While prenuptial agreements are fairly well-known these days, their counterpart – the petnup – has been slowly gaining traction.
Although ‘prenups’ have long been frowned-upon as a means of anticipating a breakdown in the relationship at a time when it ought to be at its strongest, they have had a renaissance in the national zeitgeist as a practical contingency plan.
A typical prenup document typically accounts for the many assets that each individual owns, including property, savings and any businesses. But there is only one thing that a petnup is concerned with.
Like its namesake, the prenup, the petnup seeks to prevent any fallout or confusion over the status of the couple’s pet should their relationship break down.
On average, more than half of all British households contain at least one pet, and London leads the pack, with the city housing more dog and cat owners than in the rest of the country.
With roughly 4 in 10 married couples eventually taking back their vows, and a married person 34% more likely to own a dog than a non-married person, more and more people are looking to get themselves a petnup to avoid making an already stressful time even worse.
A survey conducted by Direct Line found that 27% of divorce cases involved arguments around the custody of a pet and that there had been a 20% rise in the demand for petnups before marriage.
Men retain full ownership of a pet in just under a third of cases, whilst more than half of cases result in women keeping the pet. But if no arrangements have been made in advance, animals can often end up abandoned.
This is what prompted the animal charity Blue Cross to develop the petnup document.
According to Blue Cross, dogs and cats are the most fought over pets followed closely by horses, rabbits and guinea pigs. But while people may view their pets as part of the family, under British law pets are regarded as cattle and are therefore treated no different than the kitchen fridge.
As such, petnups provide a legal framework for guaranteeing that pets are treated fairly during divorce proceedings and aren’t just an afterthought. Moreover, they prevent a judge from awarding ownership to whoever looks like the owner on paper, which may simply come down to whoever bought the pet.
Petnups cover a range of aspects surrounding the pets, including who pays for pet insurance, and who takes the pet to the vet.
They also take into account specific circumstances, such as whether or not the pet goes to the kennel or cattery should the party responsible for taking care of the pet go on holiday, and if so, deciding who pays.
Pets can cost their owners thousands of pounds each year in maintenance costs alone and so it is vital that such arrangements are agreed upon in the case of a separation.
Rather morbidly, though necessary nonetheless, they also determine who will pay for the funeral, who chooses where the pet will be buried and who ultimately gets to make the decision about the possible cremation of the pet.
Oftentimes, ‘the wisdom of Solomon’ as divorce lawyer Vanessa Lloyd Platt – whose law firm Lloyd Platt & Co drafted the UK’s first petnup document with animal charity Blue Cross – puts it, is notalways applicable for each situation.
Equally splitting care of the pet between each party isn’t always appropriate as it may be the case that only one of the parties is able to provide the pet with the right environment.
If this is the case, then typically that partner will retain full ownership of the pet.
Vanessa said: “With animals such as stick insects, we had to work out what was necessary to make sure the animal didn’t die as a result of the advice that was being given.”
Vanessa says that working with petnups has enlightened her to just how many obscure animals are kept as pets in the UK.
She said: “Cats and dogs are of course the most popular pets, but even snakes and tarantulas have been the focus of petnup agreements.
“You’d be surprised how many people in rural England own llamas.”
And while it may be hard to imagine a fierce legal battle taking place over ownership of Timmy the Tarantula, should one ensue, it will most likely be whoever can provide him with the best and safest habitat who will ultimately win.
Pets have often proven to be sticking points during celebrity divorces too. Ant McPartlin – from Ant & Dec – and Lisa Armstrong’s dog Hurley became the subject of a row during their divorce which resulted in the former couple sharing custody of their chocolate Labrador.
In another example, Eamonn Holmes and Ruth Langsford engaged in a bitter custody battle over their dog that resulted in the Loose Women star taking full ownership of their Border Collie cross. Perhaps a few petnups could have saved them all some drama.
In law, whoever bought the pet has the bigger right to ownership. But if one parent has sole custody of the children, would it be fair to separate them from the pet they’ve spent their entire young lives playing with?
In cases where children are involved, special consideration may also be given to whether or not it is suitable for the pet to go with the children.
In a recent case, the judge took into account the feelings of the children who lived with the dog and decided that the dog should stay living with the wife and children – ultimately deciding that disrupting these arrangements would be distressing for both parties.
So, although the law may favour whoever bought the animal – unlike a Dalmatian – it isn’t always so black and white.
Featured image credit: milli via Unsplash
Join the discussion