To not work full time?

[Lazym]

I have two children 16 and 12. Since my oldest turned 7 months I have worked part time. I cleaned in the evening for 8 years and for last 7 1/2 years I've worked in a supermarket 4 mornings a week, 4 - 8. Obviously when kids were younger this worked out well as I was back home for the school run and partner went to work. My youngest started secondary in September, so now childcare costs aren't an issue I've had comments from partner about finding a full time job. My point is I enjoy my job and am good at it so why should I leave this job to potentially start a job I could hate? The job I have doesn't have full time hours. I contribute to the household financially, pay for two weeks of food shopping every month and pretty much pay for all of the kids needs/clothes. One example, just spent £200 on my lad for his prom, partner paid nothing. So I work and do the usual household chores cook, clean, washing etc. Partner is very money obsessed, but I feel I pay my way too. From when they were very young he's always swanned off and done his own thing, leaving me to it. Another issue with working full time is my lad will be starting college in sept and he'll need a lift to the train station which is 6 miles away and collecting, so how am I supposed to do that? Just needed an opinion. Can never reason with partner as he's never wrong.

WTAF are you going on about? Are you OK? Serious question.

Protection of what? Say the average person maybe owns a £350k house..what’s going to happen if one dies or leaves the relationship? …the house gets split the same as it would do if it were in both your names. Marriage certificate not needed. You speak like everyone’s wealthy and has all these assets to split and protect. My sister has been with her partner for 26 years, they both own the house worth £250k..marriage pointless as house will be split regardless. Most people get married these days to post pics on Facebook and quite frankly it’s embarrassing seeing them divorce and wind up with joe the window cleaner from Essex. Fat lot of good that marriage certificate was there. Waste of £20k as far as I’m concerned.

I knew this would be a “separate finances” case. I cannot imagine spending my life arguing with the person who us supposed to love me more than anyone else in the world over who bought the toilet paper and who owns which bottle of milk. You sound more like flat mates than anything else.

Stop calling him “my partner”. Partners see each other as equals, and he doesn’t. If you are running the home, cooking, cleaning, washing, shopping, etc and you can collectively afford for you to work part-time, then he should have no issue with it. He doesn’t value your contribution as he doesn’t see you as an equal. That’s probably why he won’t marry you.

I’m fine but you’re obviously living in cloud cuckoo land if you think your marriage certificate will make an ounce of difference to the outcome of your life if your husband decides he wants out.

I think that’s a massive stretch. He works full time, OP work 16 hrs a week. Does she not have the entire school day to “swan about” as much as she likes too? She isn’t sitting at home doing 6 hrs of housework a day, get a grip.

Oh fucking hell. YOU are the one living in cloud cuckoo land LOVE. Educate yourself.

You could be right. This thread has told me a lot of home truths I'm afraid.

@Mumtothreegirlies the op's band isn't on the house.

the house gets split the same as it would do if it were in both your names. Marriage certificate not needed.

I'm going to pass over the fact that marriage offers numerous protections beyond this that aren't replicable by any other means, because a) that'll be clear to anyone who does a quick Google and b) you raise an important point. You can indeed get a cohabitation agreement to protect your interests in the house. And yet I don't think I've ever known any "marriage is pointless" person on here to have done that. OP hasn't answered my question about it. It would indeed be a very good protection for unmarried cohabiting people....so why isn't it more common?

Without any such protection, if the house is entirely in one person's name, it wouldn't be split as if it were a joint asset except perhaps in very very exceptional circumstances. As it is, OP's partner could chuck her out right now (I'm assuming no cohabitation agreement) and there's nothing she can do.

I think you’ll find you’re the naive one. I’m not living with rose tinted glasses on thinking the fact I have a husband is going to somehow make me less vulnerable. Married or not everyone has to make sure they have their financials in place. Marriage is a fun ceremony to show your commitment that’s it.
its not important in OPs case. OP needs to work on her own situation and getting married won’t solve her issues.

Why on earth would the OP get half the house if her partner leaves her? Her name isn't on the mortgage, they are not married and she would have no legal right to anything of his. That includes house and his cash.

@Mumtothreegirlies don't patronise me.

The op isn't on the deeds of the house. She is fucked - he can kick her out at any point.

If they were married he couldn't as the house would be a joint marital asset.

Where did you get your law degree, out of interest?

Exactly marriage isn’t going to solve OPs issues. The issue is her partner legally owns the house.
I didn’t get married to offer me any ‘protection’ and I’d argue that’s the case for the average married person many of whom are renters or live in council houses.

@Mumtothreegirlies PLEASE STOP!

On paper it’s unreasonable to not work full time but reading your responses why should you? Your partner hasn’t added you to the mortgage, so why should you pay a higher share when he’s also likely to not lift a finger in the house. As you know OP you’re in a very vulnerable position and need to start taking steps to protect yourself. I’d be telling him he adds me to the mortgage, gets married or I’m gone.

Protection is the only thing marriage gives you. If you just wanted a public display of commitment, you could have a ceremony with no legal status.

Her partner owns the house. That problem would be solved with the protection of marriage or a cohabitation agreement. Even wills can be changed without someone's knowledge but it's hard to divorce someone on the sly.

@Mumtothreegirlies you are wrong. If e op was to be married, apart from anything else the house would be a joint marital asset.

Please stop. You are giving legally incorrect advice.

You are in a vulnerable position only working PT but running a house IS work, albeit unpaid - if you are working FT, what is going to happen to everything you do in the house? If the current financial set up covers everything why the obsession for you to work FT? Your older child has had you around out of school, surely your younger child deserves to have you around too.
Running a house/ looking after a family is sadly undervalued.

Yeah, it would solve one of OPs problems. That is, she'd be able to register her marital home rights over the property and, in the event of a split, her contribution to the family would be recognised when assets were being divided.

You can’t force someone to marry you.

@Mumtothreegirlies LOL

Everyone saying marriage is just a piece of paper.... Your house deeds... Money... The entirety of the law... The Bible... Court proceedings... It's just pieces of paper 😂 get yo piece of paper!!!

This is categorically untrue, who are you trying to fool? Are you actually a man, who doesn't want to marry their partners, so you won't need to share your assets when you split?

That at least is true, but very little else you've written recently is.

@Mumtothreegirlies I never said anyone could.

However, marriage provides protections way beyond just being a piece of paper.

Please can you stop posting incorrect advice.

If the OP were married:

1. She would most likely receive a proportion of the equity in the house in the case of a split. Potentially the majority of it. Even compared to if she were on the deeds but unmarried, marriage enables a split driven by the needs of the DC and not merely 50:50.
2. She would be able to receive some of her ex's pension, which since he earns well is potentially quite large.
3. If her partner dropped dead tomorrow, she would have much greater ability to access the finances and assets and would not have to pay inheritance tax on them.

Marriage could not be more relevant and significant in this specific instance of a high-earning man owning property and living with a woman who is not on the deeds and has a very low income. It has the capability to make a huge financial difference in the event of a split or a death.