Summary:
I already purchased a block of land and 80% of people have said it was really stupid because i'm going to get into a scenario where I get married and she will steal half my investment.
Wanted to know others thoughts about this topic or if you have any previous experience/advise
35% chance and it's not "half your assets" it's half of the pooled assets. Surely you can give the other partner some credit for helping build the wealth?
The government study "to have and to hold strategies to strengthen marriage and relationships" showed that not living together before marriage actually made the marriage more likely to succeed.
Around 35% of marriages end in divorce. It's nowhere near 50%.
I agree though, frank discussions about finances are key to prevent misunderstanding or false assumptions.
even women tell me: just rent and try, trust needs to be earned. Love may cause temporary blindness, when 2 get together the cultural gap may not be visible at first but later it needs 2 to agree on how to manage it.
Relations don't have to end in marriage, its for old times sake to give women perks
Not just marriage; a defacto relationship for 2 years is counted as marriage by our evil judicial system. There is no reason to marry since it has no advantage over defacto.
Yes there is, you get to spend 15 - 50k on one day. What's not to like?
Blind trust is what gets people into situations where they lose half of their assets.
No wonder a lot of marriages fail; people in these kinds of marriages tend to count their assets more than value their family and children.
By your logic we shouldn't have airbags in cars because people would drive safer. I don't forsee the crash; but I know the probabilty of one is greater than 0%, so I take steps to mitigate the damage. Why shouldn't the same apply for marriage?
Also cause marriages side with women mostly
Also cause marriages side with women mostly
What does that even mean?
Bullshit, I work in healthcare I've seen my fair share of well-paid female executives/doctors get their assets split to the benefits of the husbands. The family court doesn't see gender, it sees facts and child custody.
If you don't want to risk losing any money over a marriage, don't get married/being in a defacto relationship. Alternatively, marry a person who has/earns more than you.
I'd buy IF it's a bargain. Marriage is a future event (in your case), it may or may not happen, may or may not fail. Not going to let it get in the way of scoring a bargain.
I have heard of people going after frequent flyer points, nothing is safe.
Precisely - see http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FamCA… for just one example where frequent flyer points were adjusted.
Wow, I skim read that entire thing.
That is terrifying
I love how they both have Queens Counsel representing them too…. hardcore
Lawyer , trust
Said no one ever
there's a reason why it's called 'divorce rape', if you're a high earning male and you marry a min. wage hairdresser then the family courts will ensure that she maintains her current lifestyle after she divorces you.
Not really a thing in Australia, this is an American thing (alimony).
Well, it exists (spouse maintenance), but it's nothing like it is in the US.
A high earning male will never marry a hairdresser, but the hairdresser will be the reason for a divorce MUUUHAHHAHAAAAA
I purchased a house prior to getting married the first time.
Everything in it was mine before marriage.
The marriage didn't last long, she and her family took things they had no right to as well as damaging the property. As well as other issues. I took the advice of my solicitor. He told me to change all locks and get an injunction against the family - I did all that.
A year or so later, I sold that house and bought another. Didn't go for divorce unit a few years later. The solicitor sent a letter giving the grounds for divorce. If she agreed to the divorce, then I would cover costs. If she disagreed then she would have a share of costs to pay. She signed the agreement. She got nothing.
Thanks for sharing a real life story. Sounds terrible, I hope things are better for you now.
I was also scared by all these stories of losing half my assets.
Then I spoke with a friend who is a family lawyer. He said in his honest opinion, most asset separations he sees are fair. And he's a regular blokey-bloke, not a soy boy white knight.
It's only in the case of children that you have a greater split (so the female in the relationship, who usually gets custody of the children, can provide for the children, i.e. it's done in the best interest of the kids).
In the event of a marriage or defacto with no kids, they assess what each partner brought into the relationship.
Length also plays a part - it's a big difference if were you together for 4 years or 20 years.
Don't believe the scare tactics of 'automatically losing half'. It's not true.
Based on your experience, can you share any tips / learnings for next time?
It was a bad situation.
A very wrong decision on my part to marry the first wife. Let's just say only Michael Jackson beat me to the shortest marriage (as in being together).
In a way, I was fortunate, getting out early. My friend, who married the twin (we had a double wedding, this was in UK), stuck it out and ended up with two sons. However, he also suffered mental and physical abuse for years. He finally had enough and took off one night. Left the area and went south to stay with friends his missus didn't know about.
He's now remarried to someone who loves home (though he almost died from sepsis earlier this year, spent 4 months in hospital).
Find a wifey who also has a block of land, or a high yielding investment merc (whatever floats)
Nice segue
Good luck with that.
I need to live in a house.
A house in a decent location increases in price at the rate of inflation or higher.
The rental isn't much different to repayments.
It may not necessarily hamper my ability to get a business loan.
Yes.
Never let them share your ozbargain account
Yep, bought a house while single and glad I did. Then married someone who had 2 houses (although I wouldn't have cared if they had nothing). Need to be able to let go of this attitude about a partner stealing half your stuff or you will never be able to trust someone or be happy.
Maybe you will never find love, so it will not be an issue?
Serious-ish answer - there is way more involved than just 'you were married, you get 50% each'. The courts consider pre-maritial assets, contribution to asset pool, future needs, etc.
I already purchased a block of land and 80% of people have said it was really stupid because i'm going to get into a scenario where I get married and she will steal half my investment.
You should ask those same people about the money you have in the bank (or wherever) and why that wouldn't be subject to any marriage breakdown settlement.
Exactly this!!
Better be destitute instead, then no matter who you marry (more likely to be another destitute person if any) then you can't get robbed!
If you decide to not do anything on the basis she will steal half your investment then you will never do anything, including getting married.
I really do dislike the depressing nature of people.
I already purchased a block of land and 80% of people have said it was really stupid because i'm going to get into a scenario where I get married and she will steal half my investment.
So to abstract this a little, your friends are saying that you shouldn't buy assets in case you get married (to the wrong person) and end up losing half of them.
What's the alternative? Just buying depreciating consumer garbage on Ozbargain?
This made me laugh :).
Well they prefer me to meet someone first and then buy a house together rather than just myself.
lol. I was going to add this but it won't let me edit now so here it is (wrote it before reading your reply):
Edit: Just in case it isn't clear to you: You might lose 50% of your assets in a divorce later, you still have 50% of your assets (probably more if you marry someone who has a net worth of > $0).
In this case, you get to keep 50% of your assets.
50% of $300,000 is $150,000
50% of $0 is $0
Which would you rather end up with?
In this case, you get to keep 50% of your assets.
You also get to keep 50% of the liabilities, if the property loses value.
50% of -$100,000 is -$50,000
50% of 0, is still zero. (The better option, going by your logic?)
Sometimes arguements can go both ways, my friend.
Well they prefer me to meet someone first and then buy a house together rather than just myself.
Does this mean they don't want you to accumulate assets until after you get married? Or do they believe that if you just hoard cash, that you'll somehow manage to keep 100% of it, where as real estate and shares somehow get halved? (doesn't work that way).
Either way, in case it's not clear, just keep growing your asset portfolio, and pay down any debts you might have (mortgage on the block of land, etc). You seem to be on the right track and best of luck!
Marriage/divorce can be considered a separate issue when/if it comes along. Obviously exercise common sense, don't go boasting about your investment portfolio to girls and then get hitched 3 months later lol. Observe the spending and saving habits of your potential partner before committing to anything.
Answer of the first paragraph: A little bit of both I suppose.
But I do love this advise :) Thanks a lot!
Well they prefer me to meet someone first and then buy a house together rather than just myself.
Depends on what you're trying to do.
You've committed an investment to the block of land already at a specific location.
This decision should not affect the decision to buy a house together with someone else.
It's like saying "Should I save money" and "I'll just make more money" - both have NO effect on each other, you should be doing both!
Don't know why but that thought never occured to me either. Thanks doge~
Wouldnt you also be eligible for free stamp duty etc
Wait til you have kids, they'll steal 100% of your money!
Not if OP builds up a large enough investment portfolio before they come along, which it looks like he's already started doing.
Nah they have their hand out from day one, greedy little buggars.
Lol what a shame.
Why do you want to neg it?
Because he's still living with his parents and living off of their money!
I would buy
doesnt sound like a good relationship if this is your concern.
At the start of a relationship anyway, people dont know your financial situation. That house might be mortgaged severely.
I think it's more of a 'what if' scenario. I honestly didn't really take too much into consideration until my relatives mentioned horror stories about similar situations. Though I may agree or not agree with their philosophy, i do believe one should be prepared for the worst case scenario as there are some cruel people out there.
Yes I would, imagine worrying about that
You are doing right and smart.
Don't listen to that brainless ( selfish idea )
If you worry about that problem. See your solicitor before you marry.SIMPLE.
I was single when I bought a house, and don't have any worries about a girlfriend 'stealing' half. Later on met a nice woman.
What actually happened was she found out where I lived and said she won't live further than 10km from the CBD. Arbitrary hard wall limit. She also commented that she didn't like her work and asked if I would support her if she quit, therefore I would be paying for a far more expensive house that she alone wanted. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.
The kicker was that she then purchased her own place (just within 10km of the CBD, which she liked to mention a lot) but would also complain about the cost of housing.
Basically if you buy something now expect your future wife to be unhappy with the location/size/type of housing.
Then dont get married? Relationships don't mean you have to get married due to old traditions or brainwashing religions
And everyone should know there's no equality in marriages
You don't need to get married.
That isn't why people get married you sad sad broken person.
If we go on the 50% of assets, partner would in theory inherit 50% of the house. Of the 50% of assets, partner would also inherit both the asset plus any associated debt.
Seen it go the wrong way. Husband was on $$ income. PPR was interest only loan for about 15 years. Now they separating. Wife wanted to keep the house but can't afford house repayments (principal and interest) as result. Wife had to get mother to pay off the mortgage.
Seen parents protect their children by making a loan arrangement to their kids. Because the loan can be recalled parents are effectively secured creditors to you (child). Loan arrangement needs to be done above board in written form. Doesn't have to be necessarily at market value.
If you die 'suddenly' , she gets 100% :p
What must I do to convince you people??
So your friends and fam are assuming you're going to marry someone poorer than you?! Bit harsh! Many women these days have a lot of their own financial assets. I was wealthier than many of the guys I dated before I met my husband! Also if you go into a marriage with the attitude of how you can protect yourself in divorce, I'm pretty sure your marriage will definitely fail.
Best thing you can do is try to marry someone in similar (or better) financial circumstances and dont rush into marriage. Make sure you have amazing communication because good communication can solve most problems.
General stereotyping I guess, though you hear this situation a lot more often comparing if the sexes were reversed.
Utter rubbish.
Aside from the irrefutable fact that you can never FULLY know someone, people change. I don't think my mother, for example, ever considered that my dad would have an affair, physically and emotionally abuse her and then threaten to lock her and her children in the house and burn it down.
Planning what you would do if anything goes wrong is not only sensible, you're an idiot if you don't.
What you've effectively just said is that you'd force your partner to jeopardize their future because you don't trust that they'd want to stay in the marriage unless you trap them.
The seatbelt analogy someone else used is perfect - there's a difference between recognizing a potential problem and expecting it to happen.
And finally, while I've never been married so could be completely wrong, my assumption would be that someone who refuses to even consider the possibility that their marriage could ever end is more likely to take it for granted.
main reason as to why i plan to not get married or get into a relationship. way too (profanity) risky. prenups mean jack shit.
Thats really sad
dont forget child support too …
Get the snip? I did… after the horse horses have bolted. Better late than never, I guess ;)
I did it. No way would I spent my life worrying about that sort of thing.
What if she earns and owns more than you? Then you get half of her stuff, plus some sweet alimony.
Just find the right woman.
Maybe concentrate on getting a girlfriend, then maybe marriage, otherwise your family will be wrong
Maybe concentrate on getting a girlfriend, then maybe marriage, otherwise your family will be wrong
Millions of marriages in Asia disagree with you whereas in AUstralia….lolol
somebody explain to a single man like me, how they get HALF your house?
They chop it down the middle.
It's called CGT…chainsaw+grinder+tablesaw method.
Wait till you see what happens to the kids of the marriage.
I know a barrister that's been doing family law for a decade. He said the legislation may be drafted in gender neutral terms but if you read the cases the male spouse rarely "wins".
Also binding financial agreements have limited use these days because of new case law and need to be updated periodically to maintain their effectiveness.
Just get a prenuptial agreement if you ever decide to marry.
Would I buy a house if I'm single? Maybe, at the moment I can barely afford weekly expenses. It's hard to imagine buying a property. (You asked!)
Even prenups can be undone if not correct
https://www.news.com.au/finance/money/wealth/landmark-high-c…
Just marry someone richer then you
There is a lack of eligible richer men around for women to marry. Women tend to marry up, not down.
Damn gold diggers….
Pardon my ignorace. Or non-ignorace? But haven't de facto relationships been pretty much comparable to marriage in family law or something since 2009?
Yes, in most states after a year the partner can lay claim to a chunk of the property regardless if you're married or not. Choose your partner carefully.
really? so a gf of more than 1 year living with you can then claim half of the things ?
Is it actually 1 year? That sounds so short
if you have a huge mortgage getting a partner is one way to off-set it.
I don't understand the advice though. Should one spend all their money and be completely broke when they get into relationships for fear of losing some of it? If you didn't buy the block then presumably you'd still hold your deposit which is every bit as much an asset.
I bought a house while single, seemed a good investment.
20y later, married for most of it, have a much better house together. turns out the first house was a good investment, got in before he market went silly.
If you’ve already bought, don’t worry about it. Plan on a long term union with your partner. If things change, they change.
Agree, I owned 2 props with a friend, eventually sold and put my profit as a 30% deposit on a home for my now wife and I. certainly sucks that I invested 5 times the amount she did into our life starter, as well as pay for our wedding/honeymoon… but at the end of the day, I love her immensely, and you shouldn’t consider the worst case like you are!
Unless you’re very risk averse… think of the value you will ADD to a relationship, rather than the impact it could DETRACT.
If you have the ability to buy a house/land today, imagine what a second income can do to your financial situation down the track, eh?
Not meaning to be a d*ck but it seems that you resent the fact you contributed “5 times the amount she did into our life starter, as well as pay for our wedding/honeymoon… ”
I've seen it bring grown men to tears.