I didn't think I needed a pre-nup. Then my husband left me…and I realised he could take half my savings, says EVE SIMMONS

I person ne'er seen my mother angrier than erstwhile I announced, astatine nan property of 11, that my eventual extremity was to wed a rich | man.

Outraged that I hadn’t absorbed her feminist attitude, she responded plainly: ‘No, if you want to beryllium rich, you must make money for yourself. Never trust connected a man for cash.’

It is simply a motto I person endeavoured to unrecorded by. It meant I was proud to beryllium nan breadwinner passim my nine-year narration – until, that is, it ended abruptly, conscionable six months aft I walked down nan aisle astatine nan property of 31, erstwhile my betrothed announced he didn’t want to beryllium joined aft all.

Especially not to me.

While nan heartbreak near my encephalon tangled pinch despair, I assumed that astatine slightest nan particulars of our divorcement would beryllium elemental aft specified a short marriage. What was excavation was mine, and his, his. But I was wrong.

A bid of uncharacteristically callous emails from my hubby informed maine that he was, by law, entitled to half of everything I had. Savings, pension, investments and, astir upsetting, nan lump sum my mother had contributed towards our three-bedroom semi. My mother’s hard-earned savings were ‘a shared gift’ – and, therefore, I had nary ineligible correct to inquire for it back.

While we some contributed adjacent amounts of our ain cash, and nan aforesaid monthly owe payments, borrowing arsenic overmuch arsenic we did would ne'er person been imaginable without my salary. I called a friend of nan family, a divorcement lawyer astatine 1 of London’s apical firms. Surely he’d sewage this wrong? Her response: ‘He’s correct – you didn’t get a pre-nup.’

I was embarrassingly naive astir money passim our relationship. Like galore heterosexual couples, he assumed nan domiciled of finance and life admin manager.

I had ever worked agelong and painstaking hours, which made things specified arsenic calls to owe companies virtually intolerable during nan day. He had much spare clip — and said he didn’t mind our arrangement.

Unfortunately, this besides meant he could declare that my mother’s money had been ‘spent’ — and location was thing I could do to title it.

Like astir doe-eyed engaged couples, we were allergic to nan connection ‘pre-nup’, assuming they were only basal for those who a) were secretly readying an eventual exit aliases b) had shedloads of cash.

How silly I was. It’s not only nan financial losses (or rather, my mother’s) that sting. But perhaps, if an statement was already successful place, I’d person been spared nan traumatic dealings pinch a hubby I hardly recognised.

Negotiating money tin bring retired nan astir dreadful broadside of group you thought were decent. Expect to witnesser your erstwhile beloved metamorphose into an other-worldly alien who speaks to you arsenic if you’re his somewhat inept accountant. Prepare for phrases specified as: ‘Please tin you do nan following’ and ‘as I antecedently mentioned’.

All this coming from nan personification who, conscionable months ago, wiped smudged eyeliner from your look and hung your knickers connected nan washing line.

Now, 2 years later, I person go nan matrimony decease knell among my friends, raising an eyebrow astatine immoderate mention of matrimony and asking astir their savings portfolio. You tin ne'er cognize what personification is genuinely tin of, I show them. While it mightiness sound cynical, I couldn’t thief but consciousness alleviation erstwhile I publication nan immense mostly of Britons are successful support of pre-nuptial agreements.

According to a study by a London rule firm, 66 per cent of adults deliberation nan financial agreements are a unit for good.

Increasing numbers of couples are opting for them, too, pinch nan proportionality rising from conscionable 1.5 per cent of couples successful nan 1970s to 17 per cent today, according to nan astir caller poll.

But I don’t deliberation this fig is astir precocious capable (sorry, romantics). As expanding numbers of women out-earn their antheral partners, pinch 25 per cent of joined couples having a female breadwinner successful 2020, we request to protect ourselves.

I would stake that astir of these women person faced much hurdles than their antheral equivalents successful nan quest for an due salary.

Many person climbed to nan apical of their crippled while besides managing nan lion’s stock of housework and childcare. Yet nan sad reality is that, aft each nan battles for adjacent pay, a man could, rather possibly, return distant half your occurrence if you tried to divorcement him.

Divorce lawyers show maine high-earning female clients are shocked erstwhile they study this is simply a possibility. ‘Popular civilization tells america divorcement is astir men getting financially screwed,’ says David Brown, solicitor specialising successful divorcement astatine Leicestershire patient Wartnaby Hefford.

‘But that’s only because men, historically, person earned much money which is nary longer ever nan case. All excessively often clients wrongly presume that financial divided is based connected gender.’

Traditionally, divorcement agreements were slanted this measurement to protect women who often were not financially independent but had sole caring duties of nan children. This is sometimes still nan lawsuit but progressively little so. In nan modern world, specified a default seems outdated and wrong.

Thankfully, my hubby decided not to travel aft my savings and pension, perchance because nan ineligible fees to prosecute them would person made it not worthy nan hassle aliases possibly because he knew heavy down that it would beryllium wrong.

But, acknowledgment to a hefty student indebtedness I had yet to salary off, I was near pinch little rate than he did erstwhile it came to buying our individual properties. I stayed astatine my mother’s level for a twelvemonth to prevention for a deposit.

So would I person kept mum’s savings if I’d person asked for a pre-nup? The reply is probably, though it still wouldn’t beryllium guaranteed.

A pre-nup is fundamentally a statement aliases deed signed by some parties earlier they marry, stating specifications of a financial divided successful nan lawsuit of divorce.

The costs connected mean is anyplace from £1,000 to £5,000 successful solicitor’s fees. Yet ultimately, they aren’t legally binding successful nan UK. ‘A judge makes nan last determination astir who gets what during a divorce. If he aliases she doesn’t work together pinch nan position of nan pre-nup, they won’t uphold it,’ explains Brown.

This is because arsenic circumstances change, pinch children and changes successful employment, an aged pre-nup will nary longer beryllium considered adjacent aliases relevant.

‘A pre-nup should beryllium updated aft nan commencement of each kid and astir each 5 years to springiness it nan champion chance,’ Brown advises.

However, successful cases for illustration mine, wherever nan matrimony lasts little than 3 years and nary children are involved, a pre-nup is apt to beryllium upheld.

‘The tribunal will besides want to spot that nan statement was drawn up astatine slightest a fewer months earlier nan matrimony and that some parties had independent ineligible advice,’ says Brown.

There is simply a communal misconception that pre-nups are reserved for nan rich. In fact, anyone pinch much than £10,000 successful savings – astir double nan costs of obtaining nan archive – tin guidelines to benefit.

‘A fewer 1000 pounds connected a pre-nup is considerably little than £5,000 to £6,000 connected solicitor’s fees, which is what it would costs you to conflict for your money done nan tribunal system,’ Brown says. ‘It’s amended than nothing.’ Perhaps nan astir mind-blowing truth I learned astir divorcement during my uncoupling was that, moreover decades aft your divorcement is final, an ex tin still declare authorities to your financial assets – pre-nup aliases nary pre-nup.

The cardinal is to guarantee a ‘clean break afloat and last settlement’ aliases consent bid truthful nary early claims connected either broadside tin beryllium made.

In 1 high-profile case, a female was awarded half a cardinal pounds of her ex-husband’s riches 30 years aft they divorced. He spent their matrimony surviving successful a caravan pinch virtually nary expendable income but made respective cardinal from business deals a decade aft they split.

If it wasn’t for a family friend successful nan ineligible industry, I would ne'er person known astir a modular statement that prevents this called a consent order.

This is simply a elemental document, costing astir £1,000 to £2,000, that fundamentally erases each parties’ authorities to income they whitethorn get aft nan divorce.

If it weren’t for my consent order, my ex-husband could perchance beryllium entitled to 50 per cent of nan net from my upcoming book astir my divorce. And really ironic would that be.