obligation to your family.

 

 

Without a pre-nup there is all kinds of financial implications for this guy but no real benefit other than a piece of paper provided by the state that says, "ok, you are married".

 

A spouse shouldn't be left with nothing in the event of a divorce, particularly if the marriage lasts many decades. It's also easy to divide assets between spouses and children.

 

Marriage comes with financial obligations and that includes sharing resources. Prenups are not just for protecting the spouse with assets; it's also to ensure a fair settlement for the spouse who has less.

 

People who do not want to share should not be getting married.

Edited February 21, 2017 by BettyDraper

[PegNosePete]

Btw Pegnose, I am in my late 40’s. I will not be remarrying after anyones death and having a family lol. My, you do flatter me !!!!

 

Well plenty of people marry in their 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's! Never say never.

 

You could potentially gain a lot of grandchildren that way. It's actually something you should think about as well, knowing the laws in your country. If you were to marry and gain some step-kids and step-grandkids, your own assets might not go to your own kids.....

 

How do you trust someone enough to commit to them in marriage, sickness and health, better or worse - but then believe they wouldn't follow through on your wishes? Seems to be a question of faith, something lacking here.

But you're not just trusting your partner, you're putting trust/faith in a lot of other people too, many of whom are complete strangers. You could trust your partner 100%, but do you trust her future husband to give your property to his wife's ex-husband's niece...?

[Tribble]

If this isn't the first time the rug has been pulled out from under you in this relationship, why are you still in it?

[parsnips]

Thanks guys. Its been good to see other peoples takes on this.

We can all listen to advice and take it on board or not. The bottom line is I know in my heart that this is going absolutely nowhere. He is happy to have me to go out with and do the fun stuff with and happy to have me cook for him and watch tv with. I had applied for part time in my job so I could move outside of the city into his house with him. Thats all been pulled as well. He told me to cancel my part time application and stay put in my own house. God, I've been such a fool when you think about it. He got the all clear from the hospital a week or so before he bailed on our plans. If anything good has come out of this, at least he told me before my part time hours were sanctioned and I was left unable to pay my mortgage and bills. Now I have to man up and walk away from him for good.

[BluEyeL]

That was a sign he wasn't totally committed.

 

My ex-husband always pushed me to do things that will bring me money and make me completely independent. That sounds great in principle,but at some point it became obvious that the reason he was doing all that was because he was planning his exit and didn't want me and our son to need anything from him. Such as when I was trying to move my job so he can also get the job he wanted at the same location as us, he was refusing that, saying I should stay put and he should leave instead of trying to find jobs at the same location. He knew he was planning to leave for good so he didn't want me to do anything for the relationship that would affect me after his departure.

 

I think him insisting you stay full time and in your house was the same idea. Maybe he wasn't 100% sure he'd not marry you but he had serious doubts about the ever after with you.

 

Good luck with the break up! And remember, you CAN find someone else better! Always!

[Mr. Lucky]

Mr Lucky, I suggested that to him. I suggested he sign the houses over to the sister and move in with me. He absolutely would not hear of it.

Its like this, my house is in a more desirable area than his and worth twice the price of his. Yet I was prepared to marry him and we would have joint assets if you want to call it that. Whats mine is yours, whats yours is mine etc. I turned my nose up at well meaning friends and family who advised me that I was mad and was doing my kid out of her full inheritance. Is that all there is to life ? If his mother and brother got in his ear, well more fool him because he's lost any respect I had for him and messed up any future we had together. I could never trust him after this. No matter how much I could try to get my head around this, I would always feel that his family had been in cahoots about this behind my back. I couldn't live like that. They are all best left to it. I want no part of it.

 

Well, there you go, asked and answered. This was never about property and heirs in the first place.

 

He got the all clear from the hospital a week or so before he bailed on our plans.

 

Sorry Parsnips, this lays his intentions pretty bare. He needed you until...he didn't need you anymore. I hope you take some comfort in the fact you didn't end up married to this guy ...

 

Mr. Lucky

[ChatroomHero]

A spouse shouldn't be left with nothing in the event of a divorce, particularly if the marriage lasts many decades. It's also easy to divide assets between spouses and children.

 

Marriage comes with financial obligations and that includes sharing resources. Prenups are not just for protecting the spouse with assets; it's also to ensure a fair settlement for the spouse who has less.

 

People who do not want to share should not be getting married.

 

This part is not about sharing. It's about a considerable asset he want to keep in his family that would ultimately default to the OPs daughter eventually instead of his family based on the law.

 

Again, if you had a family farm in the family for 150 years and wanted to pass it to your nephews, marriage in the circumstance would be a terrible idea. What if your SOs kid was 19 and a drug addict? Your family farm would be endowed to the 19 year old drug addict and not your family. Marriage sacrifices or not, dumb move without being able to get a prenuptial.

 

Nobody is saying accumulated assets while married shouldn't be provided to the wife, but property you own that would eventually go to kids of someone else's family by default should be protected. Love or not, if you had $10 billion and you wanted to make sure family and friends were set for life when you died, would you get married and just give up that right to distribute your wealth as you see fit? Would you leave it all hoping your SO doesn't fall out of love or their kid doesn't hate you and claim it all? Of course not, you would have a prenuptial taking care of your SO and your family as you see fit with your pre-marriage wealth.

[parsnips]

Nobody is saying accumulated assets while married shouldn't be provided to the wife, but property you own that would eventually go to kids of someone else's family by default should be protected. Love or not, if you had $10 billion and you wanted to make sure family and friends were set for life when you died, would you get married and just give up that right to distribute your wealth as you see fit? Would you leave it all hoping your SO doesn't fall out of love or their kid doesn't hate you and claim it all? Of course not, you would have a prenuptial taking care of your SO and your family as you see fit with your pre-marriage wealth.

 

Chatroom, yes I get that and yes, he can leave his houses to whomever he wishes. The latest development is, that he's told me he's just discovered that if a partner lives in his house for three years, then under my country's law, that person becomes entitled to something or other to do with the property. So, he's made it clear I will never be moving in with him. Yet he's happy to come and spend two to three days in a row in my house, before hopping off back to his man cave. So essentially, theres no future for the relationship. Sure, we have a great time at the weekends etc and its lovely to have somebody to do things with, but at what cost ? I find his intentions (and his family's) very cold blooded and I think I'm worth more than that and have no wish to be embroiled in their set up.

[PegNosePete]

The latest development is, that he's told me he's just discovered that if a partner lives in his house for three years, then under my country's law, that person becomes entitled to something or other to do with the property.

Can you please let us know which country this is? It would be good to know for future reference. There are some countries that acknowledge "common law" marriages, and some countries where living together can give you a claim on the property, especially if contributions to the house (mortgage or home improvements etc) have been made. But I'm not aware of any where such a specific timeframe is laid out in law.

 

I think you need to stop believing what he is telling you.

 

And I think you need to tell him it's over between you. He's made it pretty clear this relationship is going nowhere. Better to bail now than drag it on.

[Tribble]

CAnd I think you need to tell him it's over between you. He's made it pretty clear this relationship is going nowhere. Better to bail now than drag it on.

 

Sadly, this is where you're at. He wants to live like a single guy who has access to sex and companionship. You've gone from getting married to casual dating, with no discussion or compromise. He's shown what his priorities are and you aren't even on the list. There is no future here.

[parsnips]

Pegnose, yeah my country recognises common law spouses after three years of cohabiting.

Tribble, it would seem so