While Garrido did not name any individuals, netizens have been questioning whether the post refers to Bea and Vincent, amid earlier reports and circulating rumors about a supposed wedding in Spain scheduled for May that may have been postponed.

The timing of the post has fueled further speculation, with some observers wondering if the alleged disagreement over prenup terms could be linked to the rumored change in wedding plans. However, there has been no confirmation from either party regarding the status of their relationship or wedding arrangements.

In his lengthy post, Garrido described what he claimed were unusual and highly restrictive provisions in a prenuptial agreement presented to a bride-to-be.

He alleged that the agreement included conditions such as restrictions on raising one’s voice during arguments, a requirement for the bride to live with her future in-laws, and a provision involving custody of children in the event of separation.

“Dear Bride-to-be: You were ready to sign the prenup, but then they added provisions that had nothing to do with property relations. You had every right to refuse. That no longer looks like a prenup but more like a life sentence,” Garrido wrote.

He also criticized the alleged requirement to live with in-laws, questioning its fairness in a marriage arrangement.

“For example, it’s not right that you are required to live with the in-laws. Ano sila, hilo?” he said.

Garrido further raised concerns over the reported restriction on raising one’s voice during disagreements, saying such a rule would be unrealistic in a marriage.

Among the most controversial points in the post was the alleged custody provision, which Garrido described as a potential “deal breaker.”

“But the most problematic, the deal breaker, the ‘poison pill,’ is the provision that in case of separation, you give up custody of your young children,” he wrote.

He added that custody rights are fundamental and cannot simply be waived without court approval.

Garrido even referenced television personality Maggie Wilson in his post, suggesting the bride-to-be speak with her regarding custody experiences.

The post quickly went viral, drawing thousands of reactions and sparking divided opinions online. Some users criticized the alleged prenup terms as excessive, while others argued that such agreements are common among wealthy families and high-profile couples as a form of asset protection.