PreNups, Trusts, Offshore Accounts & Protecting yourself

[ScottinCrimea]

What if the wife will be content with 30% of his retirement?
 

Can't couples leave as friends if they reach an agreement? 

SoC, Apparently you have never gone through a divorce.

[Gator]

A pre nup works in one way and one way only. To LIMIT the entitlement of one spouse to something other than SHE (usually) would be entitled to at Law. 

If so, I should sue my family law attorney for malpractice because our contract includes provisions to provide her more at my death than she would be entitled to by law. 

[Doll]

Gator, there wills for that.

[William3rd]

If so, I should sue my family law attorney for malpractice because our contract includes provisions to provide her more at my death than she would be entitled to by law. 

Has to be a will or trust. Talk to your probate attorney. At death, if there is no will then the estate will pass by intestate succession. And at law, that give your spouse a hell of a lot. More than you can imagine to the exclusion of your children who will take less by virtue of the marital union taking a piece. But I speak only for California and nothing that I say here is intended to serve as legal advice.

[BillyB]

A prenup should follow the laws of the land. If it's lopsided, then it's no good. To me a prenup is insurance to protect against judges who are allowed A LOT of discretion when it comes to splitting up assets at a divorce trial. Also if you have business partners and family heirlooms, you might need things in writing what is your's and what's your's within the business.

I told my ex's attorney after the trial that the judge favored women. She told me all judges favor women and always tells her male clients to settle. I read somewhere that women win 60%, men win 10%, and it's a tie 30% of the time in divorce trials.

Judges are human. They may have biases, and if they future political ambitions, getting their name in the newpaper for a poor ruling/record against women based on what a woman's advocate group says is a no no. Nobody defends men.

I'm sure Gator's a fair man when it came to his prenup. Sure a prenup can sour a woman before marriage but if it's fair, your lady will smile and respect you even more. If your lady doesn't respect you for being smart protecting such things as family heirlooms or business partners, you shouldn't be marrying her.

A Pastor once told me prenups(fair ones) are smart because both people know what they're getting going into the marriage and they know what they're getting if they leave the marriage. It also may prevent a nasty fight.

 I was having a friendly divorce with my ex until lawyers got involved. We are not as friendly anymore as they turned it into a fight and convinced us to grab our piece of pie. I guess that's their job is to grab as much as they can for their client. No different than the greedy client who wants an attorney to craft up a one sided prenup. Lawyers made much more of a fight out of my divorce than it should've been. I'm a believer a fair prenup would have saved us a lot of money and we would have been friends after the divorce. The attorney fees were over $50,000.

[William3rd]

Translation- I was getting away with robbing my ex blind in our divorce and was promising her eternal friendship in return for nothing until she talked to a lawyer. I got my ass hammered and had to pay what the law provides for and now I dont want to be her friend anymore. Come to think about it-she doesnt want to be my friend either. . .Yes sirree- it is all the lawyer's fault, and the judge's, and the feminists. Everybody's fault except for mine. . . . .

[BillyB]

Translation- I was getting away with robbing my ex blind in our divorce and was promising her eternal friendship in return for nothing until she talked to a lawyer. I got my ass hammered and had to pay what the law provides for and now I dont want to be her friend anymore. Come to think about it-she doesnt want to be my friend either. . .Yes sirree- it is all the lawyer's fault, and the judge's, and the feminists. Everybody's fault except for mine. . . . .

William, [deleted by mod] I was separated over 6 months with the ex before she got a lawyer. But I made an agreement with the ex she could live in the home that's bought before our marriage for 3 or more years until she gets her degree. I paid her spousal support, her car, and child support more than what the court ordered after she got an attorney. I even paid child support for a child that is not mine biologically or adopted but from her previous relationship. Being a nice guy doesn't count in court my attorney says and he was right. I don't get any credit for the support I gave. I don't want to be her friend anymore because she used the kids against me and I had to fight to see them. Guess what? I am a defacto parent of a child that isn't adopted or biologically mine. You don't obtain that kind of status for being a dead beat. She got over twice as much from the judge as her attorney thought she could get in mediation. Every attorney I talked to who reviewed the case thought I got the bad end of the stick too but appealing is difficult to win due to family court judges having a lot of discretion when determining the value of possessions. The two homes and business was bought and started outside of marriage. But a repair here or there gave her a stake in the property. For a 3 year marriage, the judge gave her half the value. The ex's attorney, a female herself, already agreed that the judge in the trial and in the courts she works in favors women. That should tell you something. I'm not giving you my opinion but the opinion of other attorneys too. You sure like to come out with assumptions and insults before getting the facts. Not very professional for being an attorney William. Do you ridicule your clients in their face when they ask you to help them write up a prenup or do you just stay quiet, take their money, and ridicule those men who want prenups on the forum? While your at it, you might as well ridicule men for not being able to keep their marriages together. It's all their fault. Contrary to your and stereotypical beliefs that all prenups are bad, they aren't as some people do need it to protect themselves from a judge who is human and can have error in judgements.

[Doll]

Translation- I was getting away with robbing my ex blind in our divorce and was promising her eternal friendship in return for nothing until she talked to a lawyer. I got my ass hammered and had to pay what the law provides for and now I dont want to be her friend anymore. Come to think about it-she doesnt want to be my friend either. . .Yes sirree- it is all the lawyer's fault, and the judge's, and the feminists. Everybody's fault except for mine. . . . .

[BillyB]

Doll, I don't go to RW ladies forums and tell those ladies who got nothing that they got what the FSU law provided and it's their fault. That's a big difference between me and you. Since you live in the FSU I'm going to forgive you for not fully understanding William's post and my response. But if you do understand and are insinuating I'm greedy and a crook with a shady character as William has, and you're bold enough to make your feelings known again, then I will have some choice words for you too.

For the men out there searching for FSU women, it is important to go into marriage with trust but it's foolish to believe anybody is 100% honest including yourself. 2 out of 3 marriages fail in Ukraine and Russia. Some men are at fault, some women but to expect your marriage will last a lifetime is more fantasy than reality. Also, no matter how good your FSU lady speaks English, there's an excellent chance you will be paying more in the event of a divorce than with a local woman. In my State, it doesn't matter if she committed adultery or abused you, a judge will not let you divorce her and be a burden to taxpayers if she has to get on a social program to survive. Besides, you signed a document you will be financially responsible for her anyway. If what I said hasn't scared you, then you need to choose wisely in this endeavor. Is that possible? Most of society thinks it's extremely foolish to pursue a long distance relationship and enter marriage with little face to face time.

Most people don't need a prenup. They don't have much or their assets are few. Some have valid reasons. It's up to them to decide if their reasons are valid. There's nothing wrong with a prenup that follows State or your Country's guidelines. It's fair according to the laws of the land. But it can be bent with a judge's discretion on how the piece of pie gets split up based on how much he thinks each person contributed to the relationship. At his discretion, he may undervalue or overvalue some assets to enlarge one person's piece of pie.

[Doll]

Since you live in the FSU

Hon, I live in the USA  Like you do

[Jack]

Since you live in the FSU I'm going to forgive you for not fully understanding 

Hon, I live in the USA  Like you do

oooopps

[ScottinCrimea]

2 out of 3 marriages fail in Ukraine and Russia.

All my sources show a rate of around 43%, not the 67% you claim.  Show me your sources please.

[Gator]

Has to be a will or trust. Talk to your probate attorney.

Correct, the prenup provision needs to be coupled with a will or trust.  However, without the prenup I would have the right to leave almost everything to my children or my favorite charity.

[BillyB]

Hon, I live in the USA  Like you do

You might want to state in your profile your residence is in the USA instead of the FSU. 

Doll, you, Williams and I have in the past had disagreements over issues in the past but I don't go around waiting for an opportune time to go on attack on something you say and I don't wait for another poster to attack you and give a big thumbs up in agreement.

If I had gone to an FSU women's forum and told a woman who felt the laws in the FSU weren't fair after her divorce "that it's her fault and that she just wants more from her ex husband because she's attempting to rob him blind" without knowing the facts, I'll probably be thought of as a stupid A@@hole and those who agreed with me would be thought of as the same. Maybe you didn't understand the innuendos Williams was making but I certainly did. This is not the first time he's acted like a child, I've seen him communicate like that with others.

If anybody needs a decent Immigration attorney who done me a good job, educated in Russia and in America, acts professional, able to speak Russian to your fiancee and looks a whole lot better than William, you can contact her at this website.

http://www.lkrichlaw.com/sub/index.jsp;jsessionid=D66B8F3F8D44258A54E488F1FFB5C76C?contentid=0AHPP4DKd7P2Ym4udgJ5K0mX

[Doll]

You might want to state in your profile your residence is in the USA instead of the FSU.   

OK, I'll try but it seems to me there are not options for a female member to both show nationality and residence

[Doll]

Couldn't change- the options are "times to the FSU vs resident"
Sorry.

[BC]

William, [deleted by mod] I was separated over 6 months with the ex before she got a lawyer.

Maybe inaction was part of the ensuing difficulty you created/encountered accepting the decision?  I can imagine a bunch of scenarios where things could get quite twisted.  Was your separation agreement filed, or did you even have one prepared by your legal advisor?

Heck, the fact you gave permission and allowed her to continue living in your house would support even your ex stating 'Well, he gave it to me.', in which case having to relinquish only half of the house may have been a generous decision by the judge on your behalf.

Oh by the way.. It's quite easy to find attorneys who will agree / commiserate with you - after all they don't make much money driving customers away.. 

[William3rd]

William, [deleted by mod] I was separated over 6 months with the ex before she got a lawyer.



You only get one side of the story here and I havent listened to your stories for over a year. They never make any sense. This result sounds like a tall tale.  I restate my previous translation. Fundamental fairness came back to bite you in the butt. 'nuff said.

[Bruce]

Billy B - did you ever get married to your girl from Uzbekestan? 

[Muj]

BillyB,

Unfortunately in a difficult divorce at least 5 people largely influence the outcome - the couple, their lawyers and the judge and at least one of them is willing to be evil.  I've seen many cases where the divorce resolves as soon as the finances are exhausted as the lawyers disappear too.  My friend's ex's lawyer took her money, predicted an outcome (unlawful - get in writing if a lawyer does this), quickly spent the retainer, then refused her calls when she couldn't cover any more bills. 
Most "friendly" divorces involve no lawyers.  I've seen a friendly divorce where the judge decided the woman received too little support.  Even though she already signed, the agreement was rewritten.  Both ended up ahead as each didn't pay $10k's in legal bills.  They probably split about $1M in assets.
BillyB, not sure how you ended up with child support for her kid.  Seems your lawyer goofed.  You're definately no deadbeat or looking to steal her due as you demonstrate by allowing to live in your home.  Unfortunately you didn't understand the consequences of your generosity too her.

[ScottinCrimea]

BillyB,  I asked for your source of the divorce statistics you cited as facts, remember?

[BillyB]

  Was your separation agreement filed, or did you even have one prepared by your legal advisor?

Heck, the fact you gave permission and allowed her to continue living in your house would support even your ex stating 'Well, he gave it to me.', in which case having to relinquish only half of the house may have been a generous decision by the judge on your behalf.

No separation agreement filed but the separation didn't count towards length of time the ex was married to me either. Letting the ex stay in the house had no effect with the judge's decision on how to split it. If you own a property before you were married in a State that recognizes the difference between separate property and community property, then the house should be separate property. But there are ways that a judge can give your ex interest in it. Maybe you were living together before marriage when you bought it with your own money but the judge recognizes your living together is (marriage like) even though the ex and your finances are clearly separated. Maybe you made a repair on the home when married and she gets interest in the house. Let's say you own a piece of property worth $800,000 according to the expert witness, an appraiser. But at trial he says that he can't appraise wetlands and you have 50% wetlands designated on your property and he admits the value of the property is half but the judge rules the property is worth $700,000 anyway and the ex's share is 2/7th or $200,000 based on guidelines of the law and refuses to assign her's and your share by percentage(2/7) although your attorney asked for it. So the property gets sold at the market value of $400,000 because the judges estimate of $700,000 was unrealistic to begin with and the ex gets $200,000 for a 3 year marriage although the judge calls it 4 because of the meretricious(marriage like) relationship. That may just be one piece of property in dispute. It can happen to anyone because judges have lots of "discretion". There's no doubt in my mind a judge can award half or more to an ex for a short term marriage and prenups that follow state guidelines would prevent judges from using their "discretion" from straying away from state guidelines when it comes to splitting up assets. Based on mine and viewing other people's trials, judges have lots of "discretion"

If in your State you have the option for a jury for a divorce trial, then request it. No offense to judges but more heads are better than one and jurors do pay attention to evidence and testimony more closely and most likely try their best to stick to state guidelines when making their decision for spitting up assets.

After my divorce, I talked to a lot of attorneys and they all said I got the raw deal but told me there's only a 10% chance to be awarded an appeal and if an appeal is awarded, there's little chance of winning it because family court judges are allowed lots of "discretion". Most all attorneys I talked to weren't after my money but honest with telling me an appeal is not worth persuing.

  Billy B - did you ever get married to your girl from Uzbekestan?

She was failed at the interview and a waiver has been applied for.

  BillyB,  I asked for your source of the divorce statistics you cited as facts, remember?

I once posted the first link on the forum(can be searched) and it said about 65% divorce rate for Ukraine and 67% divorce for Russia but now it says 43% for 2002. I don't know why they changed it but the second link is from a UN 2005 study and if you do the math for number of marriages and number of divorces, it's about 2/3 divorce rate in Russia. Third link is similar to what used to be in the first link.

http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsWorld.shtml

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefMedia.aspx?refid=701500518

http://www.mybestdate.co.uk/datingstatistics.aspx

  BillyB, not sure how you ended up with child support for her kid.  Seems your lawyer goofed. 

It was my choice to be a defacto parent for the child and pay child support. I was the only father the child has ever known. When we were separated and on friendly terms with the ex, I payed support on my own free will and had regular visitation. After attorneys got involved, she took him away as I did not have any legal right to see him. So when picking up my biological son and always seeing him crying and saying he wants to go with "papa", I chose to persue being a defacto parent which would give me a legal right to have visitation with him. Since divorce court can take a year the child was brainwashed during this time but the family court counselor saw right through that and knew there was a bond between us. His report did not say good things about the ex. So after the trial and months of professional reintegration counseling, he has fully bonded with me again. Of course I had to pay for all that counseling.

  You only get one side of the story here and I havent listened to your stories for over a year. They never make any sense. This result sounds like a tall tale.  I restate my previous translation. Fundamental fairness came back to bite you in the butt. 'nuff said.

None of my stories make any sense? No wonder you got something against me. Most people here can read and determine things for themselves without your help William. If you want to argue law, then argue law and state there is no way things can be unfair when it comes to getting divorced and state your reasons why instead of being sarcastic. If you want to state all judges are fair and equal and interpret law the same, then you're free to do so and tell us why. Lastly, choose the man you want to be and stick with it. You could go on and continue to act the way you do here or you could act the way you do when you are in court in front of a judge, clients, colleagues, and jury. Based on your dual personalities here and there, who is the better man?

[BC]

No separation agreement filed but the separation didn't count towards length of time the ex was married to me either. Letting the ex stay in the house had no effect with the judge's decision on how to split it. If you own a property before you were married in a State that recognizes the difference between separate property and community property, then the house should be separate property. But there are ways that a judge can give your ex interest in it. Maybe you were living together before marriage when you bought it with your own money but the judge recognizes your living together is (marriage like) even though the ex and your finances are clearly separated. Maybe you made a repair on the home when married and she gets interest in the house. Let's say you own a piece of property worth $800,000 according to the expert witness, an appraiser. But at trial he says that he can't appraise wetlands and you have 50% wetlands designated on your property and he admits the value of the property is half but the judge rules the property is worth $700,000 anyway and the ex's share is 2/7th or $200,000 based on guidelines of the law and refuses to assign her's and your share by percentage(2/7) although your attorney asked for it. So the property gets sold at the market value of $400,000 because the judges estimate of $700,000 was unrealistic to begin with and the ex gets $200,000 for a 3 year marriage although the judge calls it 4 because of the meretricious(marriage like) relationship. That may just be one piece of property in dispute. It can happen to anyone because judges have lots of "discretion". There's no doubt in my mind a judge can award half or more to an ex for a short term marriage and prenups that follow state guidelines would prevent judges from using their "discretion" from straying away from state guidelines when it comes to splitting up assets. Based on mine and viewing other people's trials, judges have lots of "discretion"

If in your State you have the option for a jury for a divorce trial, then request it. No offense to judges but more heads are better than one and jurors do pay attention to evidence and testimony more closely and most likely try their best to stick to state guidelines when making their decision for spitting up assets.

After my divorce, I talked to a lot of attorneys and they all said I got the raw deal but told me there's only a 10% chance to be awarded an appeal and if an appeal is awarded, there's little chance of winning it because family court judges are allowed lots of "discretion". Most all attorneys I talked to weren't after my money but honest with telling me an appeal is not worth persuing.

Billy,

Such circumstances really explains a lot.  That a man and woman in this case set up a common household, they both fix things up the way they want the house and later marry - it would seem reasonable that she would have accrued an interest in the communal home.  Marriage was just a formality and not necessarily the beginning of the union.

Sure, there may have been differences between multiple appraisals, but nothing really wrong with the judge picking a middle point between them to establish a value.

That the house was later sold for only 400K is a lump in the throat of any seller, whether divorcing or not, and an appeal would never be able to fix that.

A lot of this could have been avoided had the man involved, who was buying this property, sought out good legal advice beforehand (no prenupt needed)

Even a prenuptial agreement would probably not be effective unless it was prepared long before the couple set up a common household.

[BillyB]

Sure, there may have been differences between multiple appraisals, but nothing really wrong with the judge picking a middle point between them to establish a value.

Based on the scenario I gave you, there is no multiple appraisals and the judge didn't come close to the expert witnesses admittance that his appraisal should be half off his original estimate based on proof half the property being unusable wetland. The number I gave you is based off a judge's using his "discretion". I heard this word "discretion" from many attorneys. A judge can also assign a percentage of a property to parties instead of a lump sum so when the property gets sold at market value, it's fair for both. Assigning a lump sum based on bad math by straying far off from expert witness testimony isn't fair. BC, I can probably give you a number of scenarios how things can go bad for someone in a divorce trial but what I really want to see is a lawyer or judge come forth and say the law is black and white, just and fair to both men and women and then explain the reasons why based on the law they are reading...... but they can't. And so far nobody else has come forth and give reasonable explanations that the system is completely fair or at least won't stray too far from fairness based on law. Don't attack my experience or my opinion but where's legitimate defense of the system currently in place from the number of posters here that is familiar with law? Someone please explain how judges are allowed to stray far away from State guidelines based on their "discretion" and if that's always fair? I would like to hear some answers, wouldn't you too? As far as I remember, humans make errors. If someone doesn't think assets could be split in the manner I describe, don't say "it makes no sense", give valid reasons for why you think it can't. This has nothing to do with what a guy or woman says in court. It's based on how they lived before divorce and how assets can be split unfairly based on a judge using his discretion. I don't enjoy sharing some of my divorce experience except to help guys learn what can happen and guys should know love isn't going to conquer all and they should use their brains occasionally.

Hearing me or a couple of guys complain about a bad divorce ruling is one thing and can be dismissed but when I heard from many attorneys who work in the business that men are getting ran over and judges always favor women, then it's a safe bet there is problem with fairness at least in the area I live in. This is not only an opinion I share with you. I'm sure there is a lack of fairness in the FSU for women when they get divorced based on what I've read in the past. Some FSU women are just disgruntled when they post but they have valid reasons. The mediator, an attorney, before my trial said that the ex wants way to much in his opinion after reviewing all the documents and we're probably not going to come to an agreement. He also said when he first got out of law school, he had a purpose to serve the public and see justice served. 20 years later he has little faith that justice is getting served. I've got no problem with keeping things fair in a divorce trial or a guy who wants a prenup to make sure things stay fair according to state guidelines. Maybe when some of you who still don't get it work your ass off, bought property making a huge down payment with money earned way before there was a "marriage like" relationship with no help from the live in girlfriend because she's busy paying you back for loans she borrowed and see half go to her, then you may understand what I'm talking about.. I blame the system, not the ex. I'm also not "greedy". When I got married, I handed my paycheck and checkbook to my wife and let her have full control of the finances. I bought her better clothes and an automobile than what I owned. I am more than fair with the ladies in my life. Even through divorce the ex wanted me back because she found out the grass wasn't greener on the other side with her boyfriend.

Women can be smarter than men when it comes to money and understanding how things could go bad or be unfair during a divorce. Some judges like to take from those who have and give to those who have not. If you take 100 men and 100 women with considerable assets, more women than men out of that group will be getting prenups.

[tfcrew]

Regarding certain former relationships for those interested...

The essential distinctions of a common law marriage are:

   1. Common-law marriages are not licensed by government authorities, although they may be recorded in the public records of some governmental entities.
   2. Common-law marriages are not solemnized.
  3. Cohabitation alone does not create a common-law marriage; the couple must hold themselves out to the world as husband and wife; and....
         1. There must be mutual consent of the parties to the relationship constituting a marriage
         2. Both parties must be of legal age to enter into a marriage or have parental consent to marry
   4. In some jurisdictions, a couple must have cohabited and held themselves out to the world as husband and wife for a minimum length of time for the marriage to be recognised as valid.

There is no such thing as "common-law divorce". Once a marriage is validly contracted, whether according to statute or according to common law, the marriage can only be dissolved by a legal proceeding in the pertinent trial court (usually family court or probate court). In Texas a new provision was added to the Family Code, either partner in a common law marriage has two years after separation to file an action in order to prove that the common law marriage existed. To use the provision, you must have been separated after September 1, 1989.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage

Another interesting study...

adultery is in fact a crime in more than twenty states.

The Role of Marriage Law in Regulating Adultery: "Fault-Based" Divorce and Property Division

follows...
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/grossman/20031216.html