Here’s a podcast worth listening to…

I have “Google Alerts” that point me to anyplace on the web that happens to mention the key word phrase “divorce insurance” so I can keep up on what’s being said on the topic. Occasionally,  those alerts send me to some really interesting information that has nothing to do with our WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policies. 

Let me qualify that by saying that regarding this particular VoiceAmerica™ Talk Radio Network broadcast, I really shouldn’t say it has “nothing to do with” our product since the panelists in this discussion, the host Bill Faiferlick, moderator for the weekly broadcast “It’s Your Money: How to Prosper in Today’s Economy and Beyond” and author of It’s Your Money: Your CPA May Be Costing You Millions and his guests, Pat Felix, an estate and tax attorney, John Raspante, CPA and Director of Compliance and Risk Management and Education for Graf Repetti, and Ray Ellis, a retired Cleveland Browns football player and another VoiceAmerica™ show host, talk all around our product without ever mentioning it. Very likely because none was aware of it at the time this recording was made on October 26. 2010, but if we were ever to make an infomercial, I doubt we could do a much better job than these guys do in presenting a whole list of reasons why anyone – but especially a professional athlete – ought to buy a WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policy!

Here’s a link to the broadcast Divorce Insurance: Protecting Your Assets and Privacy from Life’s Unexpected Events. It’s an hour long but any 15 minutes will give a good idea of what I’m talking about. You can see the title is obviously what pointed me to the website and interestingly enough Mr. Faiferlick’s upcoming book shares the same name even though I’m sure he had never heard of us before this week.

My thanks to Bill and his guests for an informative discussion that anyone considering marriage with an interest in protecting their assets from the unexpected should listen to.

UK Supreme Court enforces prenups in key case but maintains “fairness” test

Yesterday the English Supreme Court upheld the enforceability of prenuptial agreements in what will be regarded as a landmark ruling for family law in the United Kingdom.

The closely-watched judgment, issued yesterday morning (October 20, 2010), is the first time that the UK’s top court has backed the use of a prenuptial agreement in a divorce case. The verdict saw the court back German heiress Katrin Radmacher in her dispute with ex-husband Nicolas Granatino, a former investment banker who now works as an academic researcher. The couple entered into a prenuptial agreement, which was drawn up in Germany in 1998, several months before the couple wed in London. The marriage ended in divorce in 2006.

French-born Granatino, who abandoned his highly-paid banking career for an academic position in 2003, challenged the validity of the prenuptial agreement, claiming he had no ideas of his wife’s fortune – which has been estimated at more than £100m – and that he had not been properly advised by a lawyer.

Granatino was originally awarded more than £5.5m in an earlier divorce settlement to help him to buy a house in London where the couple’s two children lived, but an Appeals Court last year slashed the payment, citing the prenup as justification.

The Appeals Court ruling said he should receive a lump sum of about 1 million pounds plus a 2.5 million pound loan for the house that will be paid back when the youngest of the couple’s two daughters reaches the age of 22.

The Supreme Court backed that decision, ruling that the couple freely entered into the agreement and that it should be upheld. Nicholas Phillips, the president of the Supreme Court, said the judges decided by an 8-1 margin to let stand the earlier Appeals Court ruling that the prenuptial agreement in this case was fair and should be applied.

The case marks a change in the way courts view such agreements in a country where the starting point for big money divorces has generally been a 50-50 split, or an equal distribution of assets. In the past, Judges in England and Wales had occasionally taken such agreements into account but, unlike in Scotland, they were never legally binding.  Separation agreements, the Scottish version of prenups, are already legally binding there.

Nicolas Grantino and Katrin Radmacher

Granatino declined to comment after the defeat but his former wife made an appearance before the cameras outside the court. Her attorney, Simon Bruce, said “This decision means prenups are binding as long as they are fair. This judgement is pro-marriage. Everybody hopes their marriage will last a lifetime. From today we are allowed to prepare for the possibility that it might not be the case.”

So what’s “fair”?

Samantha Hickman, an associate at UK legal firm Clarke Willmott, said standard practice is that prenups must be freely entered into and should be drawn up well in advance of a wedding, to ensure they have the best chance of being accepted in court, just as they are in the US.

“It takes time to value all assets, especially if they are scattered around the world.” Hickman said.  And the paperwork should be signed at least 21 days before the big day. If it’s signed just days before the wedding, it can look like one spouse was forced into the agreement, having been given little chance to check their legal position.

Each partner should seek independent legal advice before signing says Hickman. “The more thought and preparation, the better. If prenups are not freely entered into, it will be easier for one party to argue ‘undue pressure’ in court.”

Suzanne Kingston, head of the Family Law Department at Dawsons Solicitors in the UK, said “The Supreme Court had given the most clear sign to date that pre-nups will now be upheld in England as they are in the rest of Europe and the United States.”

But others cautioned that the impact may be more limited. It is expected that the judgment will be seen as falling short of a full vindication of the use of prenups as the Court concluded that there were “no factors which rendered it unfair to hold the husband to the agreement”.

Divorce lawyers also noted that the Supreme Court left Granatino with a settlement of £1m, which he would not have been entitled to under a strict enforcement of the prenuptial agreement.

The Supreme Court ruling comes after a series of court judgments that have given greater weight to prenuptial agreements in the UK,  without recognizing them as fully binding. The UK’s Law Commission is currently considering whether statutory legislation should be introduced to explicitly recognize prenuptial agreements, but its recommendation is not expected until 2012.

Prenup or Divorce Insurance. What’s the difference?

I’ve been asked many times what the difference is between a prenuptial agreement and a WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policy. First, let’s understand exactly what a prenuptial agreement is.

A prenuptial agreement, also known as a antenuptial agreement, or premarital agreement (commonly abbreviated as prenup or prenupt) is a legal contract entered into prior to marriage, a civil union or any other agreement prior to the main agreement by both of the people intending to marry or contract with each other. Such agreements have existed for thousands of years in some form or another, particularly in European and Far Eastern cultures, where royal families have always made provisions for protecting their wealth.

The content of a prenuptial agreement can vary widely, but commonly includes provisions for the division of property should the couple divorce and any rights to spousal support during or after the dissolution of marriage. They may also include terms for the forfeiture of assets as a result of divorce on the grounds of adultery, and further conditions of guardianship may be included as well.

Think of it as a business arrangement to help remove some of the emotion that’s naturally involved in the event the marriage dissolves. Marriage is not just an emotional and physical union — it’s also a financial union. A prenuptial agreement and the discussions that go with it can not only define what happens if the marriage ends, but may also help ensure the long term financial well-being of the marriage by disclosing, in advance, both parties’ current financial status. Some of which may not be obvious, like debt or tax liens.

Laws vary between both states and countries in both how to draft them and in whether they will enforce such agreements.

In some countries, including the Netherlands, the prenuptial agreement not only provides for the event of a divorce, but also to protect some property during the marriage, for instance in case of a bankruptcy.

Many countries, including Canada (Quebec), France, Italy, and Germany, have matrimonial regimes, in addition to or, in some cases, in lieu of prenuptial agreements. In these countries, a couple elects to own property under a separate property or shared property regime, either by meeting with a notary or by signing the agreement in front of the public officer that marries them. Some countries have signed on to the Hague Convention on Marital Regimes. These act much like prenups by allowing the parties to own property either separately or jointly.

Amy Irving's prenup was written on a napkin.

Historically, Family Law judges in the United States frowned upon prenuptial agreements and many times would not recognize them. Nowadays they are clearly recognized, although they may not always be enforceable. Without an ironclad agreement signed well in advance of the wedding, you could end up a lot lighter in the net worth department — like director Steven Spielberg.  His ex-wife, Amy Irving, got half of what he earned during their four-year marriage because their prenup was scribbled on a napkin and she didn’t have a lawyer.  Her take: $100 million.

Both parties need to be represented by separate lawyers to ensure that the agreement is enforceable. In some cases, the parties may retain a private judge to be present during the signing, to be sure that neither party has been coerced into the agreement, another key reason why some agreements are rendered null and void.

Prenuptial agreements are, at best, a partial solution to averting some of the risks of marital property disputes in times of divorce. They are not the final word, nor can they be counted on in every state and country to be followed to the letter by Family Law judges. For example, not everyone is rich enough that they can decide what state to marry and reside in. So if you live in one of the nine community property states here in the US — Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington or Wisconsin — the law says that any property accumulated during the marriage will be divided equally.

In all other “equitable distribution states,” without a valid prenup, assets are divvied up according to what the court deems fair. The operative word in that sentence being “deems”. The judge would normally take into consideration things such as the length of the marriage, whether there are children, and the couple’s age, health, job skills and other factors. But not every judge is as fair as we’d like and sometimes they’re downright unfair, depending on your point of view.

In other words, if you don’t want the final decision about how your assets will be divided to be made at the whim of some subjective Family Court judge, a prenuptial agreement can protect you in some cases. Without a prenup however, you’re letting your financial future be determined by a third party that may not rule in your favor.

Can a WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policy be incorporated into a prenuptial agreement?

Absolutely. If you’re already going to all the effort of crafting a valid premarital agreement, then why in the world wouldn’t you incorporate a clause to have a third party insurer pay some amount to offset expected (and unexpected) expenses including legal fees, setting up a second household or even some lump sum support payment? It’s done all the time.

However, WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policies are often looked at as a vehicle to use in lieu of a prenuptial agreement.

Not everyone needs or wants a complex premarital agreement. Sometimes, simply having a conversation about a prenuptial agreement can guarantee a break up. In those cases, it’s up to you to take control of your own future. If you’re truly concerned about your own or your children’s financial well-being then you can by a policy on your own in complete confidence. And you can buy a policy before or after your wedding day.

More importantly, most of us never even consider a premarital agreement of any kind because we truly believe that we’ll never get divorced. Life, however, has a way of interfering with even the best laid plans. Over time, some cracks can appear in the foundation of your marriage that you may never have envisioned ever occurring. Infidelity, drug and/or alcohol abuse, or domestic abuse are good examples of changes in your spouse’s character that no one ever wants to think about, yet they happen all the time. And they are quite often bright red warning flags of the impending failure of your marriage.

Finally, the key component to a prenuptial agreement is that it must be signed well in advance of the wedding day. What happens if you get married without one?

There are such things as “postnuptial agreements” (postnuptial agreements are similar to prenuptial agreements, except that they are entered into after a couple is married) but any Family Law attorney will tell you that postnups are a minuscule few in comparison. Again, both parties have to agree to sign.

WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm, in contrast, can be purchased by either party, at any time (well before or long after the wedding day), with or without consent of the other party. There is no attorney involved. There is no complex set of legal rules you need to follow for the policy to be valid.

In addition, a WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policy is very easy to understand. If you get divorced, you get paid. Simple as that.

You choose your coverage amount based on your need and your budget. And since there is no accrued or accumulated cash value to the policy before the divorce is finalized, there is no marital asset to divide.

So whether or not you’re thinking about a pre or post marital agreement, you should be thinking about a WedLock Divorce Insurance^sm policy.

Click on this link to get started.

Marrying for money, it turns out, actually works.

 

 Okay, I know…quite the provocative headline.

Staying married to get rich(er) works

And no, I don’t mean that you should go out and find some rich guy or gal and woo them to the altar. Rather, what I mean is that studies show that people who are married are, by and large, richer than those who are not.

I get a lot of questions from the media about the 77% figure I use to describe what the average person loses in net worth as a result of divorce. So I figured for my first official blog post (usually our marketing VP gets the honors) I’d expound on the source of that number and what it really means.

Do any real research and you’ll quickly come to the conclusion that the old sarcastic maxim of “If you get divorced, you give your spouse half” is actually wishful thinking, as proven by a study by an Ohio State University researcher back in 2006. And conversely, the study also showed that a person who marries – and stays married – accumulates nearly twice as much personal wealth as a person who is single or divorced.

“Getting married for a few years and then getting divorced is clearly not the path to financial independence,” said Jay Zagorsky in a Washington Post article, whose study divided married couples’ assets so they could be compared with singles.

Zagorsky, a research scientist at OSU’s Center for Human Resource Research, tracked the wealth and marital status of 9,055 people from 1985 to 2000. The study’s respondents had been participating in the ongoing National Longitudinal Survey, which has repeatedly interviewed them about various aspects of their lives since 1979 down to the most minute detail.

Zagorsky’s study, which was published in the January 2006 issue of the Journal of Sociology, defines wealth as the total value of a person’s assets, such as real estate, stocks and bank accounts, minus liabilities, such as mortgages. His study also showed that regardless of the individual’s economic standing during marriage, the proportionate loss was similar.

Combine that with the fact that, according to the US Census recent findings, 1 in 7 Americans already live below the poverty line and it’s no wonder that divorce is now one of the top contributing factors to bankruptcy.

The study is still continuing and the participants are now 45 to 53 years old, making them the youngest of the baby boomers.

At the time Zagorsky cautioned that results could be different for much older and much younger Americans, who have faced different attitudes about marriage, divorce and living together without marriage, but other studies have shown that in general, the results can be applied across all ages.

Zagorsky showed that single people slowly accumulated wealth during the study, going from a median of $1,500 at the start to $10,900 in the 15^th year. While married people accumulated wealth much faster, accumulating 93 percent more than single or divorced people over the life of the study.

A big reason married people accumulate more wealth than others is simple economies of scale – one household is cheaper to maintain than two, Zagorsky said.

In contrast, divorce reverses those benefits exponentially.

“Divorce looks like one of the fastest ways to destroy your wealth,” Zagorsky said.

People who divorced started losing net worth four years before their divorces were final, Zagorsky found. He thought that could be because they had separated before divorcing, forcing them to support two households. Chances are he’s right.

The study also found that men fared better than women after divorce, holding about 2 1/2 times the wealth. However, in dollars, that added up to a difference of only $5,124, hardly the difference between being rich or poor, but on the lower end of the economic scale, it could make the difference between being above or below the poverty line.

“While men come out slightly ahead, divorce destroys wealth dramatically for both sexes,” Zagorsky wrote in his study.

So what does that tell us? It’s not rocket science. The simple truth is that if you’re married and you stay married, you’ll be richer in the long run. And if you get divorced, chances are very high that you’ll lose a lot more than your shirt.

WedLock Divorce Insurance coverage on Inc.

WedLock Divorce Insurance coverage on Inc. http://www.inc.com/news/articles/2010/09/entrepreneur-says-i-do-to-divorce-insurance.html

Psychology Today says Divorce Insurance Has Finally Arrived

Psychology Today says Divorce Insurance Has Finally Arrived http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/contemplating-divorce/201009/divorce-insurance-has-finally-arrived

Marital Trouble? Consider Divorce Insurance! Www.wedlockdivorceinsurance.com

Marital Trouble? Consider Divorce Insurance! Www.wedlockdivorceinsurance.com

Divorce insurance. Protect yourself from financial devastation by divorce.

Divorce insurance. Protect yourself from financial devastation by divorce. For as little as $15.99 a month www.wedlockdivorceinsurance.com

www.wedlockdivorceinsurance.com The first company in the world to offer Divorce Insurance

www.wedlockdivorceinsurance.com The first company in the world to offer Divorce Insurance. We provide a financial safety net in the event your marriage fails and you become a statistic of divorce.

divorce is never a happy event but its good to know that you could get divorce insurance.

divorce is never a happy event but its good to know that you could get divorce insurance. learn more www.wedlockdivorceinsurance.com