Married, Kids, Common Law, Debts, Death

coupleuk

Well, I guess that headline just about covers it.

I could do with some guidance if possible?

Here it is (get a coffee, you might need it) ...........


1) John married Jane, they bought a house and had 4 kids.

2) John meets Lucy, who is married (with 4 kids too).

3) Lucy gets a divorce plus 50% of assets and she moves in with John. Both are working and they pay bills together.

4) John continues to pay mortgage on his previous property with his wife and supports his kids.

5) Lucy and John live together for 25 years. John is still paying the mortgage on his wifes house but has very little contact with his daughters.

6) John gets Cancer (2007) and pulls thru.

7) John gets into debt (£15,000) and Lucy finds out, which puts a strain on relationship with Lucy and he moves back in with his wife for a few weeks (2009).

8) John gets into further debt (£27,000) which is then re-financed thru CCCS Charity.

9) Johns Cancer returns (2010) and he decides, after 30 years apart, to divorce his wife. John has nothing from the property.

10) John spends weekdays with his daughter so he can attend hospital and spends weekends with Lucy.

11) John sadly passes away (late 2010) with no assets just the debt.

12) Johns funeral is arranged by his daughters. Lucy does attend (with 50+ of their friends) but their 30yr relationship and friends aren't mentioned.

13) Johns daughter pays for cremation with money from Social Fund. Lucy isnt asked or able to organise anything to do with funeral.

13) There is mention of a Will, but only his daughters know of it. Lucy states that he had never made one in their 30 years together.


So, you'll all probably agree that this is all one HUGE mess.

1) It seems John divorced his wife so his creditors couldnt get any money from his house. Is it possible that Lucy could still make any claim on the property as his common-law wife?

2) Who should have arranged the funeral? Lucy, his common-law wife of 30yrs or his daughters?

3) Can the creditors go after Lucy for any of the debts (they were in his name) ?

Thanks

honeypop

1) It seems John divorced his wife so his creditors couldnt get any money from his house. Is it possible that Lucy could still make any claim on the property as his common-law wife? Does this refer to the property he owned with his wife, that Lucy had no input with?

2) Who should have arranged the funeral? Lucy, his common-law wife of 30yrs or his daughters? I think it was correct for his daughters as next of kin to do this.

3) Can the creditors go after Lucy for any of the debts (they were in his name) ? If I have this correct then his estate will be used to pay any debts and anything still left unpaid then is 'written off'

In addition, there is no such thing as a common law marriage, the direct.gov website has info on this: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Yourrightsandresponsibilities/DG_10026937

RadoJo

Unfortunately, 'common law' is not an official status - if you check out this link there's some more info:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Yourrightsandresponsibilities/DG_10026937

So in answer to your questions:

1. No
2. His daughters - they were his daughters before his 'common law' wife was involved with their Dad, and as already stated above, unless he made legal provision for 'Lucy' then she is just another friend.
3. I wouldn't have thought so as the debts should have been paid from the estate, so provided they weren't in joint names Lucy should be ok.

paddy's_mum

How much unhappiness could have been avoided if John had divorced many years before so that most of these 'loose ends' wouldn't have existed.

It's very sad that Lucy should have been relegated to a bystander role but she did at least attend the funeral without hindrance. It has been known for partners to be refused permission by a hostile and bitter 'widow'.

podperson

1) It seems John divorced his wife so his creditors couldnt get any money from his house. Is it possible that Lucy could still make any claim on the property as his common-law wife?
No she would have no claim, even if it was still in his name she would be on shaky ground not being his actual wife - and it sounds like if it would have been taken by the creditors anyway. Besides she had no input into the house, she never lived there and made no financial contribution to it - why does she think she has a claim?

2) Who should have arranged the funeral? Lucy, his common-law wife of 30yrs or his daughters?
Next of kin would generally arrange the funeral which would be his daughters, can understand she might be a little hurt not to get some input but am assuming she's not very close to the daughters and she did get to go.

3) Can the creditors go after Lucy for any of the debts (they were in his name) ?
As long as there were none in joint names then she is fine. Any estate he had left (which would have included the house if he still had it!) can be gone after by the creditors.

RAS

Hi

If John was financially supporting Lucy within 2 years of his death, then she may be able to claim against his estate. She needs a quick meeting with a lawyer versed in probate and ingheritance issues. She may well get nothing but needs to ask.

coupleuk

Thanks for the replies.

John was still paying the mortgage on his original home after his kids had grown and had left home.

Lucy had divorced and had put her divorce settlement toward a different house for her and John. They were both paying the small mortgage and bills etc.

They sold the house (with no money from it) and were renting. Lucy was paying the rent and they shared the bills/food bills etc.

1) I would have thought that, as Lucy had used her divorce settlement toward their home, that she could have expected John to "claim" his settlement when he finally divorced Jane. He was still supporting Lucy (aged 74) at the time of his death (aged 73).

2) It now seems that John only divorced Jane to distance his debts from his (ex)wife and daughters. If this divorce only took place in 2010, are the creditors likely to "go after" the house?


I should point out that Lucy has no interest in chasing this and Im just curious, nothing more.

It is annoying that Lucy's 4 kids will get nothing from their mother as she used all her divorce money on the house, yet Johns kids still have their inheritance in Janes property. But, such is life.

Lucy is however trying to get 2 small items from Johns daughters. Neither have any value (sentimental or monetary) but they were loaned to John by a friend and Lucy feels the friend should have them back. I think the daughters just binned them.

Fang_3

There's no such thing as a 'common law wife' in this country.

Why do you think it's unfair that John's children will have an inheritance from their mother's property?

coupleuk

Why do you think it's unfair that John's children will have an inheritance from their mother's property?

Lucy divorced her husband and put her share of the settlement toward the 25+ year co-habiting relationship with John.

There are no longer any assets from the relationship - therefore, Lucys kids will get no inheritance.

However, John didnt divorce his wife until he realised his creditors could claim against his matrimonial home. Once he realised, he got divorced. It took him 25+ years of seperation to get round to it.

Now, his (ex)wife has a house with no mortgage and his kids will stand to inherit the house.

The reason it is "unfair" is that Lucy did the decent thing and her kids will suffer. John didnt and his kids will see the benefit.

As I said, Im not trying to get money as its far too late to be worrying about all that, but Im just trying to get thru a grief process and understand why events happened the way they did.

You can guess that Im one of Lucys kids and I'm questioning whether john actually loved Lucy (mom) at all during their 30 years together.

onlyroz

To be honest, I don't understand why any child thinks they have a "right" to their parents' assets at all. And it sounds like "John" didn't actually have any assets - just debts - and it baffles me why he didn't divorce "Jane" years ago if he was playing happy families with "Lucy".

podperson

Not to be critical but sounds like John wasn't very good with money and even if he had divorced his wife years ago and taken his share of the house then it would have been swallowed up the debts he owes and then Lucy would still have ended up using her own money - but perhaps with the added complications of them being married/having things in joint names so the creditors would have been able to chase her.
I appreciate that it must be a difficult time for your family and it's a complicated situation but at the end of the day it was your mum's money and she chose to spend it on her life with this man. Whether you liked him or not or thought he loved her or not then they spent 30yrs together and that would suggest to me that although definately not perfect he at least made your mum happy for some of that time. If she hadn't done this then she may or may not have spent her money on something else but that would also have been up to her.