How about earning more money or living in a house you can actually afford? You are getting most of the equity already.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
the injustices that the system produces are truly astonishing as seen by the previous two posts.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
you chose to get married in England. This is a typical outcome to lose 70% of assets. Just do not get married again.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
maybe buy valuable video games. You could start this as a new hobby collecting something stupid like video games. It might be hard to proof they have value. They are just something you play with. But you buy old games that hold their value. Over time could build up a decent portfolio. She probably won't care about getting your stupid video gamesby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
With most important transactions you are warned. There is a legal requirement to warn you. If you do spreadbetting it says most people lose. With marriage as a wealthy man there is no warning and the loss potential in England is insane. There is probably no easier way to lose more than half your net worth. Just a move to England can cost you half your net worth or more. And I don't thiby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
Yes I imagine that re the information. Another really striking thing is the lack of information that is provided to people entering marriage in England the enormous consequences on their hard earned wealth. There is no contract that is more binding but there is also no other contract where you get so little information provided to you before you sign. A session with a family lawyer describing tby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
North Korea most likely has a fairer outcome for OP. If there isn't that much money involved I imagine it might work that the wife just lets the other jurisdiction handle the case. Perhaps she doesn't know about how different the outcomes might be. I imagine that not everyone is smart about this stuff.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
I believe the simple advice to try to divorce in the other jurisdiction is more than fairby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
I have deleted this post. The opinions of this poster on the matter are self interested and tiresome in their repetition.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
At least you acknowledge that it is a defect now. Just as your teacher from Oxford does acknowledge too.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
This post is an example of how utterly insane it is to get married in England as the financially stronger party. The fact that it is even possible to have outrageous requests like this is a disgrace. In my EU country nothing like this could ever happen .by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
The exceptions in the bill seem sensible to me. What I said is that pre marital assets should be excluded, the bill says exactly that with some managable and reasonable exceptions.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
This should be very straightforward, seems a standard case. But no one can tell you what will happen as it depends on the specific judge. The law is too uncertain for anyone to tell. So your hard earned assets are in the hand of some judge. good luck!by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
it looks like I have to teach you on your own subject pls read the bill, it seems pretty clear that the proposal is to only make financial Orders limited to matrimonial property. It expliclity says to not include PRE MARITAL assets. I seriosuly dont understand how this is so hard to grasp. Pls see section 2). and yes if it means that we can ensure the conditions are met, they are bindby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
My main point is that only marital assets should be divided (as seems logical and fair) That is what seems to be proposed and is also where England is the stark outlier currently. This really seems fairly obvious that it ought to be like this, I could write the arguments why but : According to the article the rest of the Western world agrees with me, these people in England agree with me. Soby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
Article in the FT "London’s reputation as divorce capital could be tested by legal shake-up The Law Commission’s review is expected to take a hard look at the favorable treatment given to the spouse of the main breadwinner" seems like there are some sensible people in England that agree with my point of view. From the article: Baroness Deech, a crossbench peer in the Hoby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
I guess to an extend how you have a distaint to some EU burecroat telling you what to do. Similarly, I feel an absolut distain at some judge in England who has no clue about what hard work went into generating assets in a different country simply redistributing them on a spreadsheet as they see fit. Anyway it is what it is. I think most people dont realize the full extend of it before they entby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
I dont have a strong view on the EU. Poland alone is projected to have a larger GDP than Britain by 2030 though. I wouldnt want to live in France, Germany or Poland though . I dont think the riots in France have much to do with the EU. For the record also the law is also different in the US and there also prenups hold and pre marital assets are generally not touched. I dont only treasure moneyby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
How does it matter the law is the same basically all over the EU and the world that pre marital assets are not stolen to meet some ridiculously generously assessed "needs". England stands out as the top up jurisdiction. So it is only England that is that unfair to the financially stronger party. I am not saying that my EU country is paradise or whatever, simply that the divorce law iby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
there are law firms in my EU country warning against marrying someone from England on their webpage, calling it "financial armaggedon".by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
absolutely if you start with a similar amount it is a much more reasonable decision, but if from the start there is a big wealth disparity there is only risk for the wealthier party in an unbelievable unbalanced wayby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
This is all so insane, I am speechless. You must be mentally ill to get married as a much stronger financial party in England.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
David seems incapable of understanding fair points made by posters and usually comes back with some accusation. The point is that it may not necessarily be a joint decision that someone chooses to not work anymore. You can not force someone to work. If they choose to be lazy after marriage (which the enlgish system incentives them to do) the earning party has to be the pay full cost for that aby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
Even Poland will overtake the little britain by GDP by 2030. Continental Europe wins in the end. but again I do not have an issue with England, only its divorce law.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
I haven't mentioned children or talked about my situation or what I want the spouse to do? You have no argument. You just accuse me of things I have not actually said. I understand raising children is a contribution. I have shown in a simple hypothetical example how the "needs" produce an unfair situation (i.e. you having to finance generously assessed needs of a lazy bum). Aby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
a simple example quite nicely illustrates this: say you are wealhy and have a job and the other party is a lazy bum: The lazy bum has no job and no assets and lives off benefits. They are the states problem. You get married and are married for a few years, now 5 years later you divorce. The lazy bum is still a problem but in England due to the fact that you were married they are now YOUR pby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
The whole thing is mostly about squeezing the middle class/upper middle class even more: the court simply overrides asset owernship to meet "needs" (which are ridiciolously generous interpreted and depend on the amount of money invovled which also makes no economic sense), while here in the EU in a case like 3 when there is not enough income the wife may be on benefits, while in Englby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
You keep on saying it is "objectively" fair. Again lawyers all over the world seem to agree with me. Those are reasonable people in the EU/USA, I am not talking about the islamic world. The whole point of house being a "joint asset", you take this as given. Economically it should make zero difference, I buy a house with my 1.5 M and because I bought a house I have to giveby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
it is good that you yourself compare the English law to the islamic law: It is arguably as extremely unfair just the other way around. I seriously do not understand how a hard working wealthy person can get married to somone with much less wealth/income in England when the contract is so unbelievably unfair. Otherwise I dont have a problem with England and I actually think like the Englishby Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum
What most reasonable people consider unethical: Making it possible to go after someone's inheritance, making it possible to go after someone's pre marital assets. All possible only in England divorce law. The most stark case of legalized theft I have ever encountered.by Randomer4040 - UK Divorce Forum