Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
4049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 708

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1218013 20-Jan-2015 08:53
One person supports this post
Send private message

What exactly is the criteria for engaging this asset sharing? When I was flatting I always tried to avoid staying with the same flatmates for more than two years because I was unsure of how this whole thing works.

It seems to be fraught with complexities and I suspect most people don't fully understand what risk they're exposed to.

17920 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5167

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1218079 20-Jan-2015 10:20
3 people support this post
Send private message

alasta: What exactly is the criteria for engaging this asset sharing? When I was flatting I always tried to avoid staying with the same flatmates for more than two years because I was unsure of how this whole thing works.

It seems to be fraught with complexities and I suspect most people don't fully understand what risk they're exposed to.


I'm sorry what?!

You MOVED HOUSES to avoid getting some free advice on whether your "relationship" was defacto? You aren't serious surely? You understand the CAB is free, and have an 0800 ?


11825 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3831

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1218136 20-Jan-2015 11:12
Send private message

Aredwood:
Glassboy:
Aredwood: Being a sperm donor is something I might just consider. As I don't see myself ever getting into a long term relationship due to the stupid relationship property laws. Although I would have to do some research into the laws to do with child support. To make sure I wouldn't be be liable in that respect.
.


You'r showing your ignorance of the law, but then again it sounds like it's just a convenient excuse.  See

Property (Relationship) Act 1976, Part 6
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1976/0166/latest/DLM441361.html



Only there is a whole pile of case law that that link doesn't show you. There have been lots of cases where prenup agreements have been challenged in court. And the courts have overrulled them. Therefore you can't completely rely on them. Especially when you see things like this in the paper http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11369381 and http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11319832 When people who have far more money than what I could ever hope to have, still end up with relationship property problems.

The other big reason for what I originality said. Is that I own a house with 600K equity in it. Why should I have to gift 300K or more of that to someone just because they happened to be in a relationship with me for a few years? I bought that house when I was 22 years old. When everyone else my age was living it up, I had to put every spare dollar onto the mortgage. And im still struggling now. But I will be mortgage free approx when Im 40. So don't want to hand over 1/2 of what I have worked for. To someone who couldn't be bothered doing the hard work themselves.  Yes I can understand the intention of the law when kids are involved. But it applies in the same way even when there are no kids. Which is the silly part. And when there is 300K at stake - it is definitely worthwhile from an Ex partners point of view to try and challenge a prenup in court. So you would have to budget for lawyers fees to defend it.

Either way it is alot cheaper to not get into a relationship in the first place.


It's a curious law - as is the one that appears to prevent you from leaving your estate to the cats home when you die if you wish to.





140 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 67


Reply # 1218261 20-Jan-2015 13:10
One person supports this post
Send private message

Aredwood:
Glassboy:
Aredwood:
Glassboy:
Aredwood: Being a sperm donor is something I might just consider. As I don't see myself ever getting into a long term relationship due to the stupid relationship property laws. Although I would have to do some research into the laws to do with child support. To make sure I wouldn't be be liable in that respect.
.


You'r showing your ignorance of the law, but then again it sounds like it's just a convenient excuse.  See

Property (Relationship) Act 1976, Part 6
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1976/0166/latest/DLM441361.html



Only there is a whole pile of case law that that link doesn't show you. There have been lots of cases where prenup agreements have been challenged in court. And the courts have overrulled them. Therefore you can't completely rely on them. Especially when you see things like this in the paper http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11369381 and http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11319832 When people who have far more money than what I could ever hope to have, still end up with relationship property problems.

The other big reason for what I originality said. Is that I own a house with 600K equity in it. Why should I have to gift 300K or more of that to someone just because they happened to be in a relationship with me for a few years? I bought that house when I was 22 years old. When everyone else my age was living it up, I had to put every spare dollar onto the mortgage. And im still struggling now. But I will be mortgage free approx when Im 40. So don't want to hand over 1/2 of what I have worked for. To someone who couldn't be bothered doing the hard work themselves.  Yes I can understand the intention of the law when kids are involved. But it applies in the same way even when there are no kids. Which is the silly part. And when there is 300K at stake - it is definitely worthwhile from an Ex partners point of view to try and challenge a prenup in court. So you would have to budget for lawyers fees to defend it.

Either way it is alot cheaper to not get into a relationship in the first place.


OK so firstly unless you have privileged information about those cases - which you shouldn't be blabbing here - you have no idea if they are directly relevant.  Secondly if you don't trust your lawyer creating the appropriate documentation then there are other vehicles such as family trusts that allow you to protect property.  Thirdly if you meet the right person (and maybe even had kids) you'd find your outlook would change.

It's pretty cowardly blaming the law for one's misanthropy or misogyny.  


You will notice I said" Yes I can understand the intention of the law when kids are involved"

So to expand on that - Assume that I get into a relationship, Have 3 kids. Missus stops working so she can look after kids. Relationship ends after 5 years. She has missed out on years of earnings and career development due to being at home to look after the kids. And she is now a solo mum with 3 kids to support. So the 300K will allow her to support the kids and compensate for lost earnings / career. The law working as intended - This situation I have no problem with.

Now imagine same 5 year relationship but no kids. She has still been able to work / further her career as normal. At the end of the relationship, No kids to look after. So she is no worse off than before the relationship. Yet she is still entitled to 300K in this scenario. What "loss" has she suffered or what "wrong" is the law trying to put right when a "no kids" relationship ends?

As for family trusts - They can easily be busted open by the courts. If the house that is in the trust, is also lived in by the couple. And because alot of relationship property law is based on the outcome of previous court cases. (A judge makes a decision, Other judges have to make the same decision when the facts of the case are the same) This makes it very difficult and time consuming for a lawyer to both write up a perfect prenup. Also as new cases are heard by the courts, their outcomes add to current case law. Which in turn changes it. Meaning a good prenup contract 5 years ago might be full of holes today.

The newspaper links were simply 2 examples of people who Most likely have alot more money than me. So im guessing they got good legal advice on how to structure their affairs. Then 1 or more of: A situation occurred that neither them or their lawyer considered, the contract was unclear so the courts had to interpret it, The situation of the parties changed meaning the contract no longer reflected their actual situation, Case law changed meaning the contract no longer reflected the current law, 1 of the parties launched an opportunist case hoping to get lucky. Presumably if everything had been perfect from a legal point of view. There either these court cases would never have happened or the cases would have been about mundane matters like "you haven't paid" or "you didn't follow the contract" It was simply a way of saying that if people with better access to legal advice still run into problems. Then what hope have I got in making a prenup that will be impossible to challenge? (at least in the no kids situation)


Aredwood I have a simple solution for you - find a woman who as equal or more assets than you then let her worry about the pre-nup!  You'd be surprised how many woman there are out there who are single with assets like yours, but it truly sounds like you're not really looking for other reasons.  Myself and some of my female colleagues in the IT industry would definitely be writing a pre-nup if we hooked up with you.


659 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 144
Inactive user


  Reply # 1218341 20-Jan-2015 14:51
Send private message

networkn:
alasta: What exactly is the criteria for engaging this asset sharing? When I was flatting I always tried to avoid staying with the same flatmates for more than two years because I was unsure of how this whole thing works.

It seems to be fraught with complexities and I suspect most people don't fully understand what risk they're exposed to.


I'm sorry what?!

You MOVED HOUSES to avoid getting some free advice on whether your "relationship" was defacto? You aren't serious surely? You understand the CAB is free, and have an 0800 ?



Were you f***king your flatmate \ flatmates on a regular basis and doing relationship type things ?

4049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 708

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1218359 20-Jan-2015 15:17
Send private message

heylinb4nz:
networkn:
alasta: What exactly is the criteria for engaging this asset sharing? When I was flatting I always tried to avoid staying with the same flatmates for more than two years because I was unsure of how this whole thing works.

It seems to be fraught with complexities and I suspect most people don't fully understand what risk they're exposed to.


I'm sorry what?!

You MOVED HOUSES to avoid getting some free advice on whether your "relationship" was defacto? You aren't serious surely? You understand the CAB is free, and have an 0800 ?



Were you f***king your flatmate \ flatmates on a regular basis and doing relationship type things ?


I would love to see this question arise in court.

"Sorry, the GCSB's cameras in your bedroom weren't working but we trust you to give an honest account of the graphic detail of what may or may not have happened in said bedroom. Oh, and by the way, were you doing 'relationship type things', whatever that means"? 

834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

  Reply # 1218424 20-Jan-2015 16:52
Send private message

Horseychick: 

Aredwood I have a simple solution for you - find a woman who as equal or more assets than you then let her worry about the pre-nup!  You'd be surprised how many woman there are out there who are single with assets like yours, but it truly sounds like you're not really looking for other reasons.  Myself and some of my female colleagues in the IT industry would definitely be writing a pre-nup if we hooked up with you.



Yep I know a few.  But then again there's nothing to say that any woman has ever tried to change Aredwood's mind. :-)

834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

  Reply # 1218428 20-Jan-2015 16:56
Send private message

Mark:
Glassboy: 

You misread and obviously don't understand the basic genetic difference between males and females.


Well duhhh!!! of course I don't know the differences from a genetic perspective, I work in data storage not genetics!!

But I skimmed enough before I lost interest to read "Theoretically, it also could mean that lesbian couples could give birth to a baby girl without the need for a father. Women do not carry the genetic information required to make a boy.".


So you've never heard of X and Y chromosomes?

1357 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 344


  Reply # 1218683 20-Jan-2015 22:44
Send private message

Glassboy: 

So you've never heard of X and Y chromosomes?


Heard of yes .. know what it REALLY means ... no clue!  Just like I've no clue why you felt the need to say "You misread and obviously don't understand the basic genetic difference between males and females.", it did't seem to add anything at all to the conversation other than make you seem like a pedantic xxx :-)


Mad Scientist
18909 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2455

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1218685 20-Jan-2015 22:46
Send private message

actually the real answer is. everyone is made female. if ALL the male genes work then the female stuff is further converted to male stuff. if a single of those catalysts are not working you end up looking like a female, X or Y

1888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 316


  Reply # 1218700 20-Jan-2015 23:15
One person supports this post
Send private message

It would be great if the original topic were to continue now.  I'd hate for this interesting thread to be closed and a potential family disrupted because of all the off-topic banter.





Sometimes what you don't get is a blessing in disguise!

What does this tag do
962 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 197

Subscriber

  Reply # 1218735 21-Jan-2015 00:04
Send private message

I had considered it after hearing that there is a waiting list a few years ago. My better half isn't OK with it though which answers that.

4958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1318

Trusted
Microsoft

  Reply # 1218737 21-Jan-2015 00:18
Send private message

Aredwood:
Only there is a whole pile of case law that that link doesn't show you. There have been lots of cases where prenup agreements have been challenged in court. And the courts have overrulled them. Therefore you can't completely rely on them. Especially when you see things like this in the paper http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11369381 and http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11319832 When people who have far more money than what I could ever hope to have, still end up with relationship property problems.

.


bush lawyer here

neither of those cases read like prenup / relationship property issues to me

2nd one is hard to understand what is going on

1st one sounds like a contesting will situation in the high court.  I unfortunately have some experience of that with righting wrongs of someone that was taking advantage of when they lacked mental capacity, but all of this is incredibly off topic

Minimalist
5487 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 415

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1218756 21-Jan-2015 06:28
Send private message

Yep, back on topic as per the original post. Thanks.

784 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 103
Inactive user


  Reply # 1218846 21-Jan-2015 09:38
Send private message

Mark:
Geektastic:

How is spreading your genes a benefit?


Well in my case by reproducing I've increased the average IQ of the world!

;-)




So you say...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.