benefits of being married vs living together

NewHome13

Sorry if there has been a thread on this before, I couldn't find anything when I searched.

My partner & I have been together 6 years and lived together for four and a half. We are late twenties / early thirties and have no children. We plan to have a child (children?) a little way down the line.

We live in rented accommodation and we'd like to buy a place together but this is not on the cards at the moment. Neither of us has impressive savings, investments, pensions or anything like that. What I'm saying here is we own nothing of any value, if that makes a difference.

Neither of us is particularly bothered about getting married. We do not like the idea of being the centre of attention at a big wedding. We'd rather save the money that would be spent on a wedding towards a deposit on a place to live together.

Is there any real reason to marry if it is not meaningful to you as a couple?

Thank you.

elona

Suppose one of you is taken seriously ill or has a bad accident. Would you be happy to find your or his parents have the right to make decisions on the patient's behalf?

Mojisola

NewHome13 wrote: »

Neither of us is particularly bothered about getting married.

We do not like the idea of being the centre of attention at a big wedding.

The two things are different.

Getting married can be as simple as going to the RO and using the simplest ceremony.

"Having a big wedding" is just all the other non-essential stuff.

NewHome13

elona wrote: »

Suppose one of you is taken seriously ill or has a bad accident. Would you be happy to find your or his parents have the right to make decisions on the patient's behalf?

Would this actually be the case? I have heard of this, but when I looked at the citizens advice website it said

'Hospitals will usually accept your partner as the next of kin. No one is entitled to give consent to medical treatment for another adult unless they are unconscious or unable to give consent through mental incapacity. However, in practice, doctors do usually discuss decisions with the patient's family and this will normally include your partner.'

However, I found their website a bit perfunctory and confusing, hence my post here

NewHome13

Mojisola wrote: »

The two things are different.

Getting married can be as simple as going to the RO and using the simplest ceremony.

"Having a big wedding" is just all the other non-essential stuff.

Thanks for your reply. I know that this is the case, but even a RO ceremony costs money and takes a bit of planning and organisation.

I wouldn't have anything against a tiny RO ceremony, but I don't really have anything for it either if you see what I mean?

Tammykitty

NewHome13 wrote: »

Would this actually be the case? I have heard of this, but when I looked at the citizens advice website it said

'Hospitals will usually accept your partner as the next of kin. No one is entitled to give consent to medical treatment for another adult unless they are unconscious or unable to give consent through mental incapacity. However, in practice, doctors do usually discuss decisions with the patient's family and this will normally include your partner.'

However, I found their website a bit perfunctory and confusing, hence my post here

They will include the partner, but should the partner and parents disagree then the official NOK (parent) has the final say usually.


Also - things like workplace death benefits or pensions can be paid to NOK (every workplace is different - some you can nominate who should receive the money regardless of relationship)


https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/living-together-marriage-and-civil-partnership/living-together-and-marriage-legal-differences/

Mojisola

If you aren't going to get married -
make wills,
send letters to your GPs and local hospital nominating each other as NOK
and/or
print off NOK cards and carry them with you
http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/files.royalfree.nhs.uk/next_of_kin002.pdf

If you don't get married, you miss out on an increased IHT threshold (which might not matter now but may if your finances change in the future).

If you don't get married but do have a child -
the father will have to attend the RO if he wants to be put on the birth certificate,
if one of you dies young, the surviving parent won't be able to claim some benefits available to widows/widowers.

LilElvis

NewHome13 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply. I know that this is the case, but even a RO ceremony costs money and takes a bit of planning and organisation.

I wouldn't have anything against a tiny RO ceremony, but I don't really have anything for it either if you see what I mean?

I got married in Las Vegas and organising flights and accommodation for 12 plus the ceremony took about 6 hours maximum. The 2 of you could get married whilst on holiday/honeymoon if you don't want all the faff of a big do.

My husband has an illness which is likely to be life-limiting and without being married I would not receive his pension benefits - doubly important now as we have a child and I gave up my career to raise her.

Being married hasn't tangibly changed anything for us, apart from the fact that we wear rings, but does give us both a degree of additional financial security in the future.

fairy_lights

Your situation is similar to mine OP, neither me or my OH have any desire to get married, we don't want a wedding and are quite happy as we are. The benefits of us getting married will be small - we're extremely unlikely to ever earn enough for inheritance tax to be an issue and fortunately we're named as recipients for each others pensions etc.
Having said that, we're going to get married anyway so that in a medical emergency we're each others next of kin, no questions asked and no quibbling with his, ahem, delightful mother.
It will give us a bit of peace of mind, if nothing else.
We're just going to find the cheapest possible registry office option and then get pizza, no guests, no fuss.

SuperHan

You could get a power of attorney over health and financial matters. There's a small cost to this, but it would empower your partner to make decisions on your behalf if you were unable.


It would also protect each of your rights better if you were to ever break up.


There are a lot of tax implications to being married too.


If you were wealthy, there could be inheritance tax/capital gains tax benefits. Similarly, if you could benefit from marriage couples allowance, that may be a plus.


There are also tax benefits to not being married - for example you could each own a home in your individual names and not suffer the additional stamp duty land tax a married couple would.


But if you have good wills, are not particularly wealthy and have relevant power of attorneys, there probably isn't much real need to get married.

NewHome13

fairy_lights wrote: »

Your situation is similar to mine OP, neither me or my OH have any desire to get married, we don't want a wedding and are quite happy as we are. The benefits of us getting married will be small - we're extremely unlikely to ever earn enough for inheritance tax to be an issue and fortunately we're named as recipients for each others pensions etc.
Having said that, we're going to get married anyway so that in a medical emergency we're each others next of kin, no questions asked and no quibbling with his, ahem, delightful mother.
It will give us a bit of peace of mind, if nothing else.
We're just going to find the cheapest possible registry office option and then get pizza, no guests, no fuss.

Yes, this is so like our situation, but we both get on really well with the other's family.

While this does appeal to me, I worry that some members of the families would maybe be upset if we did just go and do this.