# Married Couple division of bills



## Winnie (21 Feb 2006)

Hey,

Ive been married for 2 years now & myself + other half still keep very separate finances.  Joint account for all joint bills where we both t/f money into from our own current accounts. But apart from that everything completely separate (savings/loans etc)

Now I like it the way it is but a lot of my friends look at us strange when a bill comes for say a meal out & we each take out our wallets or one of us says 'can you pay for me & I'll pay you back'.  I suppose this does look a little scabby? 

No kids so i suppose that would make a difference.

Basically question is - how do other people do it.


----------



## CCOVICH (21 Feb 2006)

We have basically the same set up.  For meals etc. we pay by Laser (from the joint a/c).  Holidays etc. we pay by credit card and repay whoever paid when the bill arrives.

We're not married, but I don't see what difference it makes.


----------



## paddyodoors (21 Feb 2006)

Same again - except we transfer more cash than just for the monthly bills, so it builds up a cash reserve, this covers any one-off expenses - like car insurance, annual maintenance fees. Then any meals etc, which we both enjoy is also joint account territory. 

Any personal spending / savings comes from our own account. 

Very good system, we both pay our way fairly and never have had any arguements.   

although if I ever do pay for something we do together out of my own account it is as a treat to my wife - i'd never think of saying money is owed for it.......


----------



## Ann-Marie (21 Feb 2006)

im not married but have recently moved in with my partner. we basically leave my wages in the bank to cover the mortgage and bills and we split his wages 50/50. if i get a bonus i would give him half and same if he got a bonus or done a nixer the money is split 50/50. 

i got a couple of thousand of my job to help towards the deposit of the house and just put it in our savings from both of us


----------



## Audrey (21 Feb 2006)

I'm married and I'm probably one of those people who give you a funny look when you both take out your wallets!!  I only married late in life, and yet found it completely natural for us to pool everything together.  We don't look on money as his or mine .... we just spend it when necessary and leave it there when we don't need it.  As it happens I earn a lot more than himself at the moment.  If we looked at it strictly from a numbers aspect, he doesn't actually pay his way.  But we just look on it as a joint enterprise, and it pays its way and it works for us.  My salary goes straight into the bank monthly, and pays bills etc.  His cash comes in weekly and pays for shopping, petrol and cash spending (meal out etc).  If we go on holidays then I write the cheques.  All my friends think I'm mad!!  They think I should be keeping some secret stash somewhere! ("running away money" they call it!).  I suppose you can laugh at it (and I do), but on a more serious note I feel that keeping separate monies (or even secret stashes) insinuates a mistrust of the other, and that's not a great start in a marriage.  On the other hand, your way might be best, as my way certainly means that I'm spending a lot more than I used to (and he isn't)!!!  Whatever turns you on, I suppose.  Does anybody else out there have the same set up as me/us?


----------



## Cyrstal (21 Feb 2006)

We are married, and have a joint account, that we transfer money to each month, this covers mortgage, bills, car costs etc etc...

We have the rest for our selves then to do as we wish.  We get paid at different times of the month, himself at the end and myself in the middle.  When we go out, either together, or with friends, it's whoever is most flush(ie whoever has been paid most recently!!) will pay for meal/drinks etc...


----------



## ninsaga (21 Feb 2006)

If she has it ..she pays..if I have it I pay....never a dispute...I earn more...I pay more & perhaps all of the bills...... it does not bother me or mrs ninsaga ..... we both look as all money is belong to both of us.... that's the way its been probably since day 1. 

Alot more important things in life than a marrier couple squibbling over who pays for what. I don't see it any other way.

ninsaga


----------



## Sago (21 Feb 2006)

You're not on your own on this one at all - we have a similar system going - my other half pays the mortgage and I pay all the house bills, food bills etc. We sat down and worked to out and over the year they both average out to be the same - for going out nights, we take turns in paying for meals or if we're going out for drinks we have a "kitty" system going where both of us put 100.00 in before we go out and we take turns in being "kitty" on nights out.  If theres anything left over - we split the difference.  It works for us.
Our loans and savings are completely seperate to one anothers then.


----------



## gearoidmm (21 Feb 2006)

Not married yet but I haven't thought about money being hers or mine for a couple of years now.  If we need something we buy it and whoever has the cash handy pays.  Never an argument about it.  Haven't set up a joint account yet but are planning to in the next few months.  Share the bills pretty equally but neither of us are big spenders so I suppose that helps


----------



## Molly (21 Feb 2006)

not married but have a joint account to pay mortgage , bills etc.... 

We have a daughter and I buy her clothes, toys , ballet lessons ,fairy wings etc etc    so partner pays for nights out... he can be very alpha male about treating the little lady to a few drinks and a meal..  not that in complaining about it. it works out fair and square....


----------



## fobs (21 Feb 2006)

We are married and have a joint account and pool all our money together. This was always the case from once we got engaged. All our money is spent jointly and we don't take inot acconut what the other contributes. This was important when my partner was off work for a while through illness,I was on maternity leave etc...It was never an issue of one person funding the other as I feel marriage is a joint venture. Think it is more important when kids come along as how do people aportion the spend on kids? Whatever works for people but I do find it strange when married couples have completely seperate finances and have to "pay each other back" for things.


----------



## Winnie (21 Feb 2006)

Its not an issue of trust with us & neither is there ever any arguments over money...............although if we did just pool our money 100% I suspect there would be.........I wouldnt like to be subsidising my husbands fancy new car while I choose to drive around in an older car & im sure that he wouldnt appreciate my spending on clothes!

I guess its different strokes for different folks!

And yes sorry for title......i get the hint - should have called it something politically correct like 'Partners' rather than marrieds!


----------



## Kiddo (21 Feb 2006)

We both earn almost the same. We have a joint account where we transfer X each every month. This pays for mortgage, bills, food etc. We both use are own credit cards for shopping, stuff for the house etc then transfer whats due each month from the joint account.

For nights out we normally go dutch as more often than not we meet up with friends and there is ususally a round in operation..don't think the lads would be too happy keeping lil ol me in beer for the night 

Different strokes for different folks...We have different attitudes to money.I'm a spender and he's a saver so we'd have lots of rows if it was all in the one pot...because yes dear...I really did need another pair of shoes.

If one of us was out of work/ on maternity leave/working part time etc then it'll be all in the one pot.


----------



## BillK (21 Feb 2006)

We've been married for 37 years and have separate bank accounts.

I pay all the bills and paid the mortagage when we had one.

While we were overseas, for five years, I continued the standing order to pay the housekeeping money into my wife's account, as well, obviously, paying the household bills where we were. 
When I retired nine years ago I transferred a £20K lump sum into her accounts as she does not pay tax.

For weekends away I pay the tab but if we are away for a week or more we split the cost.

Works for us.


----------



## gel (21 Feb 2006)

We have been married 15 years and everything goes into (and out again from) the one account. I would earn more but we trust one another and feel that we wouldn't have it any other way. If you are in a partnership trust is important. If you don't trust your partner then you should question the whole relationship. We feel that if we were splitting the money as other posters have described then it would only add to the conflict.


----------



## annR (21 Feb 2006)

I'm not engaged or married  . ..we have all separate accounts etc I pay the mortgage and food and he pays me rent and pays the household bills.  But it's a temporary arrangement.  If I envisage us getting engaged and married, I think about us planning a future together  - I can't see how to do it unless our joint resources are all pooled together as belonging to both of us.

Savings is done surely with some sort of end goal in mind, how can it be completely separate from your spouse's savings?

I can see how it must be separate if 2 people have different spending habits but I would have trouble with that anyway.  Probably because of the above . ..I consider it my money


----------



## zag (21 Feb 2006)

We pay everything )credit card, groceries, gas, electricity, petrol, mortgage, etc . . ) out of a joint current account, but judging from the above we are in a minority.  What I earn goes into the account and what she earns goes into the account.  No effort is made to balance up/adjust for whoever earns more.  I would think it would be strange if we both maintained seperate accounts and our own little pots of money.  Any savings we make are either generally assigned to some capital spending, re-invested or knowingly (and quite happily) frittered away on a few weeks/months of excess spending.

To those who keep their own accounts - what will you do if/when your SSIAs mature and one of you ends up with 20K and the other with 5K or none at all ?  I would find that situation a bit weird.  We are just going to pool the money and spendre-invest it jointly.

z


----------



## CCOVICH (21 Feb 2006)

zag said:
			
		

> To those who keep their own accounts - what will you do if/when your SSIAs mature and one of you ends up with 20K and the other with 5K or none at all ? I would find that situation a bit weird. We are just going to pool the money and spendre-invest it jointly.



I don't have an SSIA.  My loss.  She has.  Good for her.  I neither want nor expect anything from her SSIA.  She says it's our money-but as far as I am concerned it's hers, and she has earned it (bar the 25% of course!).


----------



## extopia (21 Feb 2006)

Pooled finances all the way, from day 1. All earnings into joint account, all expenses out. All savings and investments in joint names. We both have equal and unlimited access to all accounts.

The way we see it, we're in this together. When we married, we had similar salaries and similar prospects. Kids intervened and we made the joint decision that career should take a back seat for one of us. This was good for the kids and good for our souls. And we never even considered that the resulting income disparity between us would ever be a problem. I would consider that our combined income now is greater than it would be if we'd both continued fulltime in our careers at the time, hobbled by "joint responsibility" for kids, domestic work etc.

Anyway, in the eyes of the law all assets are jointly owned anyway, right?


----------



## bond-007 (21 Feb 2006)

Not nessascarily. I don't own my wifes house for example. She pays the morgtage I don't.


----------



## JP1234 (21 Feb 2006)

Pooled for us also.  We did have separate accounts for a while but in the end it was just easier to have the one as we get paid at different times so it was becoming a bit of a hassle to keep up with who paid what from where. We are in the process of setting up a new account which will be just for bills but that will be joint and will have a fixed amount going in each week from the main account.  We earn vastly different amounts so it would be unreasonable to expect us to pay the same as each other, though I can understand it for people earning broadly the same salary.  I wouldn't go as far as halving meals out and so on. We have our own savings accounts but we put the same amount in each month. The only difference is my partner does get car allowance, expenses and overtime so that is their "own " money.


----------



## extopia (21 Feb 2006)

bond-007 said:
			
		

> Not nessascarily. I don't own my wifes house for example. She pays the morgtage I don't.



Are you sure about that?


----------



## zag (22 Feb 2006)

JP1234 - when I travelled for business and managed to generate any significant amount in per-diem allowances we would essentially regard this as treat money for a meal or trip for the two of us.  The only reason I was getting the money in the first place was because she had changed her schedule or re-arranged things or simply managed the kids for days at a time while I was off seeing the sights (nominally working) and eating out every night.  I thought it was only fair to use it in this way rather than to treat it as being mine.  I would probably regard occasional overtime in the same way and if it was regular overtime I would regard it as part of my salary package and so it would be treated the same way as the rest of the salary.

I can't understand at all the mindset of people who would split the cost of a meal with their spouse or partner.  Do they charge their partner the economic cost of giving them a lift to the resto too ?

z


----------



## bond-007 (22 Feb 2006)

Why would I own something that I don't pay for and especially since my name is not on the deeds.


----------



## extopia (22 Feb 2006)

I don't think a spouse's name has to be on the deeds to have a claim on the family home, or indeed any other property where married couples are concerned. But I could be wrong. I'm sure someone else here knows more.


----------



## JP1234 (22 Feb 2006)

Zag - yes I can see your point, I suppose if the amounts involved were massive we might see it differently but they are not huge amounts and to be fair, usually end up going on something " for the household" anyway.   In my old job I used to get an annual bonus which took care of most of the family holiday cost. The only time I can think of when his money went on himself was the time he went out and bought a flat screen TV but I wouldn't begrudge it. 

I don't understand the splitting of the cost for meals and so on either, especially to do it in the restaurant, I'd at least wait until we got home or would say "you pay next time".   I'd be interested to know how the OP views grocery shopping, is that split down the middle or based on what you eat, do you split your phone bill depending on how many calls you made etc (not having a go, just curious as I just cannot imagine having such separate finances - even in our early relationship we just never considered splitting meal bills)  Having a kid definitely makes the difference though, you simply don't have enough money to worry about who pays what


----------



## seánieboy (22 Feb 2006)

Hi,
    Im living with my girlfriend of 3 years and are enjoying ourselves no end i love her she loves me and we both have salaries.she earns much more than me and she has her own account and i have mine and there definitely is no plan to pool them together. We have discussed this at length over the past year and came to the conclusion that if we did pool our finances together (married or living together) that it could end up in resentment towards each other as Im of the belief that what she earns is hers and what i earn is mine (she also thinks the same just in case im answering this by myself).

We hope to get married some day and don't seem to see why this situation should change. Since shes moved into my house she hasn't had to pay any bills or anything else simply for the reason that i was paying them in the first place that and it isnt costing me anymore than if i lived there on my own and 2. shes able to save an awful lot more in her savings so much so that shes been able to buy a house by herself by getting a 100% mortgage and furnish the place without having got into debt by going finance on it. Now as i see it when i get married seeing that its in her name it will stay that way. She worked really hard for that house and was great for her confidence in many ways. 

Now the way i see it and i know im not married is that some people in here think its weird if things are done that way but hey things are cool. and just in case you didnt notice there so many people breaking up these days and claiming all kinds off each other and driving each other to all kinds of extremes because of expectations from our peers thats irish society plain and simple ,good oule fashioned keeping up with the jones and outdoing each other takes the most calmest people into all kinds of emotional and obsessive outbursts. 

One thing we will never fight about is money we go to the pub and who ever has the money pays. it could be me one week and her the next week , we never  split meals as its just really messy. i go to the bar then she goes no big deal. i give my regards to all couples out there 

                                                                     Seánieboy

Myself and my partner have a great life and have a child on the way and hes future is secured from the both of us as the 2 of us have put in equal amounts to make sure his/her life is a happy and secure household


----------



## extopia (22 Feb 2006)

JP1234 said:
			
		

> I'd at least wait until we got home or would say "you pay next time"...



I just can't imagine this scenario, getting out of the taxi (who pays for that ) and going into the house, one of us taking out the wallet and saying "here's the twenty for the meal" or whatever.

To me, it doesn't sound like married (or even cohabiting, or even, for that matter, just going out) life.

Maybe I'm completely out of touch.


----------



## extopia (22 Feb 2006)

seánieboy said:
			
		

> Since shes moved into my house she hasn't had to pay any bills.....shes able to save an awful lot more in her savings so much so that shes been able to buy a house by herself....



I wouldn't say she bought it by herself as she was living rent free in your house, which was possibly the only way she could afford it.

Don't get me wrong - it sounds like you guys have a great life, but don't you think your finances are more "joint" than you are letting on?


----------



## woods (22 Feb 2006)

From the day that we met (while still in school) what we had was to share. There were times when one had a job (summer or part time) and both lived at home with parents but any money we had was ours never mine or yours. It has worked for us. Anything else would seem very strange to me.


----------



## extopia (22 Feb 2006)

Caring is sharing, as they say!


----------



## seánieboy (22 Feb 2006)

hi extopia no i wouldnt agree that our finances are joint and never will. I have no problem with this and neither has she its just as 007 was saying about his wifes house that she pays the mortgage. I never want to have a claim on that house ever ever ever Id never forgive myself if i went down that rotten road and yes youre right that as a married couple you have an entitlement to the family home. Fair enough it wont happen in our case as now she has her own house and no way would i even contemplate wanting it for myself or half of it its just not on. I know of 3 married couples that have got married and 2 years down the line they have been taken to the cleaners by the husband or the wife as one of them had an awful lot more than the other person before they got married. The thing is theres a lot of people out there getting married for this reason.

theres loads of people just out for there pound of flesh and basic and simple thats not a road were going to go down.

yes youre right she moved into my house because 

1. we love each other
2. none of us had lived with anyone before and wanted to try it out
3. the 2 of us are very independant people and likeminded
4. it was financially better for her as she was paying rent and yes she would have been able to afford her own house even if she hadnt moved in with me 

and since im an independant person i wanted to carry on living the way id always carried on and that means paying my own bills

I did initially think that by doing this that it would cost me a fortune with the esb and telephone groceries etc but this isnt the case in fact its just about the same 

The whole point about living together for us is about being able to be ourselves without having to change too much our usual lifestyle from before and hey presto its worked for us a treat so far fingers crossed.

I dont want to change our living situation it would be a shame to have joint accounts as it would take away our independant way of living so differant strokes for differant folks i suppose thanks for replying extopia


----------



## JP1234 (22 Feb 2006)

extopia said:
			
		

> I just can't imagine this scenario, getting out of the taxi (who pays for that ) and going into the house, one of us taking out the wallet and saying "here's the twenty for the meal" or whatever.
> 
> To me, it doesn't sound like married (or even cohabiting, or even, for that matter, just going out) life.
> 
> Maybe I'm completely out of touch.



No me either, I was just using it as an example! Do people divide it by half or go through the itemised bill working out exactly how much each share came to right down to how much wine each had?


----------



## delgirl (22 Feb 2006)

Same situation as extopia, we're equal partners in our marriage and, even though I don't work outside the home, I have access to all finances and an equal say in purchases, other financial decisions or any other non-financial decisions which impact on the family.

I can't imagine it any other way and, frankly, wouldn't accept any other arrangement.

A friend of mine stays at home to look after her two young children and receives an 'allowance' from her husband who has to be 'asked' for extra funds if she needs to buy anything out of the ordinary.


----------



## Sherman (22 Feb 2006)

> Fair enough it wont happen in our case as now she has her own house and no way would i even contemplate wanting it for myself or half of it its just not on.


 
Seanie, I think the point people are trying to make here is that if you get divorced or whatever, it is usually the court that decides on the way in which the assets, if any, are split. Courts here don't recognise pre-nups or arrangements like them. As pointed out by extopia, you did contribute indirectly to your girlfriend buying her house, and a court would likely see it that way too.


----------



## Danmo (22 Feb 2006)

Andrewa said:
			
		

> Does anybody else out there have the same set up as me/us?


 Me!


----------



## Danmo (22 Feb 2006)

Andrewa said:
			
		

> Does anybody else out there have the same set up as me/us?


 
Me! When we started living together I was all for keeping it separate and it was ridiculous. He "owed" me for this and I "owed" him that and it just got to be so much hard work that it's easier to pool everything. We are married now and this is what we do. If he gets a bonus, we might make a payment off both credit cards or book a holiday or if I get one I might buy something for the house  etc. It's all the same.


----------



## Molly (22 Feb 2006)

> To those who keep their own accounts - what will you do if/when your SSIAs mature and one of you ends up with 20K and the other with 5K or none at all ?


 He has an SSIA and I dont, we regularly discuss what we will do with the  money when it matures, the discussion is never what he will do with his SSIA but what we will do with our SSIA. 
 Whats mine is mine, whats yours is mine ....


----------



## Winnie (22 Feb 2006)

I guess I can just never imagine not having my own separate finances.

We do have joint savings & all household expenses come from our joint account so its not completely separate.
But as regards his car loan - that is his, the car is his & i have nothing to do with it
My SSIA & his savings - We are planning on building a house in the near future so in reality it will be spent on joint stuff.  But if we werent planning that, then yes the SSIA would be mine to spend as I was the one to save it.

My husband & I both earn a similar basic wage, however he earns about €15k extra in overtime - why should I take 1/2 of that when he is the one who has had to put in the extra work?  I usually choose to take my overtime as days off instead & that is my choice.

We are starting to join our finances up a bit more than previously but we both agree that we will always want our separate money.

I just wonder what couples do when they have completely different spending habits & yet put all their money into one pot - does this not cause awful rows.

In the case of children - I think things will prob change a bit more when that happens.  But if one of us cut down on hours to look after them I imagine that we will just change the ratio of money going into joint account to take that into account.

But yes - if we are out we will split the bill.... as amazing as people find it.


----------



## Lorz (22 Feb 2006)

We're getting married in 3 months but have been living together for several years and so have a joint account.  We transfer an equal amount when required to cover mortgage, bills, presents for joint friends, meals out, etc.  We each pay our own car loan.  We're happy with this at the moment because we both earn a similar amount and everything is split 50:50.  The problem arises when we will start our family - soon!  I plan on working part time at that stage and so will be earning considerably less than hubby.  At that stage what do we do?  If we combine our money - he'll probably nag me about my spending on clothes, I'll probably nag him about following Munster around Europe!  I really don't know what we'll do?  Open to suggestions?  Sorry for hijacking!


----------



## Audrey (22 Feb 2006)

fobs said:
			
		

> We are married and have a joint account and pool all our money together. This was always the case from once we got engaged. All our money is spent jointly and we don't take inot acconut what the other contributes. This was important when my partner was off work for a while through illness,I was on maternity leave etc...It was never an issue of one person funding the other as I feel marriage is a joint venture. Think it is more important when kids come along as how do people aportion the spend on kids? Whatever works for people but I do find it strange when married couples have completely seperate finances and have to "pay each other back" for things.


 fobs, I completely agree with you.  That's exactly what I was trying to say in my post.  I find it strange when two people who have committed to each other are actually counting who-pays-what and keeping a little bit aside (secretly) from the other.  My partner was unenmployed for a while also, and it never occurred to me (or him) that he wasn't entitled to have nights out and enjoy himself.  I always made sure there was cash in the house (in a particular box) and he just went there and took it when he needed it.  I suppose horses for courses, but I couldn't work on the principle of "mine" and "his".


----------



## hjrdee (22 Feb 2006)

Winnie said:
			
		

> My husband & I both earn a similar basic wage, however he earns about €15k extra in overtime - why should I take 1/2 of that when he is the one who has had to put in the extra work?


 
While I would tend to agree, the other arguement would be that while he was out working overtime, you may be doing extra work around the house, like cleaning, laundry, kids homework, cooking, etc, which would normally be shared duties.

I would do a certain amount of overtime myself, but while I'm doing that my other half is at home doing the other tasks, which I avoid. As such, this increases her workload as well as the overtime increasing mine.

Just a thought!


----------



## Audrey (22 Feb 2006)

Danmo said:
			
		

> Me! When we started living together I was all for keeping it separate and it was ridiculous. He "owed" me for this and I "owed" him that and it just got to be so much hard work that it's easier to pool everything. We are married now and this is what we do. If he gets a bonus, we might make a payment off both credit cards or book a holiday or if I get one I might buy something for the house etc. It's all the same.


 Danmo, you've hit the nail on the head when you said "It's all the same".  That's the point.  You're a family when you're a couple ... surely it's one for all and all for one!


----------



## Audrey (22 Feb 2006)

Winnie said:
			
		

> I guess I can just never imagine not having my own separate finances.
> 
> We do have joint savings & all household expenses come from our joint account so its not completely separate.
> But as regards his car loan - that is his, the car is his & i have nothing to do with it
> ...


 With regard to having "completely different spending habits" I think this is probably where the difference arises between those of us who are saying "it's OUR money, not his or hers" and those of you who are saying "keep separate accounts, and split meals out etc".  The very nub of the argument (for me) is that I would never have been happy to marry my partner if our spending habits were completely different anyway!  We're of pretty much one mind when it comes to spending.  I wouldn't have been attracted to spending my life with someone who would expect to be able to over-spend drastically just on himself, without a thought for "us".  It works because we think of ourselves as "us" and not as people who are entitled to spend whatever we want just because we earned it, but without a thought for the family/union that we have created.


----------



## fobs (22 Feb 2006)

Me and my husband would have had completely different spending habits before we got together. I would spend a lot on clothes,shoes etc.. but would be careful not to spend beyond my means. My husband was of the "live for today" attitude. We did discuss our finances though and came to an arrangement where we both had to compromise our spending habits to form a unit. We pool all our finances and we have a rough household budget (trying to get this in better order  ) We always discuss any big spend with each other as these are joint decisions. We decide if we can afford a night out,holiday etc... and I think it is easier to do this with joint finances as we always know where we are. I have an SSIA but my husband doesn't but I regard it _as our _SSIA rather than mine. I think in marriage we make all sorts of compromises so adjusting people's spending habits just becomes one of them!


----------



## woods (22 Feb 2006)

Sherman said:
			
		

> Seanie, I think the point people are trying to make here is that if you get divorced or whatever, it is usually the court that decides on the way in which the assets, if any, are split. Courts here don't recognise pre-nups or arrangements like them. As pointed out by extopia, you did contribute indirectly to your girlfriend buying her house, and a court would likely see it that way too.


Am I correct in saying that the only reason the the courts here do not recognise Pre Nups is because no body has put one in front of them. I think that in the future that will change so anyone who feels that they need one should go ahead and get one because they may be recognised when the time comes.
Does anyone know of a pre nup being trown out by a court. Surely a contract is a contract.


----------



## DrMoriarty (22 Feb 2006)

I doubt this one would stand up...  

Mrs Moriarty's philosophy is very simple: 'You earn it, I burn it.'


----------



## Sherman (22 Feb 2006)

> Am I correct in saying that the only reason the the courts here do not recognise Pre Nups is because no body has put one in front of them.


 
I don't think so - I heard that plenty of people have presented a pre-nup in court. The courts sometimes _have regard_ to whatever arrangements were entered into in a pre-nup, but they don't have to, and jealously guard their prerogative to, as they see it, order proper provision for both parties.



> in the future that will change


 - yep, it probably will - the courts are starting to take more notice of what 'consenting adults' agreed to in a pre-nup, particularly if there are no dependent children involved.


----------



## Kiddo (26 Feb 2006)

Andrewa said:
			
		

> With regard to having "completely different spending habits" I think this is probably where the difference arises between those of us who are saying "it's OUR money, not his or hers" and those of you who are saying "keep separate accounts, and split meals out etc". The very nub of the argument (for me) is that I would never have been happy to marry my partner if our spending habits were completely different anyway! We're of pretty much one mind when it comes to spending. I wouldn't have been attracted to spending my life with someone who would expect to be able to over-spend drastically just on himself, without a thought for "us". It works because we think of ourselves as "us" and not as people who are entitled to spend whatever we want just because we earned it, but without a thought for the family/union that we have created.


 
I don't think that anyone who has replied saying they have seperate accounts is saying that they or their partner overspend without a thought for the other. We see ourselves as a team and think in terms of us rather than as individuals. 

The majority of our money is pooled. All the bills, groceries, and mortgage is covered and there is usually a balance building up. If we are saving for something then we up the monthly transfer until we have the money to buy it. The rest is our own to do as we see fit with. There is never any arguments about money between us. We don't have wildly different spending habits but would put different importance on different things. I like having my own independance and am happy in the knowledge that I can buy a pair of shoes for €500 if the mood takes me(not that it ever would) without justifying it to anyone and without affecting my husband in any way. 

For example I bought a new car last year. We discussed buying it between us but my thoughts would be why should "we" buy something so expensive that would be used by me most of the time. Hubby is happy with his 7 year old car and has no plans to change it anytime soon. So I pay for the car myself. Its still seen as ours any hubby is free to use it anytime he likes.

As for SSIA's...we are thinking of builidng an extention so the two accounts will be used for that. Otherwise we would probably reinvest it.



> All my friends think I'm mad!! They think I should be keeping some secret stash somewhere! ("running away money" they call it!). I suppose you can laugh at it (and I do), but on a more serious note I feel that keeping separate monies (or even secret stashes) insinuates a mistrust of the other, and that's not a great start in a marriage.


 
There is certainly no mistrust between us. All our finances (along with everything else) is an open book. I wouldn't be best pleased to find that he was stashing funds away somewhere without my knowledge and I would never dream of doing this either.

While we do have our "own" money neither or us would see the other stuck for money. If one of us was out of work or working part-time then our system would change but at the moment it works for us..if it ain't broke....


----------



## extopia (27 Feb 2006)

Didn't someone here recently find the "running away money" hidden on top of the kitchen cupboards?


----------



## woods (27 Feb 2006)

extopia said:
			
		

> Didn't someone here recently find the "running away money" hidden on top of the kitchen cupboards? As far as I remember he just spent it himself.


Sounds to me like he is someone that a person would need a "running away money" fund for. If I was living with him I would have one as well.


----------



## muffin1973 (27 Feb 2006)

Interesting thread - We are recently engaged and have been living together for over two years now.  When we bought our own place and moved into it, we opened a joint account for the mortgage that we both transfer the same amount into every month.  He pays for NTL, I pay for life assurance (which are basically the same amount).  We split the bills for ESB, Gas, shopping.  

We are both in our early 30s and so used to having our own money/accounts that it would be really odd to just pool everything because we're getting married.  I am better with money so I take care of the internet banking/bills etc.  I have savings whereas he has a debt.  I wouldn't really think of paying off his debt for him and he wouldn't want me to.  We don't tend to argue about money much, only when he tries throwing out his visa bills without reading them    Anyway, works for us.  Maybe if any kids come along things will change but at the mo, we're happy with the set up.


----------



## casiopea (28 Feb 2006)

Im married, we've a joint account and 2 separate current accounts.  Our salaries go into our separate accounts and at the beginning of every month we both put a joint sum in  our joint account (direct debit).  This covers rent, bills, grocery shopping, miscellanous.  The account doesnt have a credit card. We both have separate savings (me SSIA for example) that were started before we met.

For me the system works brilliantly.  We know exactly what is being spent on necessary bills and household bills and at the end of every month usually have a slush fund building up in the joint account.  Because the joint account doesnt have a credit card if you were out for dinner with us you would probably see us going, "Ill get this, you can get the next one or pay me back....".



> "it's OUR money, not his or hers" and those of you who are saying "keep separate accounts, and split meals out etc". The very nub of the argument (for me) is that I would never have been happy to marry my partner if our spending habits were completely different anyway! We're of pretty much one mind when it comes to spending.



So are we, that is why the above system works for us.  There is no mistrust and certainly no secret money.  I know how much he earns and he knows how much I earn. If he lost his job he can use my account and vice versa. We run our accounts like this because it helps both us control how much we are spending on household items and on social items.  We also sometimes socialize separately, me as I live abroad I like to fly home a lot this I pay for from my current account.  He is a mountaineer and often goes on guided trips which can work out expensive he pays for those from his current account.  We could put it all into the joint account and pay for these trips from the joint account but then our monthly financial incoming and outgoing health wouldnt be as clear to us as it currently is.  



			
				Andrewa said:
			
		

> I find it strange when two people who have committed to each other are actually counting who-pays-what .....



Why is it strange to understand and control what you are spending?  Frequently people post on this website with their finances out of control and the first piece of advice they receive from the regulars is to set up a budget and monitor how much they are spending.  Just to be clear, after a night out we wouldnt be bickering going "you owe me this, I paid for the taxi etc...." but we do try to "pay the other back" simply to control our finances. At the end of the day my money is his money and vice versa but its in our interest to know what we are spending on what.



			
				Andrewa said:
			
		

> ....and keeping a little bit aside (secretly) from the other.



OK, this is strange, just because people do hold separate accounts as well as joint accounts doesnt mean there are secret stashes. That would be strange for me too. Are you sure you are not just assuming this?  Our bank statements come to the same address, we file them in the same box with the joint account statements. No secrets.  



			
				Andrewa said:
			
		

> My partner was unenmployed for a while also, and it never occurred to me (or him) that he wasn't entitled to have nights out and enjoy himself.



Same here. Again, I think there are being a lot of assumptions being made here.  If he or I were unemployeed, we'd sit down, we'd go over our finances, the employed one will support the joint account to which both have access and we'd also establish where we can both cut back on if necessary.

Our system will change a bit, when we've kids. We'll increase the contribution to the joint account and there will be less socializing I wont be going to Ireland when I feel like it and he wont be gallavanting up mountains as much   our savings SSIA etc will be used for our house deposit, it wont matter if he has contributed a bit more than me or me him, its our joint savings (eventhough they are physically located in separate accounts).


----------



## extopia (28 Feb 2006)

Hey, if someone wants to blow €500 on shoes that's OK with me. We all need a little luxury now and then. But just because the money comes from "your" account doesn't mean it's not affecting your partner's financial position. The fact is, as a couple, you are also a single economic unit. When it comes to buying a house, or paying an existing mortgage, the €500 is still gone.

I think having seperate accounts and the culture of individual owership of money above and beyond immediate needs for bills mitigates against good financial planning for the future - especially if it discourages discussion of significant "individual" purchases such as the €500 shoes or a trek up the Himalayas.

Individual purchases still affect your joint position, your net worth as a couple. So they should still be jointly "approved" if your net worth as a couple is important to you. Why wait to have kids to make big changes to financial arrangements? If you've decided to have kids (and especially if you think one of you might cut down or stop working) it might be a good thing to plan ahead financially and place less emphasis on individual buying power.

Just my opinion. All other things being equal people should do what works for them, of course.


----------



## casiopea (28 Feb 2006)

extopia said:
			
		

> I think having seperate accounts and the culture of individual owership of money above and beyond immediate needs for bills mitigates against good financial planning for the future - especially if it discourages discussion of significant "individual" purchases such as the €500 shoes or a trek up the Himalayas.



It doesnt in anyway discourage discussion of spending.  To repeat again, there is no secrecy.  Aside from the cost of a trip up the himalayas there is also the time spent away from your partner so believe you me it will be discussed at great length  



			
				extopia said:
			
		

> Individual purchases still affect your joint position, your net worth as a couple.



Agreed, and that is what I was trying to say in the last line of my post, all the money is joint savings (SSIA, pensions,  current, joint account,  etc).  

Every couple is different, something that will work for us wont necessarily work for somebody else.  For us, it is very clear with this system how our money is being spent.  We can see on months when our household spending has really peaked compared to other months and we can investigate why, is it the heating bills, the phone bills, is it the internet usage....the point is its very clear very quickly.  We can see in our individual accounts that we have perhaps a thousand left over at the end of every month, we can discuss how we are going to save that, is it best left in a current account or is there some way we should be investing it.  We are both saving very hard right now (for a house) and for us this system is very clear.

The impression on this thread is that people who have a single account as well as a joint account are stashing money away, not discussing money,  secretly spending money, basically not working as a unit/couple and that is simply wrong.


----------



## microsquid (28 Feb 2006)

Sherman said:
			
		

> I don't think so - I heard that plenty of people have presented a pre-nup in court. The courts sometimes _have regard_ to whatever arrangements were entered into in a pre-nup, but they don't have to, and jealously guard their prerogative to, as they see it, order proper provision for both parties.
> 
> - yep, it probably will - the courts are starting to take more notice of what 'consenting adults' agreed to in a pre-nup, particularly if there are no dependent children involved.



IIRC don't all previously signed legal documents eg. wills etc. become null and void on signing your marriage licence?
I would assume the same devastating legal effect would apply to pre-nups?
Just based on a comment on wills from my solicitor - anyone else want to shed more light?


----------



## bond-007 (28 Feb 2006)

Why would marriage destroy a pre-nup? I got one based on the fact we were getting married. Solicitor said it would be fine.


----------



## Kiddo (1 Mar 2006)

extopia said:
			
		

> Hey, if someone wants to blow €500 on shoes that's OK with me. We all need a little luxury now and then. But just because the money comes from "your" account doesn't mean it's not affecting your partner's financial position. The fact is, as a couple, you are also a single economic unit. When it comes to buying a house, or paying an existing mortgage, the €500 is still gone.
> 
> I think having seperate accounts and the culture of individual owership of money above and beyond immediate needs for bills mitigates against good financial planning for the future - especially if it discourages discussion of significant "individual" purchases such as the €500 shoes or a trek up the Himalayas.
> 
> ...


 
We have been planning for the future since we decided to buy a house & get engaged. We deliberatly didn't stretch ourselves when buying our house. Luckily we both earn decent salaries but one of the criteria when buying our house was could we survive on one salary? Our mortgage repayments are less that 20% of our net income. We have bought & fitted out our house and paid for our wedding in the last 2.5 years...without incurring any debt except our mortgage. We both have savings and we also always ensure we have a slush fund of one months mortgage in our joint account. 

We hope to start a family soon and the only change to our system will be for the duration of maternity leave everything will be dumped into the pot and we'll take a set amount for personal spending money each month. If one of us decides to go part time then we will do the same.

I prefer to have my "own" money to spend as I wish. My "own" money being whats left over *after *all our other outgoings are covered. Whether that be €100 or €1000 a month. Neither of us would dream of spending to the detriment of the other and as I've said before neither of us would see the other stuck for money. 

This system has worked for both my parents (married 35 years) and my in-laws (married 45 years)...and we are happy that it  works for us...after all if two accountants can't sort their own finances...


----------



## JAM (2 Mar 2006)

This thread really helped me. My husband and I have struggled for ages to sort out a budget. We know we should have far more left over at the end of the month than we do. I think one of the problems is that I get paid monthly, into my account, and he gets paid fortnightly into his account. Most of the bills then come out of his account and I use mine to try and save a bit, groceries, other expenditures as the month goes on.

We find it really hard to work out what we have coming in and out at different times of the month because of the fortnightly pay, you canot say x amount will go in on x date every month.

Having read this, we talked and decided that a joint account, with everything coming in and out might be the esaiest option.
Currently our savings account is joint, but not current accounts.

We both know we should be able to save a lot more than we are!


----------



## terrysgirl33 (2 Mar 2006)

Jam, I get paid every fortnight, and I found re-arrangeing the mortage to be paid every fortnight as well (on the day after I got paid) made life much easier for managing money.


----------



## Audrey (2 Mar 2006)

extopia said:
			
		

> Hey, if someone wants to blow €500 on shoes that's OK with me. We all need a little luxury now and then. But just because the money comes from "your" account doesn't mean it's not affecting your partner's financial position. The fact is, as a couple, you are also a single economic unit. When it comes to buying a house, or paying an existing mortgage, the €500 is still gone.
> 
> I think having seperate accounts and the culture of individual owership of money above and beyond immediate needs for bills mitigates against good financial planning for the future - especially if it discourages discussion of significant "individual" purchases such as the €500 shoes or a trek up the Himalayas.
> 
> ...


.  You've put it perfectly - individual spending still affects the joint position - that's all I was saying.


----------



## casiopea (2 Mar 2006)

Andrewa said:
			
		

> .  You've put it perfectly - individual spending still affects the joint position - that's all I was saying.



I agree too.

To be clear, individual accounts does not imply individual spending.  Individual accounts do not imply secret stashes, secret purchases, lack of discussion on spending, lack of respect/understanding of joint savings. All assumptions.


----------



## Audrey (2 Mar 2006)

casiopea said:
			
		

> I agree too.
> 
> To be clear, individual accounts does not imply individual spending. Individual accounts do not imply secret stashes, secret purchases, lack of discussion on spending, lack of respect/understanding of joint savings. All assumptions.


. 
Just to be absolutely clear, I never assumed that you (or any other poster) had a secret stash or made a secret purchase.  I didn't say you had.  (I do know of people who have done these things, but I was not assuming that you had).  I think you're assuming that I have made assumptions!  All I was trying to say (and my point was made better for me by Extopia) was that your "own" money really isn't your "own" money - it's a joint situation.  For me, therefore, I don't need to refer to any money as my "own", and I don't understand those who have that need.  Z'all!  Horses for courses.


----------



## Audrey (2 Mar 2006)

casiopea said:
			
		

> I agree too.
> 
> To be clear, individual accounts does not imply individual spending. Individual accounts do not imply secret stashes, secret purchases, lack of discussion on spending, lack of respect/understanding of joint savings. All assumptions.


. 
Just to be absolutely clear, I never assumed that you (or any other poster) had a secret stash or made a secret purchase.  I didn't say you had.  (I do know of people who have done these things, but I was not assuming that you had).  I think you're assuming that I have made assumptions!  All I was trying to say (and my point was made better for me by Extopia) was that your "own" money really isn't your "own" money - it's a joint situation.  For me, therefore, I don't need to refer to any money as my "own", and I don't understand those who have that need.  Z'all!  Horses for courses.


----------



## casiopea (2 Mar 2006)

Andrewa said:
			
		

> .
> Just to be absolutely clear, I never assumed that you (or any other poster) had a secret stash or made a secret purchase.  I didn't say you had.  (I do know of people who have done these things, but I was not assuming that you had).



No worries Andrewa, I was just being pedantic because all of those statements (secret stashes, secret purchases, lack of discussion on spending, running away money) have been used in this thread on the discussion of why individuals might continue to hold an account.   



			
				Andrewa said:
			
		

> that your "own" money really isn't your "own" money - it's a joint situation.



I agree, as I said above, and I think just because the money isnt physically located in the same place, ie joint account, doesnt change that.



			
				Andrewa said:
			
		

> For me, therefore, I don't need to refer to any money as my "own", and I don't understand those who have that need.



Im trying to draw the distinction here, that those of who do hold individual accounts dont necessarily refer to that money as our "own" money.  Its not the same thing.


----------



## hotlips (3 Mar 2006)

I am in the same situation as Andrewa and Extopia. We have been married for just over 10 years. We see ourselves as one economic unit so don't have a need for separate accounts. It's just so easy to manage. We never have to say "I paid for that" or "You owe me x amount". I just can't imagine doing that. Having said that, we have very similar attitudes to money so we are never surprised or shocked by the other's spending.


----------



## Vanilla (3 Mar 2006)

Funny thread. Mr.V and I pool everything. Can't imagine doing anything else. All assets are joint, even our cars, although one is more his and one is more mine, if you know what I mean! Only thing that ever annoys me is his absolute failure to ever have any cash, which means my supply is always being 'nicked' by him. 

By the way, wills can be made expressly in contemplation of marriage, in which case the actual marriage will not make them void. Obviously pre-nups are also made in contemplation of marriage and so therefore are not voided by the marriage.


----------



## Observer (6 Mar 2006)

The 1st Mrs Observer and I completely pooled everything - joint current, savings, mortgage, loan, credit card accounts.  We shared the tasks of account management too - I looked after the lodgements and she took care of the withdrawals.  No, no I jest.... But, seriously, incompatibilities in attitudes to money (and the resentments that resulted) contributed in no small way to the break-up.  Suffice to say, fault on both sides...... 
My current partner and I also pool everything and it works smoothly because we have almost identical attitudes to money (and possibly cos we're older and wiser!)


----------



## DC27 (6 Mar 2006)

Pooling all money gives both partners an overall view of the finances of the house. Keeping everything separate can lead to inefficiencies, not only in terms of additional fees, which are small in the greater scheme, but some money is invested or borrowed more effectively by one or other of the partners at any given time. Pooling should enable all investment / borrowing to be the most effective. You see the bigger picture which allows for better financial planning. What do people have to hide in a committed relationship?

Pooling also keeps both partners spending habits in reasonable check. Partners should agree an amount of unaccountable frivolous spending, e.g. he can spend 250 euro a month on computer games, lads nights out, etc, she can spend the same on manicures, ladies nights out, or whatever. If the relationship is mostly devoid of begrudging, then that system will work.

And if you are married, what about "sickness and in health, for richer or poorer", etc? The idea of "you owe me this or that because I bought some eggs and milk" is silly. It's as bad as the husband giving the housewife housekeeping money and keeping everything else in his wallet.

I am not married (yet), but have been in the same relationship for 14 years and almost from day 1 pooled all finances. I have typically earned twice as much as my partner and do not resent sharing everything, even when she spends 100 euro on her hair highlights and I only spend 11 euro for a back and sides.


----------



## boogaloo (8 Mar 2006)

I have to admit to being very surprised by the number of people who pool their money together!  My partner and I are together for 5 years and keep the majority of our spending seperate.  Rent, bills, groceries are taken out of joint account but that's it.  Whenever we buy a house together we will just change the rent amount to mortgage amount.  I suppose it may change if we had children.  I think I would always like to have some amount of money to call my own and to do whatever I want with, once all the bills are paid. 
We went out to dinner last night, and although he paid the bill, I gave him roughly half when we got home.  To us (and most of our friends I have to say), that is normal, and I would find it very strange not to do that.  As already mentioned, each to their own, so long as everyone is happy with their own set up surely that's the main thing?


----------



## delgirl (8 Mar 2006)

boogaloo said:
			
		

> I suppose it may change if we had children. I think I would always like to have some amount of money to call my own and to do whatever I want with.


I think this is the key - if you have children and if you both decide that it would be in the child's/children's best interest/s for one of you, usually the mother, to stay at home, then that's where the 'your money, my money' becomes interesting.

We've always had everything pooled from about a year after we met and therefore when I stopped working to look after our child, there was no difference to my access to money as it was always seen as 'ours'.

A friend of mine and her husband had this 'my money, your money' system going in the early years of their marriage and when they had children and decided that she would stay at home to look after them, it suddenly became 'his money and the 'allowance' he 'gives' her every month!

I couldn't live like that - I think it's demeaning and he makes her ask for every little thing she needs extra over and above her 'allowance'.

When they have a tiff over anything - he will say 'well, didn't I just buy you a car?'  

I don't think that will happen with everyone - this particular guy is a very high earner and likes the feeling of power this gives him over his wife - perhaps he's lacking in other areas!


----------



## fobs (8 Mar 2006)

> A friend of mine and her husband had this 'my money, your money' system going in the early years of their marriage and when they had children and decided that she would stay at home to look after them, it suddenly became 'his money and the 'allowance' he 'gives' her every month!


 
I cannot get over when married couples act like this. We always pooled our money so when my husband was off sick for a while or when I was on maternity it never entered our heads to have an allowance! This really bugs me when a wife minding the kids has to ask her husband for money. I couldn't live like this and can see how it might appeal to the earner but how would it appeal to those receiving the allowance?


----------



## boogaloo (8 Mar 2006)

Well, there is no way I could cope with getting an 'allowance' every week and having to grovel or explain myself if I went over budget on something - I'd crack up!!
I suppose I don't ever envisage a time where I wouldn't be working at least part time if I had children.  If I was without income for a few months, then my partner would of course support me as I did him when he was out of work a few years ago.  But once I was back earning it would go back to individual money.  Maybe I was single for too long and too independent!


----------



## casiopea (8 Mar 2006)

There are two separate issues here not to be confused. Women having to ask or being allocated an allowance and couples using separate accounts as well as (or instead of) joint.  

While my husband and I have separate accounts our set up is very similiar to DC27 who's talking about pooling.  For us, as I explained earlier, its very easy to see whats being spent this way.  Like DC27 we have an agreed amount of frivolous spending and an agreed amount of necessary saving.  In any month we have as a couple approximately 50 transactions (from rent, mortgage to grocery and frivolous spending). When we do our finances and sit down and go through our month we can see really easily what got spent on what.  Its easier to see it across 3 accounts (mine, his, joint) than having all the 50 coming out of one account (for me this makes the cost of the account worth it).  Especially as some transactions dont have a very clear name against them in the bank statement.  The 20 or so transactions from the joint account are always usually the same: Supermarket, car sharing, rent, heating, sometimes a weekend away if we were away as a couple. Then there are 15 approximately from our single accounts (for me maybe a trip to Dublin, lunches during the week, a present for him etc.). Immediately I know the 15 from my account were made by  me and the 15 from his by him.  All of them, in this method, are very identifiable for us and have helped us set  goals like "lets cut back on this and try and save 500chf extra this month".  Since we've employed this system Ive been much more in control of my finances than I ever was (including before I met him).   Eventhough, we both have separate accounts as well as our joint account we consider all money joint money, all savings joint savings and all resources (not only financial) pooled.  Neither ever has to ask the other for an allowance.  I think a lot of people who have single accounts in a marraige think this way.

Unfortunately I do know someone who has a household allowance similiar to Delgirls story, but they never had financial transparency in their relationship even before the children came, which is a different thing to owning separate accounts.


----------



## fobs (8 Mar 2006)

I wasn't implying that those with seperate accounts automatically have an allowance system in place but wonder at those who do this how it _works_ for the person receiving the allowance.


----------



## casiopea (8 Mar 2006)

I would wonder too, it just doesnt seem healthy and doesnt seem like a partnership.  It produces many problems not only financial. A child asks for an allowance not a spouse.


----------



## Button (8 Mar 2006)

Very intresting topic, we were thinking about just having one joint account as we are changing banks.

Myself and dh have seperate accounts and seperate savings ssias. Thats were the seperation ends really though. We just spend whatever money we have. I earn more than my hubbie at the moment. We have one child and whatever she needs is usually bought by whoever has money. I have no car loan at the moment so its mostly me who buys these things or big purchases as I have some spare cash. I suppose in the future it may change at the moment it works for us as we need seperate cars etc. We have a joint account where our mortgage comes out of and if there is enough left over we pay the bills if not one of looks after it who ever has the sponds at the time, same with nights out etc. We just tend to juggle our finances to afford whatever we need. We have been together for 12 years through some really tough times financially and have never fought over money. The only money I say is mine is what I find in hubbies pockets when doing the washing )


----------



## cnu (9 Mar 2006)

Same here,

One of the main discussions we had before we went serious with our relations was money.  We both were quiet clear that money should never be a point of contention.  We have a joint account too.  I feel lucky that my spouse thinks the way I do.  In return of saying thanx to her, I just keep my mouth shut for whatever she buys.  Luckily we both have a smilar wavelength so it works like a rocket...


----------



## BillK (9 Mar 2006)

We both had seperate accounts, into which our salaries were paid, before we married and didn't see the point of closing one. 
My salary, prior to retirement, was always higher than that of my wife so I paid all the bills and transfered into my wife's account an "allowance to cover food costs etc.
We still operate the same system and the various transfers noted in my earlier post on this topic mean that my wife has more liquid cash than I do.
Not a problem to either of us and a benefit, as far as I am concerned, is that if I fall of the twig tomorrow my wife has enough money of her own to keep her at the same standard of living for the next 3 years. (This is before my will goes to probate and before my pension is transfered to her.


----------



## extopia (9 Mar 2006)

BillK said:
			
		

> if I fall of the twig tomorrow my wife has enough money of her own to keep her at the same standard of living for the next 3 years. (This is before my will goes to probate and before my pension is transfered to her.



Why would your will have to go to probate? That's an unnecesary step surely? Wouldn't it be more efficient to have all your assets jointly held to simplify things in the event of the demise of either one of you?


----------



## BillK (10 Mar 2006)

The house, which is the big asset, is held jointly. Half of my existing pension will go to my wife on my death. So far as cash is concerned, my wife now has more than I do and both of us are happy with the current arrangements.


----------

