Prenup - prenuptial agreement / marriage contract

[blackcab]

6 hours ago, mogandave said:

I think if one in not ready to go all-in, one is not ready for marriage.

 

Would you stand by that if one party brought nothing to a marriage, while the other brought, for example, 100 million baht?

 

If the marriage ended after a couple of years, do you think both parties should receive a settlement of 50 million baht each?

Edited October 17, 2017 by blackcab

[mogandave]

Why buy insurance?  Why wear glasses? Why read about history?  Just go forth with your heart!   
Proper prior planning preventeth pith poor performance. 

What does any of that have to do with what I said?

[mogandave]

 
Would you stand by that if one party brought nothing to a marriage, while the other brought, for example, 100 million baht?
 
If the marriage ended after a couple of years, do you think both parties should receive a settlement of 50 million baht each?

How is it one person brings nothing?

If all you’re brining is money, why not just hire a hooker?

[mogandave]

In any event, the op can’t afford an attorney it’s not likely he has a couple hundred million to lose.

You guys crack me up


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[blackcab]

6 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

How is it one person brings nothing?

If all you’re brining is money, why not just hire a hooker?

 

 

People of different levels of wealth do get married. The example I gave was just that - an example.

 

So back to my question in post 31 - do you think both parties should receive 50 million baht?

[mogandave]

 
People of different levels of wealth do get married. The example I gave was just that - an example.
 
So back to my question in post 31 - do you think both parties should receive 50 million baht?

Why not answer my question about how is it one party brings nothing?

Yes, I think if some rich, lecherous old sot marries a 15 year-old virgin under the guise of true love and decides to leave her after a couple years for greener pastures he should have to split with her.

Why is it all about money with you guys? Is that all you care about?

[MaeJoMTB]

28 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Why is it all about money with you guys? Is that all you care about?

 

What else is worth caring about? (Assuming you have any)

Edited October 18, 2017 by MaeJoMTB

[blackcab]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

 

Why not answer my question about how is it one party brings nothing?

Yes, I think if some rich, lecherous old sot marries a 15 year-old virgin under the guise of true love and decides to leave her after a couple years for greener pastures he should have to split with her.

Why is it all about money with you guys? Is that all you care about?

 

 

I gave an example to illustrate a point. In real life it might be that one person has inherited family wealth, while the other lives month to month and owns no property or other assets. It's quite possible, especially in Thailand.

 

I accept that you believe all married couples should split all assets at least equally. I tend to disagree. Personally, I think their should be an unequal division of assets in the earlier years if marriage, with the split becoming more equal as the years pass.

[mogandave]

 
I gave an example to illustrate a point. In real life it might be that one person has inherited family wealth, while the other lives month to month and owns no property or other assets. It's quite possible, especially in Thailand.
 
I accept that you believe all married couples should split all assets at least equally. I tend to disagree. Personally, I think their should be an unequal division of assets in the earlier years if marriage, with the split becoming more equal as the years pass.

I gave an example to illustrate a point as well, yet you disregard it and (apparently) intentionally misrepresent what I have said.

I never said nor meant to imply all married couples should split all assets at least equally, that is just something you made up.

While I think the duration of a married can be considered, it is certainly not the be-all-end-all.

What if a rich guy takes a virgin bride, impregnates her and decided to move on three months into the wedding? She brought nothing, so she gets nothing, so she gets nothing, right?

[blackcab]

13 hours ago, mogandave said:

I gave an example to illustrate a point as well, yet you disregard it and (apparently) intentionally misrepresent what I have said.

I never said nor meant to imply all married couples should split all assets at least equally, that is just something you made up.

While I think the duration of a married can be considered, it is certainly not the be-all-end-all.

What if a rich guy takes a virgin bride, impregnates her and decided to move on three months into the wedding? She brought nothing, so she gets nothing, so she gets nothing, right?

 

 

I apologise for misunderstanding your thought process. I did try my best to understand you, but I definitely got it wrong.

 

Why do you mention 15 year olds, virgins and impregnation? I'm not even going to try and understand that.

 

[theguyfromanotherforum]

Surely these prenups in Thailand must be as worthless as the paper they are printed on. 

 

Does this mean since my Thai wife didn't write any prenup with me I can somehow claim half of her house, land and savings? Gee.....I'm a millionaire.

 

Yeah, thought so.

[blackcab]

26 minutes ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

Surely these prenups in Thailand must be as worthless as the paper they are printed on. 

 

Does this mean since my Thai wife didn't write any prenup with me I can somehow claim half of her house, land and savings? Gee.....I'm a millionaire.

 

Yeah, thought so.

 

A prenup in Thailand doesn't stop one partner claiming half of the joint marital assets from the other partner. A prenup in Thailand is not an agreement that protects the marital assets of one party from the other.

 

It can't be, because Thai statute law is very specific about what should happen to assets during a divorce. A prenup contract, even if entered into willingly, cannot supersede statute law.

 

What a prenup in Thailand is best used for is listing the premarital assets of each party, so that on divorce there is no dispute on which assets should be divided.

[mogandave]

 
I apologise for misunderstanding your thought process. I did try my best to understand you, but I definitely got it wrong.
 
Why do you mention 15 year olds, virgins and impregnation? I'm not even going to try and understand that.
 

Your example was extreme, yes?

Guy marries a 30 year old bar girl and splits up a year or three later he has cost her a couple years earning power.

Guy marries a young, “unsoiled” woman (not that uncommon here) and leaves her with a kid or two he has effectively ruined her life.

[MaeJoMTB]

37 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Guy marries a young, “unsoiled” woman (not that uncommon here) and leaves her with a kid or two he has effectively ruined her life.

 

Not sure about that, most Thai ladies seem to have children without the father and seem to be doing fine.

I would say single mother is the norm in Thailand. Yingluck was a single mom, and she got to be PM.

Edited October 19, 2017 by MaeJoMTB

[blackcab]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

Your example was extreme, yes?

Guy marries a 30 year old bar girl and splits up a year or three later he has cost her a couple years earning power.

Guy marries a young, “unsoiled” woman (not that uncommon here) and leaves her with a kid or two he has effectively ruined her life.

 

 

I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree. What if the father died instead? The woman would be in the same situation, but the father wouldn't be around to pay anything.

 

I think bringing a child into this world is a shared responsibility, and arrangements for child maintenance  (to cover housing, education, health care, general expenses, etc) should be dealt with separately from the division of matrimonial property.

 

The cost of upkeep of the child should be considered (and reviewed each year or two) with both patents contributing in a fair and reasonable manner.

 

If a woman has a child with her husband and the couple get divorced, the ex-husband should not have to maintain his wife forever (or until she remarries).

[mogandave]

I would say single mother is the norm in Thailand.

No doubt in the crowd you run with.

[mogandave]

 
I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree. What if the father died instead? The woman would be in the same situation, but the father wouldn't be around to pay anything.
 
I think bringing a child into this world is a shared responsibility, and arrangements for child maintenance  (to cover housing, education, health care, general expenses, etc) should be dealt with separately from the division of matrimonial property.
 
The cost of upkeep of the child should be considered (and reviewed each year or two) with both patents contributing in a fair and reasonable manner.
 
If a woman has a child with her husband and the couple get divorced, the ex-husband should not have to maintain his wife forever (or until she remarries).

If the father died, would the mother not inherit?

[blackcab]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

If the father died, would the mother not inherit?

 

 

You would like to think so, but it depends where the assets are (Thailand or abroad), and whether the father had no will, a will in Thailand, a will abroad, or both.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 10:08 AM, mogandave said:

 

 

I gave an example to illustrate a point as well, yet you disregard it and (apparently) intentionally misrepresent what I have said.

I never said nor meant to imply all married couples should split all assets at least equally, that is just something you made up.

While I think the duration of a married can be considered, it is certainly not the be-all-end-all.

What if a rich guy takes a virgin bride, impregnates her and decided to move on three months into the wedding? She brought nothing, so she gets nothing, so she gets nothing, right?
 

 

If the said virgin is stupid enough to marry someone that would abandon her after 3 months without getting something out of it ....................

No way the guy can be anything but a lot older if he's rich, so don't tell me she entered into it out of lurve.

We are constantly being told that young Thai women don't love the old fat farang that "bought" her because she was poor, so SHE don't love HIM, and the marriage is a fraud from the start.

If the only thing she brings to the marriage is her vagina, it behooves her to make sure it's paid for before he can run.

 

BTW, if any guy leaves the woman he marries, IMO it isn't just HIM. Perhaps SHE was just in it for the con. If so, should he stick around, just throwing more money into a bad situation? Takes 2 to tango.

[mogandave]

If the said virgin is stupid enough to marry someone that would abandon her after 3 months without getting something out of it ....................
No way the guy can be anything but a lot older if he's rich, so don't tell me she entered into it out of lurve.
We are constantly being told that young Thai women don't love the old fat farang that "bought" her because she was poor, so SHE don't love HIM, and the marriage is a fraud from the start.
If the only thing she brings to the marriage is her vagina, it behooves her to make sure it's paid for before he can run.
 
BTW, if any guy leaves the woman he marries, IMO it isn't just HIM. Perhaps SHE was just in it for the con. If so, should he stick around, just throwing more money into a bad situation? Takes 2 to tango.

Dude, you need to let go oh all that hate, it’s eating you alive.

Just because you got fat and disgusting when you got old doesn’t mean all men do.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

 

Dude, you need to let go oh all that hate, it’s eating you alive.

Just because you got fat and disgusting when you got old doesn’t mean all men do.

 

I guess that you don't know as much as you think you know. 55555555555555

[mogandave]

I guess that you don't know as much as you think you know. 55555555555555

Does anyone?

[MuntyC0re]

i think any girl will take such contract as an offense

[oldwelshman]

11 hours ago, MuntyC0re said:

i think any girl will take such contract as an offense

Why?

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎11‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 7:27 PM, MuntyC0re said:

i think any girl will take such contract as an offense

It could be written to guarantee her financial security in the event that he dies, but gets little in the event a divorce is of her own making.

If a girl takes offence, it could only mean that she is looking at the relationship from a financial point of view.

Of course foolish men will agree to forgo the prenup because "she loooooves him forever".

[mogandave]

It could be written to guarantee her financial security in the event that he dies, but gets little in the event a divorce is of her own making.
If a girl takes offence, it could only mean that she is looking at the relationship from a financial point of view.
Of course foolish men will agree to forgo the prenup because "she loooooves him forever".

So some old <deleted> can shower love and money at a gal, marry her, spend a few years knocking the shine off her, and then he can run around on her and do whatever he want, and and the only recourse she has is to leave with nothing.

Seems fair, particularly if you happen to be some old <deleted>...

[blackcab]

On 08/11/2017 at 5:54 PM, mogandave said:

So some old <deleted> can shower love and money at a gal, marry her, spend a few years knocking the shine off her, and then he can run around on her and do whatever he want, and and the only recourse she has is to leave with nothing.

Seems fair, particularly if you happen to be some old <deleted>...

 

 

 

Not in Thailand. Prenups do not work like that here. When you get married, most assets gained after marriage become joint marital property and will be divided 50-50 by a Court upon divorce.

 

The law is very clear on this point. A prenup cannot alter this, because a contract, even when it is entered into willingly, cannot supersede statute law.

[mogandave]

 
Not in Thailand. Prenups do not work like that here. When you get married, most assets gained after marriage become joint marital property and will be divided 50-50 by a Court upon divorce.
 
The law is very clear on this point. A prenup cannot alter this, because a contract, even when it is entered into willingly, cannot supersede statute law.

And if nothing significant was gained? Guy could have a pot of money any home and walk, yes?

[theguyfromanotherforum]

I am completely against prenups and in civilized countries they are not worth the ink they are written on.

 

Marriage is a contract. The richer person has the power to decline that contract. If you decide to get married be prepared to pay the price if needed. End of. I always love to hear stories here from pensioners who claim their western wives ripped them off, but are buying houses and paying off teraak families on a continuous basis.

 

Thank God the state has a final word on this otherwise I'm sure many of you fine gentlemen would throw your wives on the street simply because they got old.

[blackcab]

54 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

And if nothing significant was gained? Guy could have a pot of money any home and walk, yes?

 

 

What was yours before marriage stays yours - as long as you can prove it.

 

With most things that's easy to do (condo title deeds have a purchase date on them, vehicles have a registration date, etc). For other things get a safe deposit box in your name only, and keep the matter to yourself.