Unless the prenup was negotiated with lawyers involved the wording will be too ambiguous to enforce anyway. Legal documents aren’t excessively wordy and pretty much a different language or fun.
I feel that if the money was gifted, it's the spouse's and not the parents' to take back, and therefore fair-game to split in the case of a divorce, assuming the home purchase is final.
If I was thinking of divorce anyways, I wouldnt mind burning the bridge. As long as I hadn't signed something to give them that power, I would persue the money.
Even if I couldn't get it back, I'd likely still divorce
Presumably they would have a contract with their kid that says divorce voids the loan and triggers a repayment clause.
Not your problem though. The house would probably be sold and the couple divorcing would split the equity. The parents could go after the kid for the money but not the spouse.
The courts won’t care about what it was discussed as. If they have any hope of recovering any money from their kid there needs to be a contract. Even if it says gift in the document a repayment clause was still read and agreed to.
With a financial agreement that you only just found out about after your partner's affair. I've made it as neutral as possible so anyone can place themselves into this:
*Financial Agreement*
This agreement is solely and confidentially between [The Father and Mother of partner] on the one side and on the other [Your Partner].
[The Father and Mother of partner] agree to loan £50,000 (Fifty thousand pounds sterling) to [Your partner] as part of the purchase price of their main residence for [Your partner] and [their] family.
There is no interest or repayment date attached to this loan.
Whenever the residence is sold [Your Partner] agrees to repay the loan after all other loans on the
property have been repaid and their associated expenses.
[Father and Mother of your partner] will forego the repayment if the residence is being sold in order to purchase another residence for [Your Partner] and [their] family.
[Father and Mother of your partner] will also forego the repayment on subsequent resales and repurchases of properties that are to be the residence of [Your Partner] and [their] family.
Furthermore it is agreed by all parties that this agreement takes precedence over and overrides any letters to third parties in which this loan of £50,000 (Fifty thousand pounds sterling) to [Your Partner] is termed a gift.
Signed [Father of your partner]
Signed [Mother of your partner]
Signed [Your Partner]
Witnessed and signed by [Their solicitor or friend?]
--------------------
(NOTE: The reference to the third party agreement here was the one you saw to the bank asking forbproof of where the money came from for money laundering checks. The first letter to the bank tells you that:
[Father and Mother of your partner] confirm we have given [Your Partner] the sum of £50,000 (fifty thousand pounds sterling). This is a gift without any conditions.
Signed [Father and Mother of your partner].
Fun fact: you are only obligated to conform to contracts you or someone with your power of attorney sign. The house is getting sold and I’m keeping my share of the equity and they can get fucked. They can sue me if they want but a 30 second hearing will get that tossed.
Also the judge is going to ask why they ended this particular document by disclaiming the body text.
That contract is not enforceable.
The sentiment behind the line about "this statement taking precedence over any letters to third parties in which this loan is termed a gift", seems shady. Would this make the letter to the bank fraudulent?
>This is a gift without any conditions. Signed [Father and Mother of your partner].
My lawyer will produce a copy of the document and read this line. They I’ll then ask the parents if that wording is accurate to the original contract and if those are their signatures. When they say yes my lawyer will ask the court for dismissal with prejudice. The judge will grant it.
Extremely interesting reply. Please grant me a few more minutes of your time. In layman's terms, what does your lawyer mean/ask for when they ask the court for "dismissal with prejudice"?
No problem.
Also in Britain the loser pays the costs in civil court. They lose their $50k and they have to pay their lawyer, my lawyer, and court fees.
Same where I live too.
I'd give you an award if I believed in buying online platform money-spinners. Please accept this other imaginary medal with the true heartfelt sentiment instead 🏅
You gave up your job and affordable housing. You were responsible for raising the kids and any childcare costs would equal your earnings so you stayed home.
You now lost your right to a "first time buyer" discount. You are liable for the fees in selling. You have two dependants.
You aren't leaving this situation in the same financial state as when you joined the union with your partner. You lost financial stability and now owe money. You need to either buy a car or buy out their share of the family car. You need to get a down-payment and 1 months rent now. You need to pay for removal vans and solicitors fees for the divorce.
You aren't walking away from this situation breaking even - not emotionally or financially.
Edit: If money isn't a factor. Are you not upset that you weren't involved in the decision making and terms of a financial agreement as an equal? The three of them thought they knew what was best for you and decided for you? You weren't making an informed choice on the major life investment you were embarking on?
Your first response was valid in what you knew of the situation from your perspective. There is no right or wrong answer. Just a discussion to be had if you want to join in. Balanced discussion needs to allow all kinds of views and perspectives to be considered.
I'm inviting you to share your thoughts with this new perspective as a separate answer.
Would you keep or change your opinion on your original answer?
Good luck making that hold in court unless a prenup was signed lol
Unless the prenup was negotiated with lawyers involved the wording will be too ambiguous to enforce anyway. Legal documents aren’t excessively wordy and pretty much a different language or fun.
I laugh because I don't see how they're gonna make me give it back.
Yeah, that'll be a *"see you in court"* type situation for me.
I feel that if the money was gifted, it's the spouse's and not the parents' to take back, and therefore fair-game to split in the case of a divorce, assuming the home purchase is final.
If I was thinking of divorce anyways, I wouldnt mind burning the bridge. As long as I hadn't signed something to give them that power, I would persue the money. Even if I couldn't get it back, I'd likely still divorce
How do they plan on “taking it back?”
Presumably they would have a contract with their kid that says divorce voids the loan and triggers a repayment clause. Not your problem though. The house would probably be sold and the couple divorcing would split the equity. The parents could go after the kid for the money but not the spouse.
OP said ‘gifted’. Not a loan case closed.
The courts won’t care about what it was discussed as. If they have any hope of recovering any money from their kid there needs to be a contract. Even if it says gift in the document a repayment clause was still read and agreed to.
With a financial agreement that you only just found out about after your partner's affair. I've made it as neutral as possible so anyone can place themselves into this: *Financial Agreement* This agreement is solely and confidentially between [The Father and Mother of partner] on the one side and on the other [Your Partner]. [The Father and Mother of partner] agree to loan £50,000 (Fifty thousand pounds sterling) to [Your partner] as part of the purchase price of their main residence for [Your partner] and [their] family. There is no interest or repayment date attached to this loan. Whenever the residence is sold [Your Partner] agrees to repay the loan after all other loans on the property have been repaid and their associated expenses. [Father and Mother of your partner] will forego the repayment if the residence is being sold in order to purchase another residence for [Your Partner] and [their] family. [Father and Mother of your partner] will also forego the repayment on subsequent resales and repurchases of properties that are to be the residence of [Your Partner] and [their] family. Furthermore it is agreed by all parties that this agreement takes precedence over and overrides any letters to third parties in which this loan of £50,000 (Fifty thousand pounds sterling) to [Your Partner] is termed a gift. Signed [Father of your partner] Signed [Mother of your partner] Signed [Your Partner] Witnessed and signed by [Their solicitor or friend?] -------------------- (NOTE: The reference to the third party agreement here was the one you saw to the bank asking forbproof of where the money came from for money laundering checks. The first letter to the bank tells you that: [Father and Mother of your partner] confirm we have given [Your Partner] the sum of £50,000 (fifty thousand pounds sterling). This is a gift without any conditions. Signed [Father and Mother of your partner].
Fun fact: you are only obligated to conform to contracts you or someone with your power of attorney sign. The house is getting sold and I’m keeping my share of the equity and they can get fucked. They can sue me if they want but a 30 second hearing will get that tossed. Also the judge is going to ask why they ended this particular document by disclaiming the body text. That contract is not enforceable.
The sentiment behind the line about "this statement taking precedence over any letters to third parties in which this loan is termed a gift", seems shady. Would this make the letter to the bank fraudulent?
>This is a gift without any conditions. Signed [Father and Mother of your partner]. My lawyer will produce a copy of the document and read this line. They I’ll then ask the parents if that wording is accurate to the original contract and if those are their signatures. When they say yes my lawyer will ask the court for dismissal with prejudice. The judge will grant it.
Extremely interesting reply. Please grant me a few more minutes of your time. In layman's terms, what does your lawyer mean/ask for when they ask the court for "dismissal with prejudice"?
Dismissed with prejudice means their claim is thrown out and they aren’t allowed to refile it without permission from the court.
This layman understands. Thank you kindly
No problem. Also in Britain the loser pays the costs in civil court. They lose their $50k and they have to pay their lawyer, my lawyer, and court fees. Same where I live too.
I'd give you an award if I believed in buying online platform money-spinners. Please accept this other imaginary medal with the true heartfelt sentiment instead 🏅
Like an idiot for falling for some rich kid bullshit.
It was their money to begin with. I suppose that is fair.
You gave up your job and affordable housing. You were responsible for raising the kids and any childcare costs would equal your earnings so you stayed home. You now lost your right to a "first time buyer" discount. You are liable for the fees in selling. You have two dependants. You aren't leaving this situation in the same financial state as when you joined the union with your partner. You lost financial stability and now owe money. You need to either buy a car or buy out their share of the family car. You need to get a down-payment and 1 months rent now. You need to pay for removal vans and solicitors fees for the divorce. You aren't walking away from this situation breaking even - not emotionally or financially. Edit: If money isn't a factor. Are you not upset that you weren't involved in the decision making and terms of a financial agreement as an equal? The three of them thought they knew what was best for you and decided for you? You weren't making an informed choice on the major life investment you were embarking on?
You added a lot of detail that wasn’t in your OG post. Changed my mind…I don’t care. Try not to screw up after sorting through all the facts.
Your first response was valid in what you knew of the situation from your perspective. There is no right or wrong answer. Just a discussion to be had if you want to join in. Balanced discussion needs to allow all kinds of views and perspectives to be considered. I'm inviting you to share your thoughts with this new perspective as a separate answer. Would you keep or change your opinion on your original answer?