As Olivia* was picking her wedding dress, she and her partner Leo were also discussing divorce.
Despite being in love and ready to commit, having a prenup, they both agreed, was simply the sensible thing to do when starting married life.
“You go into it with love and hope for the future,” Olivia says. “But also realism.”
They are not alone. Once the preserve of Hollywood celebs and the super-rich, prenuptial agreements are on the rise among “normal” people too, with legal and marriage experts saying numbers have increased dramatically in recent years; around one in five weddings in the UK now involves some form of legal agreement, according to several polls.
Olivia and Leo got engaged last year after meeting on a dating app. Olivia, in her early 40s, is a business founder and Leo, who is in his late 30s, now works for her company. He was the one to initially broach the subject of a prenup.
“I didn’t want to at first as it doesn’t feel very romantic,” says Olivia. “It kind of puts a dampener on things – you’re at this really happy stage of getting married and then you’re potentially talking about, what happens if we split?”
Both have children from previous marriages, both have been through divorce. They decided a prenup was the right thing to do. Now, just a few weeks after their honeymoon, they are happily reminiscing through their wedding day photos; the prenup filed away, no longer a talking point, but there should they ever need it.
Image: Experts say it is not just about protecting money, but about property and other assets, too
“It didn’t feel right that if something was to happen in the future, I could just have what she had built with her business,” says Leo. “I wanted to make the decision from my heart and do what’s right and to focus on building shared assets together.”
“Both of us had amicable divorces,” Olivia adds. “But we know what can happen. It’s reality, and I think life is more complex these days.”
Advertisement
The law on prenups in the UK
A prenuptial or premarital agreement is one made before a couple marries or enters into a civil partnership, setting out how they wish assets to be divided in the event of a split. They are not automatically enforceable in England and Wales, but following a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010, courts now take them into account as long as they have been made in good faith.
They have long been commonplace for celebrities: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie reportedly had one, as apparently did Britney Spears and Sam Asghari. Catherine Zeta Jones reportedly told Vanity Fair back in 2000, the year she married Michael Douglas, that she thinks prenups are “brilliant”. And over the past few years, they have filtered into the real world, too.
Co-op Legal Services says prenup sales in 2023 were up by 60% on 2022, as were cohabitation agreements – and that postnup agreements almost trebled (an increase of almost 185%) in the same period. It says 21% of married people in Britain, or one in five couples, now have some form of an agreement in place, tallying with research published by marriage advocate charity the Marriage Foundation in 2021.
The average value of the assets included in Co-op prenups sits between £500,000 and £600,000, it says. Family law firm OLS Solicitors also reports a big increase in requests – a rise of 60% between 2021 and 2023, with a further 26% increase in the first quarter of 2024 compared with the same period last year.
Experts put the rise down to a number of factors: women earning more; more people remarrying and going into partnerships with children; the internet increasing savviness and accessibility when it comes to the law. Millennials and younger generations are also generally getting married later in life than their parents, therefore accruing more assets individually ahead of the milestone.
Plus, these generations have grown up experiencing divorce between mums and dads or other people close to them, in a way that was far less common for their parents and grandparents.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
‘Break-up talk isn’t romantic – neither is death, but we make a will’
Despite the rising number of couples choosing this route, it seems few are comfortable talking about it publicly. The idea of a prenup being “unromantic” still prevails.
Olivia and Leo did not want to give their real names, saying they did not feel ready to share the details with the world. They arranged their prenup through Wenup, an online platform aiming to make couples’ deals more accessible and affordable, launched in the UK in 2023 in response to the increasing demand.
“Prenups are considered taboo, unromantic and are something very private to most people,” says Wenup co-founder James Brookner.
“This is changing for younger generations who have a more open, pragmatic and non-traditional view of marriage, but for many people, thinking about what will happen if they break up in the lead-up to a wedding is a difficult enough conversation to have in private, let alone public.”
Image: Couples who have children from previous relationships are among those seeking more security to protect their assets
Nicole*, who moved from the UK to New Zealand several years ago and married her husband, Will, after three years together in 2019, says they discussed getting a prenup – or contracting out agreement, as they are known there – before she moved in with him, six months into their relationship.
“[He] raised the idea because he had worked hard to buy his first house and wanted to ensure he retained his rights to ownership should our relationship break down,” Nicole says.
The 38-year-old admits she was “caught a bit off guard” when he first broached the subject, but due to the law in the country – the Property Relationships Act, which means any individually owned property is shared equally in the event of a break-up after three years of a couple living together, regardless of marriage – it felt like the right thing to do.
They reached an agreement they were both happy with and Will, 42, covered legal costs as they had to have independent advice. The couple now have a young daughter and are happily married – and for this, you have to balance romance and practicality, says Nicole.
“Talking about breaking up isn’t romantic – nor is talking about death, but we all have to write a will at some stage. I think the reluctance is often because one party is trying to protect assets from the other, with no ill intent usually, but I can see why the other party may feel a little despondent about the suggestion if they don’t understand the law.
“Personally, I have seen too many nasty break-ups that could have been a lot cleaner had the proper agreements been in place at the outset.”
What do prenups cover?
While couples in the UK might not be showing them off along with their engagement pics, attitudes are changing privately. A YouGov poll in 2023 found that 42% of British people consider prenups a good idea, compared with 13% who consider them a bad idea. A similar poll on prenups 10 years earlier found that 35% would sign a prenup if asked to, with 36% saying they would not.
Family law solicitor Tracey Moloney, who is known as The Legal Queen online – with more than a million followers across her TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube accounts – says social media has made legal advice more accessible.
Up to about five years ago she would probably get one prenuptial request a year, if that. Now, she averages about one a week, taking cohabitation agreements for unmarried couples into consideration as well. She says she would always advise couples to have one.
“I think any family lawyer is going to say that because we see so many divorces. We’re realists. I think people can forget that when you say ‘I do’, you are entering into a contractual relationship anyway… financial ties exist because your marriage has created a binding contract. If you’re going to go into a contract in any other scenario – buying a property, buying shares in a company – you’re going to take advice. I don’t think marriage should be seen any differently.”
Prenups can cover anything from money to property to assets – including future assets such as expected inheritance – whether they are worth millions or simply of sentimental value, she points out, citing a recent agreement drawn up to protect an antique writing desk. It was “really dear to that person, passed down from generation to generation”, but of no real monetary value.
Image: Prenups used to be associated with the rich and famous, but are becoming more mainstream
At the other end of the scale, she recalls one divorce after a long marriage which didn’t involve a prenup; the wife had inherited jewellery worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. “It was never intended to be sold but it had significant value and it was added to her side of the balance sheet. She kept the jewellery but as a result, the ex kept a lot more of his pension, which she was entitled to. If she’d had a prenup, it could have been ring-fenced.”
Michelle Elman, a TV life coach and author known as Queen Of Boundaries, says when it comes to prenups she encourages any conversations about finance early on in a relationship.
“It’s hard to say, black or white, whether prenups are good or bad as it depends on the couple,” she says. “Some people might think a prenup is going into a marriage with bad faith, but if you’re going into the marriage with more certainty and clarity because you have it, then that’s best for you.
“The unhealthy option is not going into a prenup because you’re scared to have the conversation. I think for any healthy marriage to survive, you need to have already spoken about money before you get married, whether it’s because of a prenup or not.”
From proposal to prenup
Harry Benson, research director for the Marriage Foundation, says he was surprised at the results of the charity’s survey findings. “I thought this was something we would only find among the very richest people,” he says.
The 20% having some form of agreement applied to those married since 2000, compared with just 1.5% who were married in the 1970s, 5% in the 1980s and 8% in the 1990s. The charity’s poll did find higher earners were more likely to have prenups; higher earning women in particular. In terms of education, the findings were the other way round.
Mr Benson says he personally finds the idea of “dividing up the spoils before you even get started” as “deeply” unromantic. “Divorce law, broadly speaking, protects people,” he says. “For the vast majority, there’s not an awful lot of point to getting them. And of course, there is the risk that you make the proposal, down on one knee, and then say, ‘please sign my prenup’. The response? ‘Get stuffed! Are you the type of person I want to marry?'”
However, he says the research found no link to divorce rates – that having a prenup did not make it more or less likely that a couple would go on to break up.
“It’s not for me, but it is for some people,” he says. “I can see why people do it and I can certainly see the benefits for some… I just personally find them a bit oxymoronic.”
But the idea of the prenup being unromantic is definitely changing. Wenup says making the process more equitable and open means they are seeing the shift firsthand, with customers who don’t necessarily fit the stereotype of rich wealth protectors.
“If you’re not sure you need one, you probably need one,” says the Legal Queen. “They’re a bit like insurance – you hope you never have to claim on it, but it’s there to protect you if you do.”
“That smell of maggots, rotting food and maggots, my house smells like that.”
For Louise, not her real name, home has become a hell she cannot escape.
“We just couldn’t move for flies, and then we noticed an increase in rats,” she says.
Louise lives near Bolton House Road in Wigan. At the end of a row of terraced houses sits a former scrapyard, which has been transformed into an industrial-scale illegal dump site.
The wagons started coming last winter, “20, maybe 30 times a day,” Louise remembers.
“Eighteen-tonne wagons. Full of all sorts; nappies, black bin rubbish, chemicals, plastic.”
Within a few weeks, she and her neighbours realised the waste was just being dumped, not sorted or managed. It piled up, higher and higher.
They contacted the council, the Environment Agency and the police – but Louise claims no one did anything to stop the lorries.
Her retired neighbour, Tom, says it felt like the authorities “didn’t want to know”.
Though he does remember someone from the council asking him if he could go and “have a look for them” and “report back” information about what sort of waste was being dumped.
Louise and Tom are both so worried about who could be behind this that they are only comfortable speaking anonymously.
The fire which lasted nine days
By July’s heatwave, the site had long been full. The wagons had stopped months earlier, so 25,000 tonnes of waste, several storeys high, sat festering in the sun.
Lorries and vehicles in the former scrapyard lay buried, unseen, beneath the shredded and rotting filth – and then the fire started.
For nine days, dozens of firefighters from across Greater Manchester fought to bring the fire under control.
Image: Pic: Wigan Council
Image: Pic: Wigan Today
The nearby primary school had to shut due to the acrid smoke.
The sheer amount of water needed by fire engines to tackle the blaze left residents without any – while many were forced to keep their windows and doors shut in the 30C-plus heat.
Some were left with chest infections, others were hospitalised.
“I think it’s awful to let people live with that toxic rubbish right next to our house after us all asking for help and nothing’s materialised,” Louise says.
The crime costing the economy billions
Sky News has been investigating how, across the country, waste crime is a growing scourge and a booming business being exploited by criminal gangs.
Being paid to remove rubbish only to dump it illegally without sorting it or paying tax is an easy way of making huge amounts of money, with poorly enforced legal repercussions and a huge cost to the environment.
It’s something the previous head of the Environment Agency called “the new narcotics”.
The residents of Bolton House Road are not the only victims of this toxic dump.
Last winter, Neil Hardwick rented out three diggers to an individual, unaware of the growing illegal dump site in Wigan.
By March of this year, he had not received several rental payments and had received a call from the Environment Agency warning him about what was happening at the site.
Image: Neil and Carla Hardwick
With his daughter Carla, he went to Bolton House Road in an attempt to retrieve the machinery, worth approximately £300,000 in total.
At the site, Carla says a group of men slapped her, as well as spat at her. The men allegedly told her father: “We want you to give us £100,000, and we’ll allow you to take your diggers back, or we can cut your throat.”
Carla and Neil say an officer from Greater Manchester Police dismissed their report, and claimed their machinery was not stolen.
That officer also threatened to arrest the pair if they did not leave the area, they say.
“I just wanted us to get those machines back. But the fact that a man can spit in a woman’s face and get away with it, and the police are not interested, well, it is maddening,” Carla said.
The Hardwicks returned to the site 10 days later with officers from the National Crime Agency but found their machines smashed up and destroyed.
Mr Hardwick said the ordeal was “absolutely soul-destroying”.
“It’s caused us so much grief, damage to business, just absolutely brought us to our knees,” he said.
Image: A vehicle used to transport waste to the illegal dump
Greater Manchester Police told Sky News there is an ongoing complaint relating to the incident involving Neil and Carla Hardwick at Bolton House Road, and “this process will take time”.
“As part of this complaint, our Professional Standards Directorate are assessing all elements of the investigation including all crimes and reviewing bodyworn footage,” a spokesperson said.
The £4.5m bill
Finding out how the illegal dump in Wigan happened, and who’s responsible, is hugely challenging.
The landowner has not responded to Sky, nor have the companies which allegedly own the lorries seen by residents transporting the waste.
They appear to be either refuse or haulage companies that boast of their environmentally friendly credentials.
Image: The firms seen moving waste to the illegal dump did not reply to Sky News
One company’s website claims it diverts most of its waste away from landfill, and advertises its “innovative approach” to waste management.
“We’re passionate about the environment,” the website says.
Josh Simons, the local Labour MP, has been outraged by the case.
Speaking before his promotion to the Cabinet Office, he said it is “buck-passing” between Wigan Council, the police, and the Environment Agency.
Mr Simons says he was told at the start of the year that there was a criminal investigation, “and therefore no action can be taken to prevent people from dumping more on the site or intervening”.
“That just doesn’t seem right to me,” he says.
He also says information and financial support from the Environment Agency to Wigan Council has been poor.
“The number [the council] have come up with is about £4.5m to clear the waste.
“Anybody who knows local authority budgets at the moment knows they don’t have nearly five million pounds stashed behind the sofa. So what’s supposed to happen?”
The land itself is not worth £4.5m – and Mr Simons thinks this makes working-class areas uniquely vulnerable to this kind of crime.
Image: The funding and powers of the Environment Agency need to change, says Josh Simons MP
Paul Barton, director for environment at Wigan Council, said: “Our top priority is to ensure those residents feel heard and safe while the Environment Agency carries out their investigation with our full cooperation.
“We want the site to be cleared as a matter of urgency and are continuing to work with the Environment Agency to survey and sample the waste so polluters/landowners – who are the responsible parties – can progress this as soon as possible.”
Paul Clements, director of operations at the Environment Agency, said: “We are prioritising local people, businesses and the nearby school as we work… to deal with this illegal waste site as quickly as possible.
“Our staff continue to visit the site and at the forefront of our minds is the impact the illegal waste is having on the local community.
“We are continuing to progress our criminal investigation as a priority. This includes actively pursuing many lines of enquiry, interviewing under caution and using the enforcement tools available to us.”
Additional reporting by Adam Parker, OSINT editor, and Niamh Lynch, planning producer
The Environment Agency (EA), police and other agencies are failing to stop fly-tipping by organised crime groups, a cross-party group of peers has found.
In a damning letter to the government, members of the House of Lords’ Environment and Climate Change Committee called for an independent review of waste crime, with the current approach “inadequate”.
Their report described the EA as “slow to respond to even the most flagrant and serious illegality” – and said its taskforce on waste crime appears “ineffective”.
Police are accused of showing a “lack of interest” in the crime, while penalties for criminals do not match their profits and are “insufficient to deter future offending”.
Sky News has been investigating the boom in waste crime – a trade so lucrative it has been named the “new narcotics”.
Our most recent investigation found that for months the Environment Agency failed to prevent 20 lorries a day dumping industrial levels of waste at the end of a residential street in Wigan.
Over the summer, the 25,000 tonnes of rubbish burnt for nine days – making life hell for residents.
In July, we tracked down a group of suspected organised fly-tippers who waved wads of cash on TikTok after appearing to dump waste in the countryside and in farmers’ fields.
The Lords’ committee has called for the EA’s Joint Unit for Waste Crime to do more to encourage collaboration between various authorities, and for the Department for Environment, Rural and Food Affairs to develop and publish targets for tackling this issue.
Peers have also demanded an end to what they call the “merry-go-round of reporting” where members of the public who report fly-tipping and waste crime in their area get bounced between various agencies.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:53
Criminals benefitting from trash
This is something Sky News has often heard from victims – they will call the police, only to be told to speak to the council, which then pushes them over to the EA.
Peers want a “single telephone number and web portal” which would triage responsibility for each case.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:39
The boom in waste crime
An EA spokesperson said: “We recognise the recommendations of the report and are committed to doing more.
“Last year alone, our dedicated teams shut down 462 illegal waste sites and prevented nearly 34,000 tonnes of waste being illegally exported – showing that we can make real change despite the challenges involved.”
The King has been heckled over his brother Prince Andrew’s relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a visit to a cathedral.
Charles was shouted at by a man in the crowd outside Lichfield Cathedral in Staffordshire on Monday, who asked: “How long have you known about Andrew and Epstein?”
The protester, who was filming on a mobile phone, also said: “Have you asked the police to cover up for Andrew? Should MPs be allowed to debate the royals in the House of Commons?”
Image: King Charles during his visit to Lichfield Cathedral. Pic: AP
The King did not respond to the comments, which came as the monarchy faces increasing pressure to resolve the controversy surrounding Andrew, who earlier this month said he would stop using his Duke of York title and his knighthood after revelations in the posthumous memoir of sex assault accuser Virginia Giuffre.
The prince has always strenuously denied all allegations against him from the late Ms Giuffre.
At the moment, Andrew resides at Royal Lodge, a Windsor mansion where he effectively lives rent-free. He’s done so since 2003.
Obstacles to a settlement are reportedly where the prince, who remains eighth in line to the throne, will live and what financial recompense he will receive for the funds he spent renovating the home.
The Sun reported he is keen on Harry and Meghan’s former home Frogmore Cottage.
Image: Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein. Pics: PA/Sipa/Shutterstock
‘The royals need to be challenged’
Calls are still growing for Andrew’s dukedom to be revoked, which can only be done by an act of parliament.
Downing Street has indicated it its reluctance to do so, suggesting the King would not want the issue to take up politicians’ time.
Graham Smith, chief executive of anti-monarchy group Republic, said: “The royals need to be challenged, and if the politicians won’t do the job and the police won’t investigate, then more and more members of the public will be asking tough questions.”
He said he believed Monday’s heckler was “one of our own members but doing their own thing”.
After the visit to the cathedral, the King laid flowers at the UK’s first national memorial commemorating LGBT armed forces.
He was joined by dozens of serving and former members of the armed forces, as he met veterans who told of the trauma inflicted by the military’s former “gay ban”.
The memorial, titled An Opened Letter, was unveiled at the National Memorial Arboretum.