Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Pixie5740
    • By Pixie5740 27th Nov 17, 3:45 PM
    • 11,202Posts
    • 15,655Thanks
    Pixie5740
    Co-habiting couples warned of "common law marriage" myth
    • #1
    • 27th Nov 17, 3:45 PM
    Co-habiting couples warned of "common law marriage" myth 27th Nov 17 at 3:45 PM
    I saw this on the BBC website earlier:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42134722

    Resolution carried out a survey which found two-thirds of cohabiting couples wrongly believe "common-law marriage" laws exist when dividing up finances.

    Resolution chairman Nigel Shepherd said current laws were "behind the times".
    He said: "The government must listen to the public, legal professionals and a growing number of politicians who all agree that we need reform to provide basic rights to cohabiting couples should they separate."

    What do you think? My view is that marriage is a contract and if you don't enter into it then you can't expect the protection of the law when things go down the pooper.
    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.
Page 6
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 30th Nov 17, 10:11 AM
    • 1,315 Posts
    • 1,067 Thanks
    Comms69
    I think the solution to some degree is in raising awareness. As adults we should take responsibility for ourselves and that is in understanding the repercussions of the decisions we make.

    There are pros and cons to marriage (and subsequently divorce) as there are in remaining unmarried. I know of people, male and female, that have literally been left with just the shirt on their backs after divorce, despite being the main or only earner and not always through choice. My brother in law is the only earner doing a job he despises and married to a woman that expects to be looked after. He does more than his fair share in the home too.

    On the other hand, how many people are unmarried because their partner is so set against it and the alternative is separation? Not marrying may well be a form of financial control in some relationships!
    Originally posted by Happier Me


    Sorry what?


    No it's not. The alternative is separation, just like with any other issue.


    If it's a fundamental pre-requisite, then ofcourse you need to find someone else. But you cant force people into marriage by accusing them of being abusive!
    • Gavin83
    • By Gavin83 30th Nov 17, 10:29 AM
    • 4,731 Posts
    • 7,516 Thanks
    Gavin83
    My brother in law is the only earner doing a job he despises and married to a woman that expects to be looked after. He does more than his fair share in the home too.
    Originally posted by Happier Me
    Well that's his own choice. He clearly isn't too unhappy with the arrangement.
    • onomatopoeia99
    • By onomatopoeia99 30th Nov 17, 10:55 AM
    • 3,634 Posts
    • 7,997 Thanks
    onomatopoeia99
    On the other hand, how many people are unmarried because their partner is so set against it and the alternative is separation? Not marrying may well be a form of financial control in some relationships!
    Originally posted by Happier Me
    If someone feels they are being financially controlled when unmarried, they can and should just walk away. Not that I can see how it is even possible to one adult to exercise financial control of another independent adult's finances by not marrying them.
    INTP, nerd, libertarian and scifi geek.
    Home is where my books are.
    • haras_nosirrah
    • By haras_nosirrah 30th Nov 17, 1:06 PM
    • 1,329 Posts
    • 2,472 Thanks
    haras_nosirrah
    I suppose the main issue with cohabitting couples getting the same rights as married couples is what if the person is cohabitting with more than one partner?

    The double life scenario - lives with partner a during the week and partner b at the weekend. Has children with both partners, two houses, two lives.

    At least legally you can only have one wife. If co habbiting is enough to get assetts, a say over next of kin then how would the above scenario play out?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2601024/How-I-father-kept-secret-second-family-life-realised-spent-time-work-kept-missing-birthdays.html
    I am a Mortgage Adviser
    You should note that this site doesn't check my status as a Mortgage Adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Mortgage Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.
    • Happier Me
    • By Happier Me 30th Nov 17, 4:12 PM
    • 391 Posts
    • 837 Thanks
    Happier Me
    Originally Posted by Happier Me View Post
    I think the solution to some degree is in raising awareness. As adults we should take responsibility for ourselves and that is in understanding the repercussions of the decisions we make.

    There are pros and cons to marriage (and subsequently divorce) as there are in remaining unmarried. I know of people, male and female, that have literally been left with just the shirt on their backs after divorce, despite being the main or only earner and not always through choice. My brother in law is the only earner doing a job he despises and married to a woman that expects to be looked after. He does more than his fair share in the home too.

    On the other hand, how many people are unmarried because their partner is so set against it and the alternative is separation? Not marrying may well be a form of financial control in some relationships!


    Sorry what?


    No it's not. The alternative is separation, just like with any other issue.


    If it's a fundamental pre-requisite, then ofcourse you need to find someone else. But you cant force people into marriage by accusing them of being abusive!
    Yesterday 6:55 PM
    Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that the alternative is separation, I said so in my post. As adults we need to take responsibility for our own actions or inactions. But that's coming from someone with a personality type that is highly unlikely to experience abuse. I'm not sure it's as easy as that for someone who finds themselves in an abusive relationship.
    • maman
    • By maman 30th Nov 17, 4:29 PM
    • 17,161 Posts
    • 102,593 Thanks
    maman
    Sorry but I know little of the benefit system. I thought that unmarried couples living together were already 'penalised' by the system in that they can't claim as if they were two separate entities.
    Originally posted by maman
    That's certainly true but I wouldn't describe it as being penalised.
    Originally posted by Tabbytabitha

    I wouldn't describe it as being penalised either (hence the quotes). I was just pointing out that the government can recognise cohabitees when it suits them financially but ignore it when it's likely to cost them.

    I'm wavering.


    There's been a lot in the media on this point this week. Today, for example, I read about someone who'd been given leave to appeal a decision that prevented her having a bereavement payout when her long term partner died as they weren't married. So it seems the establishment is questioning whether to recognise a cohabitee. However, on the other hand, the benefit system does take account of a live in partner whether married or not. It seems the whole thing is a construct of government and has unfairness and illogicality built in.


    Food for thought.
    Originally posted by maman

    On a related matter, I noticed that there's to be a Private Members Bill before parliament in the new year to end 'meal ticket' divorces and make pre-nuptial contracts legally recognised. I think this is a good idea. While I appreciate that provision needs to be made for young children, there are too many people, including the wives of Russian oligarchs, fleecing former partners.
    • Mojisola
    • By Mojisola 30th Nov 17, 6:48 PM
    • 28,649 Posts
    • 72,976 Thanks
    Mojisola
    I would like to see the legal part of marriage being completely separated from any other form of celebration of the event as happens in several other European countries.

    The legal part should be seen as the only part that's absolutely necessary. Everything else is optional.

    I would also like to see the formal statement amended to include the option of 'partner' to 'wife' or 'husband' - "I call upon these persons here present, to witness that I [name] do take thee [name] to be my lawful wedded wife / wife-husband / husband"

    (And to replace 'thee' with 'you' if the couple prefer).
    • onomatopoeia99
    • By onomatopoeia99 1st Dec 17, 8:00 AM
    • 3,634 Posts
    • 7,997 Thanks
    onomatopoeia99
    (And to replace 'thee' with 'you' if the couple prefer).
    Originally posted by Mojisola
    Quite, the second person singular informal pronoun dropped from common usage four hundred years ago across most of the country, no idea why it persists in situations like this.
    INTP, nerd, libertarian and scifi geek.
    Home is where my books are.
    • Pixie5740
    • By Pixie5740 1st Dec 17, 6:14 PM
    • 11,202 Posts
    • 15,655 Thanks
    Pixie5740
    A myth so far, but this could be the start of some myth-confirming court judgements:
    https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/nov/28/unmarried-woman-wins-legal-battle-over-bereavement-damages
    Originally posted by buglawton
    Yes I saw this article too. I think it's the thin end of the wedge. If she and her partner chose not to get married why should she get the protection that a marriage contract provides? It reminded me of this woman earlier in 2017 who won the right to her late partner's pension.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/08/unmarried-woman-wins-automatic-right-late-partners-pension/

    What really got me about her story is that the pension scheme involved does pay out to co-habiting partners if the pension holder signs a form nominating their co-habitee as a beneficiary. He never signed the form. Maybe he didn't want her to be a beneficiary. They'd been together for 10 years before finally getting engaged and neither was a spring chicken.
    Last edited by Pixie5740; 01-12-2017 at 6:33 PM. Reason: typo
    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.
    • Pixie5740
    • By Pixie5740 1st Dec 17, 6:37 PM
    • 11,202 Posts
    • 15,655 Thanks
    Pixie5740
    I suppose the main issue with cohabitting couples getting the same rights as married couples is what if the person is cohabitting with more than one partner?

    The double life scenario - lives with partner a during the week and partner b at the weekend. Has children with both partners, two houses, two lives.

    At least legally you can only have one wife. If co habbiting is enough to get assetts, a say over next of kin then how would the above scenario play out?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2601024/How-I-father-kept-secret-second-family-life-realised-spent-time-work-kept-missing-birthdays.html
    Originally posted by haras_nosirrah
    That's an angle I hadn't considered. You would hope that the spouse's rights would trump those of the mistress.
    Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,728Posts Today

6,346Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @bearface83: @MartinSLewis check out the @Missguided new 60% off offer. Upping the cost of items almost double to make us think it?s a?

  • RT @efitzpat: Thank you SO SO much @MartinSLewis for your Student Loans refund advice! I just got a grand refunded right before Xmas! Whoop?

  • Have a lovely weekend folks. Don't do anything (fiscally) that I wouldn't do!

  • Follow Martin