Is my partner an "immediate family member"

lisyloo

So it begs the question - have you considered getting married?
Apart from the "love" issue you have discovered that there are legal issues which would be very relevant if one of you died without a will or thre was a medical decision to make e.g. whether to revive, or donate organs.

It sound like you want to be recognised legally as a couple at least.

I can totally understand that these days for a non-religious couple there perhaps isn't much value, but you shoudl consider the legal aspects.

If you are agaisnt getting married for some reason then make sure you both have wills, because currently if one of you dies the other is not recgonised at all. You might think you have no assets but include an employment death in service benefits and any money saved in a pension fund.

I think you should definitely consider the legal/financial angles and cover them off one way or another e.g. house ownership, pension death benefits, employment death benefits, wills etc.
You don't have to have a white dress of spend loads of money if you don't want to, but marriage sounds like a good option legally/financially.

If one of you has a big objection then personally I'd be asking why.

If it's a case of not being bothered rather than objecting to it, then you should still consider it as an option to cover off these issues.
It may not be important day-to-day but it might be if you were "locked in" and had a realtive rather than your partner making decisions.

shiny76

ernie-money wrote: »

The customer advisor told me that to qualify as immediate family, we would have to be married, or blood related, ie sister, brother, mother or son etc.

Pets are often thought of as members of the immediate family - not that I'd advocate a chihuahua to be a second card holder

If you'd applied for your partner as an immediate family member, would they have requested proof?

rartherinv

As you mentioned, a second card holder does not enter any credit agreement with the lender, so the name on the card is pretty irrelevant as first card holder is entirely responsible for the use of all cards.

I doubt any cc lender would will pay for ID checks to confirm the name you give, then further checks (births & marriages?!?) to prove they are related to you, when none of it matters to them. They probably just state that you should only choose relatives to save them the admin of couples who may not be in long term relationships cancelling cards all the time, and maybe on a macro scale there could be slightly less fraud between people who are married or blood related than those who are recently coupled or just friends.

If my name was Rartherinvest Jones and I was in a long term relationship but unmarried, I would tell them that I need an additional card for my wife Mrs Rartherspend Jones, even though she has a different surname... They wouldn't blink an eyelid. It's kind of a hobby of mine to open store cards with stupid aliases and the admin people don't care, it probably brings a ray of sunshine to their gloomy day of penpushing.

My Tesco clubcard is owned by a chicken nugget and my boots card is owned by a sandwich. :rotfl:cc companies probably wouldn't let you get away with foods but people with the same surname, I reckon so.

Tiddlywinks

You've already given your OH access to two card accounts... why do you need him to be on this one as well?

Anyway, the Ts & Cs are set by the company and (as long as they don't breach any legislation) it is up to them who they accept as a cardholder.

Your OH could always get his own card... to add to the two you've given him already.

ernie-money

rartherinv wrote: »

As you mentioned, a second card holder does not enter any credit agreement with the lender, so the name on the card is pretty irrelevant as first card holder is entirely responsible for the use of all cards.

This was exactly my point, and that's why I was so surprised when they said point blank no, due to the fact that we're not married.
Might try adding a chicken nugget as a card holder for a laugh though...

ernie-money

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

You've already given your OH access to two card accounts... why do you need him to be on this one as well?

Anyway, the Ts & Cs are set by the company and (as long as they don't breach any legislation) it is up to them who they accept as a cardholder.

Your OH could always get his own card... to add to the two you've given him already.

I don't think you read my post properly - we want to be able to earn the full amount of cashback on fuel purchases, applying for another card would incurr another monthly fee of £2.

I wasn't looking for advice on my finances, or disputing their terms, just querying the term "immediate family member" but as you ask, the reason he is an additional card holder on my amex account is to make the most of the foursquare deals (and yes, he has an amex account with me as a card holder) and he hasn't actually got a card on my MBNA account anymore, but I know this from previous experience.