AIBU to think why did this couple just get married

[Gin96]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51676780

Why does the govt give money when people
Die never heard of this
And sorry to be a callous but why is their tragedy a taxpayers issue ? Never heard of this

You can't sneak a legal arrangement on a couple by default. If a couple want to be recognised in law, with all the protections and privileges that engenders, they need to go and make an active declaration with witnesses. I.e. get married. A contract is then formed which can be removed if the couple desire.

It's not something that can, or should, happen passively. Otherwise how would you define it?

Is it living together? And for how long? I've lived with some of my housemates for much longer than some people have been with their partners and I'm definitely not in a relationship with them.

And what happens if you want to live with someone but you both have children from previous relationships and you want to keep your lives and assets legally separate? Will the law say "no, tough, you've been living together for X years so you're as good as married"?

Is it if you have children? I think the number of single parents shows pretty clearly that's no proof of a solid commitment.

Perhaps if you have children and you've lived together for more than X years? But then that would discriminate against those who don't or can't have children. And some relationships move faster than others. Will there be cries of outrage from those couples whose relationship has resulted in a pregnancy after only 3 months that they don't qualify should they break up one year later?

And how would it end, if you wanted the relationship to end? There's no contract to annul or cancel. Would you really want a bailiff chasing your de-facto "husband's" debts from you, two years after he moved out? How about if he tried to make a claim on a house you bought after the break up? Because after all, you lived together for 15 years and have three children, so you're as good as married and the assets are joint.

How would it work if one partner died and two of their ex long term relationships came out of the woodwork to try and claim the inheritance from their "spouse"? What if you'd been with one for 25 years but had been with another for 4? What would happen if they both tried to claim the bereavement allowance?

Do you see why this cannot work?

If you want to have your relationship recognised in law just go and sign that piece of paper.

if you own property and/or have minor DC with someone, they absolutely can be a twat over the courts and not marrying them won't protect you from that

In friends position if she didn’t have to divorce her husband then there wouldn’t have been any court cases. Or if there had it was in writing exactly who owned what

And what happens if you want to live with someone but you both have children from previous relationships and you want to keep your lives and assets legally separate? Will the law say "no, tough, you've been living together for X years so you're as good as married

This. There is a reason I won’t be remarrying and that’s how hard won everything has been following divorce. No man gets to remove any of that from my children.

I don’t agree with the court ruling personally.

I have received widowed parents allowance and so while I don’t want to see others denied the support I had, I think it just gets too messy if you assign married couples rights to non married couples. Who should end up with the payments if there are children to two different partners? Divorced parents may rely on child maintenance but there’s nothing other than the usual benefits to support them if their ex dies.

Forcing things like this on unmarried couples could be a slippery slope, and it takes away choice. Being unmarried is a valid choice, with both benefits and unwanted consequences in some circumstances, but it’s not difficult to get married when it’s what two people both want.

This happened to me. My partner died and I was unable to even arrange the funeral.
Luckily I had my own house and a well paid job. I'd never have kids without being married if I could go back

zsazsajuju
said:

“My dds will inherit my pension taX free if I die before 75. So would anyone else I left it to. Has nothing to do with being married.”

Then your pension is not my 33-year old workplace scheme and your daughters are not my spouse.

In friends position if she didn’t have to divorce her husband then there wouldn’t have been any court cases. Or if there had it was in writing exactly who owned what

This wouldn't preclude a TOLATA claim being made, if one party fancied it.

TOLATA

Only if they wanted to sell.

The btl properties she wouldn’t have minded just to collect her half of the rent.

She is going to have to sell the marital home anyway so will get some money to buy a smaller property but won’t have an income apart from some disability benefits so her buying power will be reduced because she needs to have a buffer for emergencies or to just add to her monthly income.

No, TOLATA claims don't necessarily end in a sale. They are, however, potentially very dear. If you own property and/or have minor DC with someone, you are risking them forcing you into expensive and nuisance court proceedings. It is a fact that refraining from marriage simply does not protect you from that possibility.

But in friends case she would have been quite happy for the status quo with the btl properties continue as it would have given her an income.

No one would have been forcing anyone to do anything.

No sympathy, you either get married or get yourself to a solicitor and get a cast iron financial agreement in place.
I don't know any one in RL who doesn't know that they won't have the same rights unmarried as married. I know quite a few people who don't want to marry as they know this and are relunctant to tie themselves financially to someone.

,You can't sneak a legal arrangement on a couple by default. If a couple want to be recognised in law, with all the protections and privileges that engenders, they need to go and make an active declaration with witnesses. I.e. get married. A contract is then formed which can be removed if the couple desire.'

Yup - there ARE lots of people making conscious decisions NOT to get married. If I had decided this I'd be well hacked off if someone lumped me or my kids with 'rights' we didn't plan on. Or I died and my ex-partner got 'rights' over my kids etc. that I didn't plan on.

We are married, and we got a civil partnership then marriage to have exactly the legal protection it brought for us and our family. Though we still get the you're not 'really' married, not a 'proper' family attitude from homophobes we have the legal protection for our family.

'Why does the govt give money when people
Die confused never heard of this
And sorry to be a callous but why is their tragedy a taxpayers issue ? Never heard of this'

Because that person may have paid tax and NI for years and years but will now never claim any of it in pension so depending on how many years worked etc the family get some of it. It's not a lot.

And sorry to be a callous but why is their tragedy a taxpayers issue

It's not a tax payer issue🙄. Its their contributions they have paid with their money into national insurance.

Again though oliver, you're basically arguing here that some people are better off unmarried. This is clearly true, but doesn't refute the point that deciding not to marry someone doesn't open you up to the possibility of them using the courts to basically punish and harass you if you have children and/or property with them. I'm really not wrong on this. I've seen it in practice. The only way to protect yourself against this possibility is not to have children or property with a partner, ideally not even to cohabit in a property you own. If you do any of these things, staying unmarried doesn't mean there cant be court proceedings.

And you need to be aware that in a divorce, the divorce itself is usually the easy bit. The majority are undefended. Where people run up the big bills is the property and kids.