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 we already have rights for married people and rights for civil partnerships. Those are your options if you cohabit and want those rights.

They can if their partner has made a will. Which they should have done. Or they can make a claim against the estate, at least in England (don’t know about other jurisdictions).

Crazy, isn't it? I wonder if they'll start issuing passports or driving licences to everybody who's never bothered (or even wanted) to apply for them, because they assume that they just can't be expected to understand a very basic principle and process?

Our prenup cost us NZ$5000 each (GDP2,140) in lawyer's fees. How many people can afford that kind of money?

I think it’s an excellent idea.

There are far too many people living together with their partner for 20 + years that get nothing if the relationship ends.

whilst I agree that 3 years is a short amount of time (should be more like 5-7), it will help claims on benefits and homelessness.

I will give you an example of my sister. She has been with her “fiancée” for 22 years.

they have lived together for 10 years, firstly in her flat and then when HE brought a house. In terms of the law currently, she get nothing if he ends the relationship now. Nothing after 22 years of living like a married couple”

he is financially abusive, she doesn’t work because he’s disabled but the only spending money she gets is her PIP and he is a train driver earning well over £65k. He hasn’t put her on the mortgage or the house deeds…… we have warned her and she doesn’t see what we see.

however with this new law, she and many other women who are being abused will be protected.

i will never understand why people would “live as a married couple” but not commit to marriage….. if you don’t want the law to hit you wrong? Don’t move in with someone.

I've just tried to complete the consultation. - it's incredibly long and asks for a reason for every response you give. I'm now not sure they want our opinions.

Why are you living with someone as “a married couple” but not going to get married?

I think the new law protects you both.

Just don’t live with someone “as a married couple”.

I agree with the proposals as a whole but disagree with the details of it. I think cohabiting couples should have the same rights as married couples as more and more people do not get married.

With regards to asset aquired before the cohabitation/marriage - let say a house, inheritance (with no children), etc the share that the person who did not own the asset gets, should be based on contribution.

For example, I have no intent to get married. My partner owns a house, which I have spend considerable amount of money on, while also sill be losing on pension, savings cash etc for our child. If soemthing happened to him, it should all go to the children not his parents... and if we were to split up, then everything that I have contributed financially to his mortgage etc should be taken into account and I should be "bought out" as at the end of the day, otherwise I am practically paying rent to the father of my child. I don't think it should be 50/50 even if we were married, unless the contibution/investment was 50/50.

Cohabitation agreements should also be legally binding and made much more affordable and easily accessible so that couples can set these things out early in the raltionship, without going to sue each other at the end. For examle, if we could fill in a simple form stating all these and "registering it" that will avoid a lot of issues, including in cases of DV. Traferring tax allowance etc. should also be available when cohabiting!

It’s utterly ridiculous to suggest a couple should only live together if they want to get married, there are many reasons a couple might choose not to get married. Meeting in older life, assets and children all being some.

Frankly no one should be penalised in their own life for your sister’s choices.

I agree with the proposals as a whole but disagree with the details of it. I think cohabiting couples should have the same rights as married couples as more and more people do not get married.

But that’s their choice not to. Why should people effectively get the benefits of / be forced into the same contractual obligations of marriage or civil partnership when both are readily available (and the costs of just doing the legal bit aren’t that high).

Someone living in a couple isn’t living as a married couple if they have chosen to not be married.

Not marrying feels deliberate on his part - part of the abuse and financial control.

If he is abusive (and I believe he is, by the way) won't he just force her to opt out? Or do they have children?

Is this not only in effect if there is no will?

Absolutely ridiculous, just get married or have a civil partnership.

Totally unnecessary law.

It’s a ridiculous idea! Not going to help the housing crisis either. However, a feel they’ll be a fair few daft women that will lose their security to cocklodgers.

Yep. This works both ways. The protections in law are available for any couple who want to marry, or do a civil partnership. There should be an opt-out for anyone who doesn’t want to tie themselves to someone else.

I’ve submitted my views on this absolutely bonkers consultation.
I will never marry again as I’ve no intention of entering into a legally binding contract.
However if I decide to cohabit, and keep finances separate, I would expect to exit without either party benefitting financially or
having to pay the other party any ongoing maintenance. If I wanted that I’d marry again.

As a higher earning woman I’d always be worse off under this proposed legislation. Why is it’s the government’s business to interfere here? I’m absolutely not financially supporting a man I choose to live with if the relationship ends. And I wouldn’t expect anyone to support me either.
Utterly crazy. There’ll just be more single people living on their own.

Absolutely agree with this!!

In fairness this would potentially LOSE Labour money in tax revenue. Since a cohabiting partner could claim the same tax exemption that married partner's do. So I don't think it is intended to take more monet from people after all.

Also, it is a consultation right now. That's not a set policy from which any deviation is an embarrassing U-turn. It's literally at the "give us as many reasons as possible that this is a bad idea stage". And that's fine. I don't have a problem with new ideas being tested to see if they are good or bad. It's just that this is a bad idea.
The advantage of a consultation is it also allows better idea to be pushed to the forefront (eg publicise the advantages of civil partnerships/marriages)

I think it is full of dangerous unintended consequences.

Exactly this. If you want to marry, you can! If you don't, but want specific legal protections, you are perfectly free to see a lawyer about that.
If you don't, and let's say you have kids, you might choose to live with someone else if your first spouse dies, but you (probably) don't want the new spouse to get everything if you die.

I agree that it is good to be sensible and aware that there could be issues. I only lived with one man and then married him so it didn't affect me. He got half of the house I had paid more into, but I would have been happy enough with that even if we hadn't been married. Since then I've lived alone which I actually prefer. People here know how the system works, they just have to be careful.

It's certainly not the disaster forecast on this thread should it happen in the UK.

Well we balance each other out. You know several NZ women who have lost $$$$$, I live here and know none.

You do realise that it also works the other way and some MEN actually lose out as well? However, this is MN, men don't matter, it's only the saintly women who will suffer.

They’d better build more houses as all these non-cohabiting individuals will need somewhere to live. Divorce has already contributed to ramping up the number of houses/homes society needs compared to years ago.