Prenup

[sojen 0]

hello VJ's

I just talked to my friend today and she is asking me about prenup and I don't know what to say. So I was thinking that I should share her situation here because I don't want to say something I am not sure and this site is so helpful.

She is a K1 and came here. Before their wedding her fiance let her signed a prenup, of course she felt betrayed because seems like her fiance does not trust her. So all the utility bills and savings accounts is all in his fiance's (now hubby) name. They even bought a house after they got married but still it was in her hubby's name. Now that her interview is coming for AOS and one if the requirements was proof of bonafide marriage. The only proof the she had were the health insurance, life insurance, and the tax return and pictures of course. She ask if is this enough proof. She also feared that if USCIS would find that they had a prenup, they will think that it was a sort of arranged marriage and she will be denied. Knowing that all the bills,account savings and the house (which they bought after the wedding) is in her husband's name.

Any opinion?

[Cino 5]

There is no way that USCIS can find out that they have had a prenup.

Only the couple & attorney's office know about it. The evidences seem to be good, no problem either.

Tell your friend to relax, they are good to go. Joint Life & Health insurances & especially Joint Tax Return are all considered as primary evidences for a bona fide marriage.

[sojen 0]

There is no way that USCIS can find out that they have had a prenup.

Only the couple & attorney's office know about it. The evidences seem to be good, no problem either.

Tell your friend to relax, they are good to go. Joint Life & Health insurances & especially Joint Tax Return are all considered as primary evidences for a bona fide marriage.

thanks Cino! that's very helpful, at least now she's not going to worry about it.

[wifey246 0]

We had a prenup. At my insistence. I even drafted the document. My USC husband has 10x more assets in his name. I didn't want him to think that I'm marrying him for his money and the GC. I didn't feel there was a need to disclose that in my AOS. When we filed our AOS, most of the bills were under his name because I didn't have a Social Security number yet. We opened one bank account to share, but he kept his savings in his old account.

Your friend shouldn't be offended that her husband wants to protect his hard earned assets. These days, it's just more practical to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

[sojen 0]

We had a prenup. At my insistence. I even drafted the document. My USC husband has 10x more assets in his name. I didn't want him to think that I'm marrying him for his money and the GC. I didn't feel there was a need to disclose that in my AOS. When we filed our AOS, most of the bills were under his name because I didn't have a Social Security number yet. We opened one bank account to share, but he kept his savings in his old account.

Your friend shouldn't be offended that her husband wants to protect his hard earned assets. These days, it's just more practical to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

thank you wifey246, I'll let her read this post, so that she can understand better. Maybe she was just a bit shock about the prenup , which is pretty normal if you are here in the US

[aaron2020 11,651]

We had a prenup. At my insistence. I even drafted the document. My USC husband has 10x more assets in his name. I didn't want him to think that I'm marrying him for his money and the GC. I didn't feel there was a need to disclose that in my AOS. When we filed our AOS, most of the bills were under his name because I didn't have a Social Security number yet. We opened one bank account to share, but he kept his savings in his old account.

Your friend shouldn't be offended that her husband wants to protect his hard earned assets. These days, it's just more practical to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

California has very specific requirements for a valid pre-nup. Both parties must be represented by separate lawyers. If one party does not have a lawyer, then that person must sign a separate document waiving the right to a lawyer. There is also a foreign language requirement if English is not the primary language for one of the party. Additionally, it must be signed at least 7 days before the wedding.

If all those requirements are not met, the court will not enforce the pre-nup.

[aaron2020 11,651]

When Steven Spielberg and actress Amy Irving divorced after four years, she argued that their prenup which was written on the back of a napkin was not enforceable because she was not represented by an attorney. The Judge agreed and she received a $100 million settlement. When Spielberg married Kate Kapshaw, both were represented by attorneys when they signed a prenup.

[sojen 0]

We had a prenup. At my insistence. I even drafted the document. My USC husband has 10x more assets in his name. I didn't want him to think that I'm marrying him for his money and the GC. I didn't feel there was a need to disclose that in my AOS. When we filed our AOS, most of the bills were under his name because I didn't have a Social Security number yet. We opened one bank account to share, but he kept his savings in his old account.

Your friend shouldn't be offended that her husband wants to protect his hard earned assets. These days, it's just more practical to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

California has very specific requirements for a valid pre-nup. Both parties must be represented by separate lawyers. If one party does not have a lawyer, then that person must sign a separate document waiving the right to a lawyer. There is also a foreign language requirement if English is not the primary language for one of the party. Additionally, it must be signed at least 7 days before the wedding.

If all those requirements are not met, the court will not enforce the pre-nup.

this is interesting. is this only in california or all states?

[aaron2020 11,651]

We had a prenup. At my insistence. I even drafted the document. My USC husband has 10x more assets in his name. I didn't want him to think that I'm marrying him for his money and the GC. I didn't feel there was a need to disclose that in my AOS. When we filed our AOS, most of the bills were under his name because I didn't have a Social Security number yet. We opened one bank account to share, but he kept his savings in his old account.

Your friend shouldn't be offended that her husband wants to protect his hard earned assets. These days, it's just more practical to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

California has very specific requirements for a valid pre-nup. Both parties must be represented by separate lawyers. If one party does not have a lawyer, then that person must sign a separate document waiving the right to a lawyer. There is also a foreign language requirement if English is not the primary language for one of the party. Additionally, it must be signed at least 7 days before the wedding.

If all those requirements are not met, the court will not enforce the pre-nup.

this is interesting. is this only in california or all states?

Each state has its own rule.

California changed its rule in response to Barry Bond (steroid boy - baseball player for the San Francisco Giants). He had his ex-wife sign a prenup in a hotel room with his lawyers present. His bride, Sunny, was a Norwegian who had problem with English and she was not represented by a lawyer. This was done a few days before the wedding. At the time, California had a different rule. The court held that the prenup was valid. The legislature changed the rule in response to this because it did not like a strong party (rich baseball player with access to lawyers) getting a one-sided agreement against a weak party (no lawyer and limited English skills). Other states have followed California, but not all.

If your friend is in a liberal state, I would bet that the prenup would be unenforceable against her if she was not represented by her own lawyer.

[sojen 0]

We had a prenup. At my insistence. I even drafted the document. My USC husband has 10x more assets in his name. I didn't want him to think that I'm marrying him for his money and the GC. I didn't feel there was a need to disclose that in my AOS. When we filed our AOS, most of the bills were under his name because I didn't have a Social Security number yet. We opened one bank account to share, but he kept his savings in his old account.

Your friend shouldn't be offended that her husband wants to protect his hard earned assets. These days, it's just more practical to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

California has very specific requirements for a valid pre-nup. Both parties must be represented by separate lawyers. If one party does not have a lawyer, then that person must sign a separate document waiving the right to a lawyer. There is also a foreign language requirement if English is not the primary language for one of the party. Additionally, it must be signed at least 7 days before the wedding.

If all those requirements are not met, the court will not enforce the pre-nup.

this is interesting. is this only in california or all states?

Each state has its own rule.

California changed its rule in response to Barry Bond (steroid boy - baseball player for the San Francisco Giants). He had his ex-wife sign a prenup in a hotel room with his lawyers present. His bride, Sunny, was a Norwegian who had problem with English and she was not represented by a lawyer. This was done a few days before the wedding. At the time, California had a different rule. The court held that the prenup was valid. The legislature changed the rule in response to this because it did not like a strong party (rich baseball player with access to lawyers) getting a one-sided agreement against a weak party (no lawyer and limited English skills). Other states have followed California, but not all.

If your friend is in a liberal state, I would bet that the prenup would be unenforceable against her if she was not represented by her own lawyer.

I see. thank you very much. I guess her worry is she only has life, health insurance and tax return and pictures as proof of bonafide marriage. No joint accounts, no joint utility bills and even the house. She is scared it might not be enough to substantiate that they married in good faith.

[Eric-Pris 1,607]

Aside from the legality aspect of a prenup, people should not be shocked when a man/woman who has worked hard to build a nice net worth asks the other to sign a prenup. It is only smart to protect the assets that you have worked hard for your whole life, in the event that things don't work out. In the US, 50% of couples get divorced, and probably higher when it involves people of different nations, cultures, languages, customs, etc. And this is from bona fide marriages, add the greencard scamartists out there and it seems dumb not to ask your partner to sign one if you have assets.

A reasonably intelligent person should be able to understand this.

[Eric-Pris 1,607]

If your friend is in a liberal state, I would bet that the prenup would be unenforceable against her if she was not represented by her own lawyer.

The OP's question was not about the legailty of the prenup, it was about sufficient evidence for AOS.

Why does it seem like some people are more interested in helping the OP circumvent the prenup than answer her actual question....

[aaron2020 11,651]

Aside from the legality aspect of a prenup, people should not be shocked when a man/woman who has worked hard to build a nice net worth asks the other to sign a prenup. It is only smart to protect the assets that you have worked hard for your whole life, in the event that things don't work out. In the US, 50% of couples get divorced, and probably higher when it involves people of different nations, cultures, languages, customs, etc. And this is from bona fide marriages, add the greencard scamartists out there and it seems dumb not to ask your partner to sign one if you have assets.

A reasonably intelligent person should be able to understand this.

If your friend is in a liberal state, I would bet that the prenup would be unenforceable against her if she was not represented by her own lawyer.

The OP's question was not about the legailty of the prenup, it was about sufficient evidence for AOS.

Why does it seem like some people are more interested in helping the OP circumvent the prenup than answer her actual question....

By everyone, you mean me because I am the only poster who mentioned the validity of the prenup. If you noticed, the OP exchanged posts with me on this digression. Cino had already answered the OP's question.

I take offense at your snide remark that "a reasonably intelligent person should be able to understand this." I think that every couple should have a prenup to protect themselves in case of divorce. However, it is inherently unfair when one spouse has more power than the other. In lots of K1 visa cases, the immigrating fiancee is a stranger here in the US without family and friends to provide support. English is probably not the person's first language. A prenup was probably not discussed before the person came to the US and was sprung on him/her at the last minute (certainly within the 90 days that the K1 is valid). The US citizen most likely had a lawyer draw up the prenup. The foreign fiancee is probably not represented by a lawyer. The foreign fiancee may be giving up significant rights to property accumulated together during the marriage. In some cultures, the pressure and shame of a woman (usually not a man) returning home not married is not an option since she will be viewed as tainted and not good marriage material. So let me know if you think "a reasonably intelligent person should be able to understand this" is unfair when a K1 visa holder comes to the US and is surprised with a prenup.

Edited May 29, 2009 by aaron2020

[Eric-Pris 1,607]

So let me know if you think "a reasonably intelligent person should be able to understand this" is unfair when a K1 visa holder comes to the US and is surprised with a prenup.

What kind of a statement is that, I'm not even sure what you are asking me. Ok, I'm letting you know that it's completely fair. We all have choices. If she chose to sign it, then that was her choice, nobody twisted her arm. If a woman is so hurt that her fiance doesn't trust her, she has the option to go home and find a more trusting man.

In MY opinion... if a person is so hurt by a prenup, it may be possible that they may have had alterior motives entering into the marriage, and are just angry seeing their big plans go up in smoke. Yes, a reasonable person should be able to grasp the concept. Again, we all have choices!

Edited May 29, 2009 by Eric-Pris

[aaron2020 11,651]

So let me know if you think "a reasonably intelligent person should be able to understand this" is unfair when a K1 visa holder comes to the US and is surprised with a prenup.

What kind of a statement is that, I'm not even sure what you are asking me. Ok, I'm letting you know that it's completely fair. We all have choices. If she chose to sign it, then that was her choice, nobody twisted her arm. If a woman is so hurt that her fiance doesn't trust her, she has the option to go home and find a more trusting man.

In MY opinion... if a person is so hurt by a prenup, it may be possible that they may have had alterior motives entering into the marriage, and are just angry seeing their big plans go up in smoke. Yes, a reasonable person should be able to grasp the concept. Again, we all have choices!

Some choices are coercive. This is not about hurt feelings. California law recognize prenups as valid agreements so long as is not coercive. A prenup executed under certain conditions will not be recognized by a California court.

Returning home to find a "more trusting man" is a crappy choice in some cases. In our culture, it's not a big deal to break an engagement. In some cultures, it is a source of great shame to a woman and her family. It could end up with the woman being ostracized. The alternative is to sign the prenup and avoid the shame even if the prenup is not fair. This is why it is coercive in some cases.

Hell, California would find a prenup that my girlfriend would ask me to sign on the day of our wedding to be coercive and ultimately invalid.

P.S. My girlfriend and I are both US citizens.

Edited May 29, 2009 by aaron2020