What do you think about proposed rights for cohabiting couples?

[CheekyPombear]

Recently I have read that the government is going to give rights to couples that live together equal rights that only married people usually have.

The proposals are if you live with someone who owns or inherits a property or money after 3 years if you split up or they die you can claim half or inherit.

That is insane. Even if your married for three years under current law its classed as short and you wouldnt get half.

There is a older gentlemen who lives with his disabled brother on my street.

Say his brother dies and he takes a younger lodger in and he dies that lodger could say she had a romantic relationship with him and claim the property?. If thats the case whats the point of making a will?.

Also there is no such thing as common law marriage thats why people who dont want to lose money or property if a relationship ends dont get married.

What does anyone else think about this?.

I think it’s absolutely terrible and will be a huge slap in the face for women like me who have specifically chosen not for marry for good reasons.

Now my agency is to be removed without my consent? I could lose my property to a person who I have not chosen as a legal partner? How dare the government do this.

And further, if this government is serious about tackling relative poverty for women and children, and improving the life chances of those children, particularly after relationship breakdowns, it could finally tackle the scandal of unpaid and under-paid child maintenance in the UK.

ive not heard of this but I think its awful. I've witnessed a couple of messy marriage breakups where people involved have lost everything including their business due to divorce settlements. I myself have chosen never to marry for this reason as I dont want to risk losing everything ive worked hard for should the marriage fail.
Does this mean il need to also avoid being in any relationship whatsoever for risk of losing everything if we separate. Can they still make a claim to half of my home etc after a split or is it only after my death they are entitled? And what about dc will they no longer automatically inherit after a parents death?
Is there a link anywhere to read about this?

Yes, the state will interfere with our private lives.

There’s a consultation, apparently.

I think it's horrible. I've worked very hard to rebuild my life after a horrible divorce and to have security for myself and my son. I have no intention of marrying again as I want to protect those assets but now I couldn't even live with a partner if I found one.

I understand wanting better protection for long term spouses but 3 years in the grand scheme of things is nothing really. I think it should be 10 years minimum.

Has a public consultation gone out and if so does anyone have the link to it?

From what I read its only if they move in to your property. If your in a relationship but live separately then they have no claim.Even then they could lie and say they moved in but would require evidence.

It is concerning just say you take in a lodger for a bit extra money and once they have been in you home three years they move out and next thing you get a solicitors letter through your door. How could you prove it wasnt a romantic relationship.

A lodger you would need them to sign a rent book monthly.

Its a crazy proposal if its deemed romantic they have a claim in other words if they gave you sex its like your paying for it.

If its not romantic eg a friend on hard times or a lodger then theres no claim but what if the person claimed there was sex or romance how could you prove otherwise.

Also what if they already had a property or inheritance but seen a male or female with a property on their own moved in with you then claimed off you but kept theirs.

It is shite. Marriage gives rights. If people don't agree with them, then don't get married... but this proposal means it wont matter anyway.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/a-fairer-end-to-relationships

Found the consultation link

I think rather than give cohabitors rights, which takes away protection from those that choose not to marry, there needs to be more to educate those that say things like 'we don't need a piece of paper to prove we love each other' or 'children are a bigger commitment'

Some women are very naive when it comes to the protection marriage could bring them and some men take advantage of that. However, punishing those on the other side of the coin, that choose not to get married for those same protections but the other way round isn't right.

As a divorced lady … fuck that. If it happens I’ll live alone. I’ve worked damned hard to achieve my financial freedom after abuse.

Well il never be moving anyone into my home then, not that I had any intentions of doing so anyway as I quite like my independence.
This is just going to create more single person households as people will be very reluctant to have anyone move in unless they are stupid or have nothing to lose.

When people get married, there is a legal aspect to it... but if they do not, then the government should have no input into it whatsoever.

I think it should be 10-20 years.

Even current divorce guidelines are less than 5 years short marriage each party leaves the marriage with what they entered with. After 6 years its classed as long then it enters starting point of 50/50.

The idea after 3 years not even married is fucking criminal.

And how do you prove it wasnt romantic in nature.

Hiring a gigalo would be cheaper.

Interestingly, we (Aus) have had this system for as long as I can remember, although not sure when it came in but must have been decades ago. Ours is 2 years, not 3 years with the exception being effective immediately on birth of a joint child or registration of a civil partnership (some people don’t want to get married but choose this instead).

I’ve never heard of any issues with this here. Over the decades I have personally known of 2 cases where it was battled out legally and it seemed pretty robust. There was no chance of a lodger surreptitiously claiming a romantic relationship, as there had to be proof of joint contribution to the household where financials were forensically examined, and in one case where one person claimed no financial input but instead ‘support’ by means of household running to allow other person to concentrate on career, there was a high burden of proof required, it wasn’t just someone saying so and how could you prove otherwise, but quite the opposite.

Exactly. If you dont want to lose assets dont get married or civil partnership.

Why should the law change to suit certain demographics who have religious but none legal binding ceremonies. Have the religious do then get to a register office.

Annulment law gets me too you can only qualify it if wasnt consummated again how can you prove it wasnt.

I completely disagree with this proposal.

It’s not exactly difficult to get married or have a civil partnership if you want the legal contract - and many people have made an informed decision not to.

Good for you I hope your much happier now.

I think the new cohabitation act applies to UK only i dont know if it applies to Scotland residents.

One of the proposals could be a opt out.

But come on seriously if a man living in a council flat met a woman who owned a home outright worth seven hundred grand he wouldnt exactly opt out.

Yeah, both parties would have to opt out. What if one refuses?

Thats the million dollar question.

And vunerable people could lose money.

Please don't let this happen.

We have a similar law in New Zealand (called the Property (Relationships) Act 1976) and it's madness. Sometimes the cohabiting person can even claim rights after just 2 years if they prove they are vulnerable. People are choosing not to live together just to avoid this nightmare. Flatmates are having their wardrobe and living arrangements checked by Work and Income to prove they are not actually another flatmate's romantic partner. My partner and I decided to sign a prenup just in this case to opt our of the Property Relationship Act, and still it does not guarantee anything if there are problems afterwards. it feels like my autonomy as a person has been violated. I don't see myself "together forever" with anyone and I am happy for relationships to last whatever they last, be it 3 months, 3 years or 30. But I don't want the Government to assume that if I am in a relationship with someone for any amount of time, that means everything we own is shared. That should be our decision, and our decision only.

Unfortunately, this is what we have, and it's definitely not working. Take it as a warning.

Blimey thats mad. If i lived in NZ i could have met someone at 23 then 25 27 etc after that i would be well and truly quids in.

Our we an outlier country that doesn’t treat cohabiting couples the same as married

The proposal is ridiculous.

I was looking forward to perhaps finding a new relationship when ds goes to uni in September.

I am single, 60, own my house outright and am about to retire. I chose not to marry years ago and have raised my ds and paid for our home, by myself.

Why would I even consider a relationship that could cost me my and my child's home/security?

If these proposals became law, any future relationship could only ever be casual. I will not co-habit (what intelligent person would?) and the housing crisis will increase as a result.

This govt is even more stupid than I believed them to be.