RE: Prenups (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 2:50:20 PM)

quote:

You have said you are with Hanners and are hers, you take direction from her first and foremost, that you are a couple. So in that respect you did choose to have it apply to you.
What I say has no bearing on my tax status. We were not living as a couple for 12 months at the time we ceased to live as a couple and began to live as a foursome. The tax code makes no provision for being in three common law relationships at the same time, so none of them count for tax purposes unless the people involved declare them to be such. So the only way we could be considered a common law equivalent to married couple for tax purposes is if we so indicate on our tax return.

quote:

But.. you still havent answered this.. how is property viewed in your relationship
Because you never asked it, that's why I never answered it. The simple, and one would think obvious, answer is that it is irrelevant to the topic because we are not married and do not consider ourselves married.

What is Hanners' is Hanners', what is Suze's is Suze's, what is Cheri's is Cheri's, and I don't actually own anything. How each of them decide among themselves to determine who owns the things they buy together is up to them at the time they buy it.

When I decide to marry, everything we both individually own will become mutually owned, or I won't marry that person, as I would consider it a sure sign that I wasn't really considered worth marrying if she were to withhold some of her possessions "just in case".

If you don't trust me and don't believe that we can make it work, then don't marry me. Let's just shack up and be together.



TreasureKY -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 2:53:19 PM)

FR:

The pre-nup agreement that Firm and I had was that we would get married.  [;)]



ricken -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 3:03:37 PM)

~FR~

Nothing leaves you more bitter and pissed off than working your ass off to make a few bucks to assure a good life, than to have mate screw you out of large sums of money while she (or he) is fucking your "friends" behind your back...

We where together for over 5 years before getting married, after we got married THEN she started screwing around, some people just can't handle it.

So since I lost so much and got my head screwed with, befoe I get mairred again, yeah a prenup....

Of course IF I ever get married, it would probably be for reasons other than love. I would have to love the woman I marry, but thats why I stay around, marriage might be because of estate planning or some other legal reason.



HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 3:07:42 PM)

quote:

The pre-nup agreement that Firm and I had was that we would get married.
Yay!! That's the sort of prenup I could get behind.



HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 3:19:37 PM)

I was looking up if they were enforceable in Canada, and it seems they are but that the courts have quite a lot of leeway to decide to set them aside or modify them.

This page summarizes things for a lot of countries:
http://www.international-divorce.com/prenups_around_the_world.htm



Fightdirecto -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 3:37:23 PM)

I may be wrong, but I do not believe that a pre-nup in the state I live in (Massachusetts) is legally enforcible.

Of course, Massachusetts's divorce laws are wierd anyway. For example, Massachusetts is one of the few states in the U.S. where, if you divorce and the Court orders you to pay your former wife alimony, that alimony continues until your former spouse dies, regardless of whether they re-marry. Recently a 70-year-old former judge was ordered to go back to work as a lawyer so that he could continue paying alimony to his ex-wife, who he had divorced 30 years before.

Also in Massachusetts, if a man re-marries at any time after a divorce, his former spouse has the legal right to go back into court and have her alimony re-negotiated based on the combined incomes of her former husband AND the income of his new spouse.



Iamsemisweet -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 4:03:13 PM)

Wow.  I would not want to live in a state like that, although I am sure Mass. is very nice.  If ever there was a need for an enforcible prenup, it would be a state with crazy laws like that. 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

I may be wrong, but I do not believe that a pre-nup in the state I live in (Massachusetts) is legally enforcible.

Of course, Massachusetts's divorce laws are wierd anyway. For example, Massachusetts is one of the few states in the U.S. where, if you divorce and the Court orders you to pay your former wife alimony, that alimony continues until your former spouse dies, regardless of whether they re-marry. Recently a 70-year-old former judge was ordered to go back to work as a lawyer so that he could continue paying alimony to his ex-wife, who he had divorced 30 years before.

Also in Massachusetts, if a man re-marries at any time after a divorce, his former spouse has the legal right to go back into court and have her alimony re-negotiated based on the combined incomes of her former husband AND the income of his new spouse.



barelynangel -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 4:54:28 PM)

To me, if a person has significant assets they wish to maintain once and if there is a divorce or keep same separate from the divorce -- i.e., a business, then i don't see a problem with setting up a prenup.  I mean to me, its like a will, only the death is of the marraige and not of people. 

People really don't like talking about making up wills, but it is necessary for couples to do.  Prenups aren't easy to discuss either but if there are substantial assets being brought into the marraige, i think its fair to speak about and set up a plan if their is a death of the marraige.  I don't agree with approaching it in a way where trust is the reason it is being brought up or that the kids need it etc.  To me, that isn't a great way to start a marraige and if some guy did that to me, i wouldn't go through with it.  I also don't think it should be approached as an ultimatum to be married.  I think it's something to discuss and have it all laid out on the table and if the couple does care about each other enough to get married, the ultimatum isn't necessary.  To me, if the ultimatum IS necessary, the couple shouldn't get married because to me that is a HUGE red flag.

In this day and age, especially if its a second marraige wherein the first ended in divorce, a plan for the demise of the union, isn't really all that odd, unless you also see creating or revising a will as odd.

I think many people approach it incorrectly and so there is a tremor of distrust being used in the mix and why its gotten a bad rep.  But in the past, marraige contracts were drawn up all the time. 

angel



LafayetteLady -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 5:20:49 PM)

~ fast reply ~

Nothing is iron clad. Courts (in the US) are bound NOT to enforce contracts that are unconscionable (sp?).

Its is very easy when you are 18 and don't have a pot to piss in to romanticize the idea of marriage. Once "stuff" is aquired, not wanting to lose it all along withthe devastation of a relationship ending is smart.

In NJ, even a pre-nup can't completely leave a spouse nothing in the event of death. A spouse will receive 1/3 of the estate.

When there are children from previous relationships, most parents want to protect their children. Nothing brings out the worst in people like a divorce or a death. Things you thought never would have been an issue while you were doe eyed with love rear their ugly heads.

Heather, regardless of whether or not the goverment says you have to file together, there can be financial advantages to doing so. That doesn't mean you are in a relationaship for "financial" advantages, simply that you are utilizing all oppotunities that can offer more comfort to thhe relationship. If filing taxes as a couple were to double your refund (I don't know how Canada taxes work), why shouldn't you do what you can to have a more comfortable existence? You didn't enter the relationship for those reasons, but if they are available, why pass them up? If Hannah's job would pay school costs for her partner would you turn them down?advantages, simply that you are utilizing all oppotunities that can offer more comfort to thhe relationship. If filing taxes as a couple were to double your refund (I don't know how Canada taxes work), why shouldn't you do what you can to have a more comfortable existence? You didn't enter the relationship for those reasons, but if they are available, why pass them up? If Hannah's job would pay school costs for her partner would you turn them down?

As for jumping off a bridge because your partner told you to and you trust he had a good reason....that isn't "trust" it is out right foolishness.for "financial" advantages, simply that you are utilizing all oppotunities that can offer more comfort to thhe relationship. If filing taxes as a couple were to double your refund (I don't know how Canada taxes work), why shouldn't you do what you can to have a more comfortable existence? You didn't enter the relationship for those reasons, but if they are available, why pass them up? If Hannah's job would pay school costs for her partner would you turn them down?advantages, simply that you are utilizing all oppotunities that can offer more comfort to thhe relationship. If filing taxes as a couple were to double your refund (I don't know how Canada taxes work), why shouldn't you do what you can to have a more comfortable existence? You didn't enter the relationship for those reasons, but if they are available, why pass them up? If Hannah's job would pay school costs for her partner would you turn them down?

As for jumping off a bridge because your partner told you to and you trust he had a good reason....that isn't "trust" it is out right foolishness.




Amygdalin -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 5:24:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

I would never want one nor require one.

I wouldn't marry someone I can't trust.

To me a prenup says "I'm jaded from past relationships and I'm now going to carry that over and put all of it on you".



Go through a divorce and find out how quickly that trust disappears.


Wow, kind of pissing on someone's parade there. Don't really understand that...

Anyway, I think this just gets to the point where the two sides are going to have to agree to disagree. People like me, Heather and Littlewonder seem to be against it. Others are for it. Like most things, it's a personal choice. I don't agree with it, but I can only decide the things in my own life.

I'm not going to get one when I marry. Many of you will. And the world goes round, ya know? This has been interesting though. Seeing all the different views.

Who started this debate anyway!?!?



littlewonder -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 5:25:46 PM)

I just find it humorous that people here will trust another with their very physical life, trust someone not to kill them...but won't with their finances lol.





tj444 -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 5:47:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather

quote:

You have said you are with Hanners and are hers, you take direction from her first and foremost, that you are a couple. So in that respect you did choose to have it apply to you.
What I say has no bearing on my tax status. We were not living as a couple for 12 months at the time we ceased to live as a couple and began to live as a foursome. The tax code makes no provision for being in three common law relationships at the same time, so none of them count for tax purposes unless the people involved declare them to be such. So the only way we could be considered a common law equivalent to married couple for tax purposes is if we so indicate on our tax return.

quote:

But.. you still havent answered this.. how is property viewed in your relationship
Because you never asked it, that's why I never answered it. The simple, and one would think obvious, answer is that it is irrelevant to the topic because we are not married and do not consider ourselves married.

What is Hanners' is Hanners', what is Suze's is Suze's, what is Cheri's is Cheri's, and I don't actually own anything. How each of them decide among themselves to determine who owns the things they buy together is up to them at the time they buy it.

When I decide to marry, everything we both individually own will become mutually owned, or I won't marry that person, as I would consider it a sure sign that I wasn't really considered worth marrying if she were to withhold some of her possessions "just in case".

If you don't trust me and don't believe that we can make it work, then don't marry me. Let's just shack up and be together.

I know you and Hanners have not lived together for 12 months, but that doesnt mean that at some point a couple of years from now or whenever, that it might not apply to you. Its something that i dont think many common-law same or hetro couples give much thought to. Should Revenue Canada decide at some point to audit you or your partner (Hanners or someone else), they might decide you should be filing as a common-law couple and not as 2 singles & that you owe more tax as a result. If that were to happen then it doesnt matter how you declare yourself if Rev Can has decided you are a common-law couple.

I have never had a prenup/agreement in my past but part of me thinks that was just dumb luck. And I dont know about you but for me, if i live with someone that i love, am having sex with and sleeping in the same bed with, I wont go into that with the attitude that its not going to last. I want it to last!

But when i do live with someone i will want a co-habitation agreement. Imo, it just sets everything out, who pays how much for what, taking into account any kids, pets, etc etc and the biggest reason is that it would give me peace of mind, I dont like the unknown and this is one way to reduce the unknown for me (& him). I would not go into business with someone without a partnership agreement even tho i dont go into business for it to fail, I would not buy an investment property with someone else without having a written agreement, living together is the same to me.

And i am not trying to tell you what to do or tell you that you are wrong so please I dont get all upset just cuz i point out something you hadnt considered before. You are an adult and will make up your own mind on things, making mistakes is how people tend to learn. Just something i have learned since being your age is that it's a lot easier, cheaper and less frustrating to learn from someone else's mistakes rather than my own. [:)]



HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 6:32:01 PM)

Well, as I stated before, an accountant and a tax lawyer have given their opinion, so we'll go with what they both say is the case over what you think might maybe be the case.

As for co-habitation agreements, I don't want or need any such thing, thanks. I see no need to involve lawyers in our lives any more than is absolutely necessary. If you feel the need then by all means make such an agreement, but personally if I felt the need to be protected from those I live with I'd just move, because I would be living with the wrong people. And if anybody asked me to sign such an agreement I wouldn't move in, for the same reason, if somebody feels they need to protect them self from me, then they're the wrong person for me to be living with.

It's really that simple. I want no part of a pre-nuptial or co-habitation agreement, and I will have no part of either, and if somebody I am with feels the need for such a thing, then I have made a mistake and am with the wrong person.

You say you aren't trying to tell me what to do, yet in the same breath you tell me I am making a mistake. You're concern is touching and would perhaps be more than that if it wasn't dripping with condescension. You made mistakes, that doesn't mean I will, and even if I do, I'd rather live life fully and make those mistakes than hide from life in fear of what might happen.




HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 6:44:43 PM)

Thank you for your unsolicited advice on how to live my life. However, I believe the topic of this thread is Iamsemisweet's question of how you feel about pre-nups, not if I should have one or how I should file my taxes.



Amygdalin -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 6:44:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

I just find it humorous that people here will trust another with their very physical life, trust someone not to kill them...but won't with their finances lol.


Ah, yes. I agree.



Termyn8or -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 7:09:03 PM)

"just out of curiosity.. when was teh first, attorney drawn pre-nup done? "

In the time of Henery the eighth sometime in the 1950s.

"I'm gettin' married to the widow next door,
She's been married seven times before...."

Yes I jumped through. Sorry. But I see absolutely no reason to get married at all. You know except for sex you can do the same thing with a well written contract except for a copuple of things. You can change your last name, I could say have a female concubine and if I had a job with health care and she changed her last name to mine and had ID they would never ever check would they ? Jointly and severally holding credit accounts, even buying property, who the fuck is going to look for the actual marriage license ? And a marriage does not guarantee you sex.

The only problem might come when the shysters really start digging if for example, you filed a wrongful death suit. That would get sticky and how it is handled in one state may differ than another, but that is not my problem. I don't file, I fire. The people whom I would even consider filing wrongful death over could never be replaced by money, and most of them are worth more dead than alive anyway. This would finance my hunting trip.

So no, no reason for the prenup, especially because there is no reason for the nup.
But if you got nothing to prove there really is no reason, except maybe for the healthcare, and that's only if they check.

Just jump the broom. Then divorce is cheaper - just say "I divorce you I divorce you I divorce you".

T^T

PS, I will read the rest of the thread later.........



Aynne88 -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 7:20:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

Seeing as how they are not actually enforceable and can be set aside by the judge....what's the point?


Not really sure how this works but I have friends in Canada that have told me about something similar called "Matrimonial Regime" which is I believe similar to our Pre-nup, is that not correct? 

Maine also does not have any jurisdiction or language in the law providing for common law marriage so no way in hell would I not have a pre-nuptial agreement which are absolutely enforced in court.  Why would I work for 2 decades building assets, a business, etc., to not have it protected? Look at the divorce rate....I am just being a realist.



tj444 -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 7:32:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather

Well, as I stated before, an accountant and a tax lawyer have given their opinion, so we'll go with what they both say is the case over what you think might maybe be the case.

As for co-habitation agreements, I don't want or need any such thing, thanks. I see no need to involve lawyers in our lives any more than is absolutely necessary. If you feel the need then by all means make such an agreement, but personally if I felt the need to be protected from those I live with I'd just move, because I would be living with the wrong people. And if anybody asked me to sign such an agreement I wouldn't move in, for the same reason, if somebody feels they need to protect them self from me, then they're the wrong person for me to be living with.

It's really that simple. I want no part of a pre-nuptial or co-habitation agreement, and I will have no part of either, and if somebody I am with feels the need for such a thing, then I have made a mistake and am with the wrong person.

You say you aren't trying to tell me what to do, yet in the same breath you tell me I am making a mistake. You're concern is touching and would perhaps be more than that if it wasn't dripping with condescension. You made mistakes, that doesn't mean I will, and even if I do, I'd rather live life fully and make those mistakes than hide from life in fear of what might happen.

Your statements are inconsistant. In a previous statement you said you didnt know if i was correct or not about tax on common-law same sex couples, then all of a sudden you say Cheri had talked to a tax specialist about buying a house and this bit about poly being exempt from tax laws. An addition to that, I dont see why Cheri would need to talk to someone about tax on a principle residence since there is no tax on any profit on those in Canada.

It doesnt matter to me what you do or dont do, your living arrangements might work out for you, or they might not. I said i wanted an agreement and stated my reasons why (since that is what this thread is about). And I never said i made mistakes regarding prenups/agreements in previous relationships, i said i was lucky which is entirely different. I live my life as fully as i want and i am not living in fear of anything, that doesnt mean i jump into everything blindly or without trying to minimize risk. Not everything you will do in your life will be right, you will make some mistakes along the way, everyone does (even if you dont think you will).



LaTigresse -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 7:36:00 PM)

Exactly.

My thinking.........I don't care what anyone else does. You don't want a pre-nup, don't get one. You get burned because you didn't have a pre-nup, don't expect me to feel bad for you because I won't. You get the shit you set yourself up for, plain and simple.

If you don't get a pre-nup and never have the need for one.....yay! Good for you. Luck of the draw.

I don't think anyone in my family has ever had one......my brother paid the price yet jumped right into the same dumbass situation the second time. Hopefully his second wife won't do the same shit his first one did. The rest of my siblings are too poor to give a shit.



Aynne88 -> RE: Prenups (9/23/2011 7:42:11 PM)

Pretty much. I mean during my first divorce in Maine there isn't even alimony if there are no children so I got fucked royally, unlike common belief that women get it all (insert big ironic laugh here) and so now everything is protected, and that doesn't make it any less romantic or idealistic, it just makes it common sense. 20 something to 40 something.....big changes. No that isn't condescending Heather, it's just what happens. I would have given him a kidney and lived in a tent if he wanted to I was so young and blinded by love, now...not so much. Yet, the love is actually deeper, stronger and more real if you will. So is the realization that what I work for and have earned is of value and I will protect it. It's not a love or not love issue.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625