Co-habitating rules - help please.

Mojisola

esmy wrote: »

We have each made wills, we have nominated each other as the beneficiary of our occupational pensions and life insurances, we both own the house (and there are different ways you can do this). We did all this because there would be no automatic right to each others assets. As other posters have said there is no such thing as a common law marriage.

This is very sensible. There is one thing that you can't do anything about and that is Inheritance Tax. If you are married or in a civil partnership, you can transfer any IT unused after the first death to the surviving partner. This can result in a significant tax saving.

pinkclouds

kezlou wrote: »

So i think based on that if we ever did split up, which hopefully we won't, we will probably be classed as common law man and wife.

Slightly off-topic but perhaps also relevant to the OP. The last form of "common law marriage", as you put it, was cohabitation by habit and repute. It was a Scots common law that enabled you to be married simply by cohabiting, acting as if you were married and having everyone (including yourselves) refer to yourselves as married. However, it was finally repealed by statute - see the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006.

There are now no legal forms of "informal" marriage in the UK. And cohabitation by habit and repute was only legal in Scotland. Moreover, the "habit and repute" was essential: it could be undone by someone giving evidence that, perhaps in private, you referred to yourself as a girlfriend or partner instead of a wife. You could not be a married couple unless you actually considered yourselves married, in every way. If you are domiciled in Scotland and have been cohabiting by habit and repute before it was repealed, then your marriage is still valid. The marriage certificate is generally issued in circumstances such as children going to court to prove legitimacy for inheritance purposes - the judge considers the evidence and takes a significant date (such as the day your husband gave you a wedding ring) as the marriage date. You see, it is a real marriage, not simply a relationship where you are a bit like a married couple - you *are* a married couple.

However, for everyone outside of Scotland or who began cohabiting with habit and repute after the law was repealed, it is totally irrelevant.

squibbs25

Thanks again for your views and responses so far.

How hypocritical the law seems to be.
So basically you have to have everything set in stone if you are not married to make sure you get everything is tied up incase your partner dies as, as a partner you are not recognised in the eyes of the law BUT if you split you can get something.
How daft that seems.


So taking what Kezlou says, they have everything in place to protect them as a couple but in our friends case there is nothing stating she is/was entitled to or bequested anything (like wise anything she had/has will go to her children).
He has financial proof of what he has paid, the only thing he did add into the conversation late last night (after id posted on here) is that a few years ago they set up a joint account to which the bills came out of, he paid the majority of the money into it (wages) i dont know if she paid anything into this particular account or if the electricty was on a dd or how it was paid, same as for the car insurance.
Not sure how that will complicate things now.

She had asked several times over the last few years to go on the mortgage, even suggesting they get married, which obviously never happened.

TBH we're still stunned at the split and extremely suprised at whats unfolding.
He is in no way gong to do her out of anything, will give her the money she 'invested' + interest from the sale of the France property as originally agreed.

When they first got together she wasnt working but in the last 6 years or so has been working 3 - 4 days a week, and other than the outgoings mentioned above her wages was hers alone to do what she wanted with - again not sure if this is relevent or not.

I forgot to mention in my OP that they both live in England.

Mojisola

squibbs25 wrote: »

He has financial proof of what he has paid, the only thing he did add into the conversation late last night (after id posted on here) is that a few years ago they set up a joint account to which the bills came out of, he paid the majority of the money into it (wages) i dont know if she paid anything into this particular account or if the electricty was on a dd or how it was paid, same as for the car insurance.
Not sure how that will complicate things now.

I think that will complicate things because the bills weren't paid by him; they were paid out of a joint account. It may only have been him who paid money into it but the joint account implies that they saw themselves as a permenant couple.

squibbs25

ikkle87 wrote: »

Youve also got to remember she has had no input into the house financially. All bills and mortgage bar electric have been in his name as its his property and his responsibility. Something which they've both agreed on for 12 years. She can't suddenly change her mind now they've split.

Thats what i believed, but sacred she will take him or try and take him to the cleaners.
She's behaving in a way i never thought possible.
Its heartbreaking to see TBH, she's put a wall up and no-one can get through, not even her mum seems to understand whats going on
Although she did tell him last night that she had been unhappy and wanting to leave for the last 3 years (he truthfully had no idea - neither did anyone else she was thinking this) that she is 'happy' now.

Now reading between the lines it makes me believe that the trying to get on the mortgage and get married was purely to financally benefit when she left :eek:.

squibbs25

Mojisola wrote: »

I think that will complicate things because the bills weren't paid by him; they were paid out of a joint account. It may only have been him who paid money into it but the joint account implies that they saw themselves as a permenant couple.

This is excatly what i was thinking.
Does it matter the bills were soley in his name?

Also would it be wise to remove himself off the joint account asap and leave it in her name only?
I doubt she would be willing to remove her name.

Mojisola

squibbs25 wrote: »

This is excatly what i was thinking.
Does it matter the bills were soley in his name?

I don't know but I would be encouraging him to get a well-recommended solicitor on his side and would also contact the charities set up to help men through relationship splits. He doesn't have the complication of arranging child access but they will also have a lot of experience in the financial areas.

Thegirl

I am not sure where the law currently stands but I can tell you what legal advice two friends of mine received who were seemingly in simliar circumstances.
Friend one: Moves in with partner to his house in his name, she was never put on the deeds or mortgage. They live together for seven years. They had a child together. She buys food and contributed to a couple of bills. When she left she was entitled to nothing but maintenance.
Friend two: Lives with partner. Has one child from previous relationship, one from this relationship. He buys a house in his name as the family home which they move into. He earnt more money than her but they both contributed to all bills/food. When they split she was entitled to half of the house as it had been purchased with the express purpose of being the family home.
Now of course their advice could have been poor/wrong, but that is what both were told.
I would advise your friend to see a solicitor. It's money well spent.

squibbs25

Thank you Thegirl, its such a minefield.
The blessing is they dont have any children together, so if there is a claim that should lessen it.
Although they lived together the stayed individual (if that makes sense).
The problem is there is no law or guidelines what so ever so its very hit and miss.

We need to get a law passed that will protect all involved, as i said in a previous post, live together as if married then die and you are not recognised in the eyes of the law (unless watertight paperwork) but split and suddenly, as if by magic you are now recognised as 'something'.

peachyprice

squibbs25 wrote: »

Also would it be wise to remove himself off the joint account asap and leave it in her name only?
I doubt she would be willing to remove her name.

I think it's too late for that, but I would advise that he opens a new account in his name, transfers all the bills and his salary to that and has the joint one frozen. As it is he's leaving himself wide open to her taking all the money out and racking up an overdraft, for which he will be jointly liable.