Getting married but not living together afterwards

chesky

They have separate households. Pay different council tax. Have their own utility bills. Pay two sets of rents.
To say 'definitely' is incorrect.

cte1111

I think you would need to look in detail at the rules for each of the benefits that you and your fiancee currently claim. I think for most (if not all) then for a financial assessment, they will take into account a 'partner' who is defined as your spouse or someone you live with as if you were married to them.

For tax credits:
"Tell the Tax Credit Office straight away if your:

living circumstances change, for example you start or stop a relationship, move in with a new partner, get married or form a civil partnership, permanently separate or divorce"

It is possible to be married but still be assessed as if you were 2 separate households, but for that you would need to have separated and that separation should be intended to be permanent. This would not really apply, as you would just have married and be intending to be in a permanent relationship.

More info for tax credits:
From the date on which a couple marry they will be treated as a married couple for tax credit purposes even if they do not begin living in the same household.
http://revenuebenefits.org.uk/tax-credits/guidance/how-do-tax-credits-work/understanding-living-together/

FBaby

To say 'definitely' is incorrect.

mmm, yes, using 'could' next to 'definitely' doesn't make for good English!

So I'll rephrase to anywhere between 'possible' and 'highly likely'!!

chesky

FBaby wrote: »

mmm, yes, using 'could' next to 'definitely' doesn't make for good English!

So I'll rephrase to anywhere between 'possible' and 'highly likely'!!

I think more like highly unlikely.

JIL

FBaby wrote: »

As the guidance clarifies, 'household' and 'home' are not the same thing. They could be consider to be LTAMC even if not married (especially when engaged for 2 years).

This guidance is used for determining if a couple are a couple, so they both have a home each. A decision maker will consult the guidance but will have to make the decision based on law. DM11051 suggests they do have to be members of the same household.

If a decision was made that these two were living together because they were engaged, it would not stand up in a court of law. There is a relationship, but they are not financially dependant on each other.
If however they chose to make their relationship legal in law by marrying then that opens up financial dependency, if one were to die the other would then have a claim on the others estate. Being engaged does not have that.

moneyistooshorttomention

It sounds like you need to ask someone "official" in order to get an objective view on this - and not people answering with their own personal opinions as to how they believe things "should" be in accordance with how they personally think.

I suggest looking up the Child Poverty Action Group on this.

It would be my feeling that the fact that you are maintaining two totally separate households would mean you wouldnt be regarded as a couple - even if married. But you do need to check with someone impartial to be sure.

If the answer (from an impartial group/person) is marriage means you being treated as a couple = then perhaps you could have a more "informal" style of marriage instead (eg a handfasting ceremony perhaps - rather than a Register Office or church ceremony)?? That would be a formal commitment - but not an "official" one iyswim.

Nothing to stop you having an "informal" Special Day/ceremony and wearing rings etc as far as I can see.

I do see where you're coming from - as the way the system is set up at present is one of the reasons I was wary of marriage or even living together - as the State would have decided to make me financially dependant on someone else if I became unemployed (despite my being financially independent whilst working).

System

Considering people in the forces are considered a couple even when not living together i think being married you'd have to still make a joint claim. They can still consider you LTAHAW even if seperate addresses.

CIS

This neatly demonstrates the differences views that different agencies have over the same sort of circumstances - for council tax purposes you would both be seen to be maintaining individual households.

Craig

Saipan

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

It sounds like you need to ask someone "official" in order to get an objective view on this - and not people answering with their own personal opinions as to how they believe things "should" be in accordance with how they personally think.

I suggest looking up the Child Poverty Action Group on this.

It would be my feeling that the fact that you are maintaining two totally separate households would mean you wouldnt be regarded as a couple - even if married. But you do need to check with someone impartial to be sure.

If the answer (from an impartial group/person) is marriage means you being treated as a couple = then perhaps you could have a more "informal" style of marriage instead (eg a handfasting ceremony perhaps - rather than a Register Office or church ceremony)?? That would be a formal commitment - but not an "official" one iyswim.

Nothing to stop you having an "informal" Special Day/ceremony and wearing rings etc as far as I can see.

I do see where you're coming from - as the way the system is set up at present is one of the reasons I was wary of marriage or even living together - as the State would have decided to make me financially dependant on someone else if I became unemployed (despite my being financially independent whilst working).

CPAG does not provide advice to individuals, only to professionals working in an advisory capacity. There are some downloadable resources on their website but these are general factsheets that would not cover a situation such as the one you are describing.

As suggested by other posters, the advice you are looking for will need to come from a welfare rights specialist or through you and your partner checking the information on each of the benefits in question.

Good luck for the future.