We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Cohabiting Law when splitting
Comments
-
Thought that too - find it hard to believe they can force you to be of 'no fixed abode' or to register somewhere you're not actually living. Doesn't make much sense, especially as it's needed for credit, etc.Sorry I think you are wrong when I was an adult and living at my parents so not an owner or tenant I was on the council tax bill (even though I didn't pay for any of it).
I was also on the council tax bill when I was a lodger (not a tenant but a lodger).2024 wins: *must start comping again!*0 -
Thought that too - find it hard to believe they can force you to be of 'no fixed abode' or to register somewhere you're not actually living. Doesn't make much sense, especially as it's needed for credit, etc.
Well it also means that the council would potentially lose out if person A was the owner and got the 25% discount and then moved his girlfriend in and she wasn't an owner or tenant then they would still get a discount even though 2 people were living there.0 -
Well it also means that the council would potentially lose out if person A was the owner and got the 25% discount and then moved his girlfriend in and she wasn't an owner or tenant then they would still get a discount even though 2 people were living there.
Completely wrong!!
The 25% discount is given when only one person occupies the property. If another person moves in, the discount is no longer applicable, their status is unimportant.
The only persons who should be named on the CT bill are those who have a legal right (de iure occupation) to live in the property, i.e. tenant, lessee or occupying owner, as these are the only liable persons. Adult children (for example) who are living at home with their parents and have no right of occupation because they are not named on the tenancy, lease or deeds should not be named on the CT bill as they are not liable persons.
However where only non entitled person or persons occupy, e.g. squatter(s), (de facto occupation) then a council can name that person or persons on the CT bill.If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0 -
Did you move in with her in Dec 15 or did you move in with her before but that's when you started to contribute towards the mortgage?
Either way, why do you think you should be entitled to anything at all? She could argue you just paid rent and towards the bill, nothing towards her mortgage.
I think you are very lucky that she agreed to the £3,500 and your chance to get anything more is next to none.0 -
I took it that aneary was saying that, not opposing it. Might have misread/misunderstood though...lincroft1710 wrote: »Completely wrong!!
The 25% discount is given when only one person occupies the property. If another person moves in, the discount is no longer applicable, their status is unimportant.
The only persons who should be named on the CT bill are those who have a legal right (de iure occupation) to live in the property, i.e. tenant, lessee or occupying owner, as these are the only liable persons. Adult children (for example) who are living at home with their parents and have no right of occupation because they are not named on the tenancy, lease or deeds should not be named on the CT bill as they are not liable persons.
However where only non entitled person or persons occupy, e.g. squatter(s), (de facto occupation) then a council can name that person or persons on the CT bill.2024 wins: *must start comping again!*0 -
You are not normally entitled to get anything back from this sort of thing.
Your ex would only be legally required to pay you back if the money was a "loan". But there is nothing in your post which suggests that any of it was a loan.
You might be able to claim an interest in the property as a result of contributing the mortgage and any increase in the value of the property due to doing improvement work. Other payments (e.g. daily expenses, tools etc.) don't count. But there would be no obligation on her to pay you for that until the property is sold.
On the face of it, a £3,500 settlement would mean you paid c. £2.5k a year to live in the property for just under 2 years. That sounds very reasonable to me.0 -
One advantage of being "morally owed" by someone, is that they tend to avoid you. It sounds is if that is a benefit worth paying for.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards