Widows pension and co-habitating

Dunroamin

Mojisola wrote: »

I didn't mean a same sex couple - I meant what I said - "two friends of the same sex". It used to be fairly common for a couple of older people to share a house when they got older in order to save money and be company for each other.

And probably many of them were same sex couples, just unacknowledged at the time.:)

Mojisola

Dunroamin wrote: »

And probably many of them were same sex couples, just unacknowledged at the time.:)

A lot of the older ladies I knew as a child who shared a home had lost BFs and fiances in WW1. There weren't enough men to go round after that and many got used to sharing their lives with other women. If that lead to sexual relations, they would have been very discreet but, I think, in many cases it was just for companionship.

atush

ViolaLass wrote: »

You seem a bit obsessed with the idea of couples who do or do not have sex. My husband and I have sex but I don't think that is the defining feature that makes us a couple as opposed to two people who share a house.

When he was briefly injured and we couldn't have sex, I still considered us to be a couple.

you seem to be missing the obvious.

In that if people are living together and not married, single sex or not, sex/intimacy is usually (be it intercourse or not) used to determine if they are a couple.

No one much cares if married people do or dont have sex, as they are defined by the legal contract. When you dont' have a legal contract, it is up to other factors (and it doesn't mean we/they are nosy).

ViolaLass

atush wrote: »

you seem to be missing the obvious.

In that if people are living together and not married, single sex or not, sex/intimacy is usually (be it intercourse or not) used to determine if they are a couple.

No one much cares if married people do or dont have sex, as they are defined by the legal contract. When you dont' have a legal contract, it is up to other factors (and it doesn't mean we/they are nosy).

But you can appear to be a couple even if you don't have sex. This couple, for example, appear to be planning not to share a bed because he has 'medical issues'. That suggests to me that they ARE a couple since it's the medical issues stopping them and not a lack of desire to be fully intimate.

atush

We dont know as it hasn't been said outright here. 'Medical issues' could be as little as severe snoring for instance.

In any case, people can live together and share w/o being a true couple. But ANY intimacy in that way means they are a couple and saying they are not can be fraudulent.

margaretclare

ViolaLass wrote: »

But you can appear to be a couple even if you don't have sex. This couple, for example, appear to be planning not to share a bed because he has 'medical issues'. That suggests to me that they ARE a couple since it's the medical issues stopping them and not a lack of desire to be fully intimate.

It could imply needing a special bed, difficulty in getting in/out of bed etc.

We have a king-size bed, but DH can only get into one side of it because of limited movement and difficulty bending in left leg. The bed is also higher than many beds available because both of us find it easier to get in and out of a higher bed.

mojos.revenge

I can assure everyone that I am not in the least bit obsessed with the couples desire to have any kind of sexual relationship.
The problem is, that sex seems to be the defining factor as to whether or not they are a couple.
They have not shared the intimate details of the medical issues, and I wouldn't expect them to.
The fact remains that the lady in question has stated that the gentleman is moving in, for company, and because he is in need of a roof over his head. Those circumstances seem to suit the couple and as far as anyone knows or is likely to know no sexual involvement is intended.
A similar situation, although fictitious, to that of maybe Norris and Emily in Corrie.
I sort of wish that I hadn't asked now, as it seems to have given all sorts of ideas in peoples heads. The worst suggestion is that of fraud, which is the last thing on their minds.
If fraud was intended I doubt that she would have even asked if she would be doing anything wrong.

margaretclare

I don't understand the details of the fictitious situation you quoted, don't know the people you named, but as others have said, there might be many reasons why people choose to share house space together rather than living separately. You state that the man is moving in because he needs a roof over his head, she is willing to provide him with that roof, and the whole exercise is to give them both 'company'.

But you did raise the question of her widow's pension and this is why the question of a sexual relationship has come up.

This was the quote, way back in the thread, about the basic assumption behind getting this type of pension:

"The pension can be paid until the widow reaches 65 but if she retires after reaching state pension age (60 years) it will usually be replaced by the state pension. However the pension will stop if the widow remarries or payment will be suspended if she begins living with a man as his wife."

So, it all hinges on whether she intends to live with this man 'as his wife'. And that's the difficulty.

The other thing to say is, if this pension is based on her late husband's NI contributions, if she remarried she would still get a pension based on her new husband's contribution record although 60% not 100%. And if they married, no one would ask whether they shared a bed, a bedroom, had sex/never had sex. As others have pointed out, many people in happy marriages do not share a bed or a bedroom and, for one reason or another, don't necessarily have sex.

atush

I am not accusing them of fraud, just pointing out the possibility as a warning to how the set themselves up. If you pass on the relelvant details, or contact CAB for them to bone up on the particulars, it is up to them and their conscience.

Personally, I got the impression that they ARen't a couple, and therefore she should keep her widows pension. I just wanted you to know a few problems that could creep up.

Blaming us for answering, is just silly.

Prothet_of_Doom

jamesd wrote: »

The state widows' pension stops if the woman remarries. It is suspended for the duration of any time when she is living with another person as man and wife but can resume if that relationship ends.

This will explain why my Nan (RIP 2005), and Her "Lodger" (RIP 1988) (Uncle Joe) had "Separate Bedrooms" for 10 years.

:eek: Or it could be that he was really just a Lodger. :rotfl: