Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
It's a good day for law firms specialising in prenuptial agreements.
Yes, especially because they are not valid in the UK.
IMO the real business opportunity is to sell insurance that will cover payouts to set figure, of course it wont be cheap but could be good peace of mind.
I have a novel idea, its quite a revolutionary concept,how about marriage being for life? Hmmm what a thought - could it possibly work, no divorce, couples treating each other as valued human beings rather than disposable commodities at the first hint of trouble....Hmmmm
Read the article. When they married neither had a great deal. The business has been built up whilst they were married and her contribution as a wife will have been no less commited.
When they got wed they made themselves into an equal partnership. When that partnership dissolves then she is entitled to her half.
If he realy believes nobody could need more than he is offering then why does he need all the rest? Why doesnt he take the 20 and a house and give her the rest?
I feel the same about Macca. Even though he had ammased his fortune prior to getting wed he still did the deed and that includes "all that I have I give to thee". Give her half.
I disagree with ongoing maintenance agreements apart from for kids.
The wife often wants to have the lifestyle she is used to but conveniently forgets that the life style included her washing, cleaning, cooking and certain sexual services too. I dont expect she will be willing to carry those on so why should hubby carry on supporting her life style.
I am not qualified to give the above advice!
The original point and click interface by
Smith and Wesson.
Step back, have a think and adjust my own own attitude from time to time
I have a novel idea, its quite a revolutionary concept,how about marriage being for life?
How about just have automatic marriage contract which is that any side is only entitled to what they earned during life and its only the kids who should get maintenance not wife. This would cut off gold diggers and thus make marriages less sham.
I have a novel idea, its quite a revolutionary concept,how about marriage being for life? Hmmm what a thought - could it possibly work, no divorce, couples treating each other as valued human beings rather than disposable commodities at the first hint of trouble....Hmmmm
The Church vows say “ For better or for worse” Not for worse and worse and worse”
The vows also say “For richer or poorer” in which case if the husband is in debt, then the wife should also pay half the debt plus a sum to pay it off for the rest of her life.
HEALTH WARNING. IT Can Damage your Health. Free Advice. Advice in the forum is the £9,995 version. By reading the health warning you are agreeing to the terms and conditions. Advice maybe bad as well as good. 24 months interest free. Your home is at risk if you don’t keep up payments. Advice limited to availability.
The Church vows say “ For better or for worse” Not for worse and worse and worse”
The vows also say “For richer or poorer” in which case if the husband is in debt, then the wife should also pay half the debt plus a sum to pay it off for the rest of her life.
Quite. As far as I can tell 30 years ago when they married they had nothing. Most of the assets have been built up jointly, the kids have left home so they are out of the equation. She gets 37% of the joint assets.
Seems fair enought got me. (Of course I'd be winging like hell if I was on the receiving end but it's not unreasonable).
Quite. As far as I can tell 30 years ago when they married they had nothing. Most of the assets have been built up jointly, the kids have left home so they are out of the equation. She gets 37% of the joint assets.
Seems fair enought got me. (Of course I'd be winging like hell if I was on the receiving end but it's not unreasonable).
Doesn't seem to be a popular view though.
Bah she is just a portable recreational/baby machine -houskeeping was covered by free board and lodging. If you make any money from your pitiful existence does that blow-up doll get 37% ?
Comment