To see a lot of couples in this situation

[Whatyoutryingtodo]

I see quite a few couples I know irl who've been together several years, engaged, own a house and have children, but no wedding plans made.
They've often been engaged for several years too but don't have any plans to get married, and say stuff like they'll 'get round to it at some point'.

Just curious as to why this happens quite a lot, not judging as I myself am unmarried and childless due to no interested suitors!

I think people will say that the man has everything he needs so why bother marrying her... Sometimes I wonder why people consider marriage more of a commitment than children? At least with marriage you can divorce, even if it's expensive and stressful, children you're tied for life.

We paid £70 to put our intention to marry. £57 + 2 £30 booking fees as we had to change the date. This is only for 2 witnesses and the 2 getting married. I think it was £100 and something to have 10 guests.

My dress was £30 and the we took the two witnesses out for a meal and a plus 1 which was £200-250 at a pretty nice restaurant £20-30 for a main course sort of place

A £200 registry office wedding is well worth the protection it offers a woman who gives up work or goes part time when DC arrive. In my opinion it’s essential to get married for that reason.

When was this? I saw a video online recently of someone totting up the fees and it came to a lot more than this.

Exactly this. Mine was about the same and it was gorgeous. Weddings needn't be expensive, it's the memory that counts.

It very obviously doesn't mean literally nothing.

It may not be necessary in certain circumstances but would you think that a SAHM where their partner owned the house and had a large pension etc was wise to stay unmarried? Surely you can see how it means a great deal there? You may think that that is a situation you'd never be in, it's a situation I'd never be in either, but it's still obvious that being married would make a big difference if they broke up.

In a long term relationship for 20 years, contemplating marriage as it will tidy up our finances! Not bothered if my partner inherits everything. I won’t be around.

@SisterHyster I think Maisy paws thinks that being unmarried affords the same protection - it absolutely doesn’t and I can’t stress this enough, having been through various iterations of this. None whatsoever other than what you put in. Nothing. Please note this - nothing.
You’ve (sisterhyster) created a really great, equal partnership via legal documents. If two people don’t do this, then they remain unprotected. Marriage is the protection for the lower earner, and their kids.
That’s the worry I think, and while you may have found getting those docs done straightforward many wouldn’t.

Despite other posts here, the legal protections are not equal as an unmarried partner. If your name is not on the mortgage/title deeds (say you live in a house he owned before you met or that HE inherited so only his name is on the deeds per the bequest), and/or you have not paid anything towards the mortgage because you spent your salary on the childcare or paid for the family car, you have no claim on the ‘family’ property. Moreover, if he has a death in service scheme or company pension you have no entitlement to it, so if you have children and he dies you will be left with nothing unless he made a provision for his children to receive the funds (and even then you’d have to have been named as trustee otherwise it is locked away until they reach 18). Yes, in terms of the jointly owned family home you MAY have equal rights in the same way to unromantically connected people who purchase a house together would but a) whether you own an equal share or not depends upon whether you have a tenancy in common or tenancy in kind and b) you do not own his half/share upon his death unless he has left it to you in a will (and then it may be subject to inheritance tax); if you are married, it is automatically yours no taxes due. So…. If you have children it is always financially safer to be married, and this is especially the case if you do not jointly own your property.

Unless I’ve misunderstood do you mean that a married woman with a mortgage free home may not get half the house in divorce? I’m not currently on the deeds of our mortgage free home .. Due to laziness mostly.

You need those documents even if you are married, so again, it’s irrelevant.

I actually think many unmarried people are actually more smart about protecting themselves than many married people are. Very possibly just because my “circle” is made up mainly of women who are comparatively high earners and not SAHP’s.

IDK about other people but for me it's money.

Also, I have been married once. I am engaged to my current partner but I'm not in a huge hurry to spend money we don't have on a party that won't change our relationship (already got kids and living together).

He has never been married, and is into the idea, but we both have more important things going on right now.

April!

I don't disagree with any of that. But how barbaric that in 2023 when divorce (i.e. people have married had kids and then are divorcing) the divorce system is so utterly and totally inaccessible, expensive and intimidating to some people and able to be manipulated by other people that the spouse who will end up with the children the majority of the time can be "threatened with a very expensive court case may make someone decide to play nice and offer you what seems fair to avoid court".

People agree to all sorts of things like that because they cannot afford the legal process which the UK family court operates even now and ultimately end up with the sole or main recourse being the Child Maintenance Service which has only just come in the 21st century via its links with HMRC.

Shocking and wrong that women go into this without a clue as to what might happen if (as they assume on their wedding day) it does not go as they planned on that day.

@Possumzilla but the question of the thread is, if you don’t want to get married, why did you bother getting engaged? The OP was asking what people thing being engaged means, if they aren’t going to get married?

If I come across a long engaged couple with no date set I thinks it's because one doesn't really want to do it but agreed for an easy life.

Exactly this

@Catslovenip if you aren’t on the deeds, it means you down’t own it. This means you won’t automatically inherit - if he were to die without a will you inherit the first £270k and the remainder is shared between his descendants (ie the court will require the house is sold); however he can leave it to you as the sole beneficiary in a will (but I think this may then be subject to inheritance tax?); in a divorce, you can argue what your contribution was (eg., did you pay for an extension/conservatory) and a court might award you a sum, but no, you aren’t entitled to anything… So go get those deeds amended pronto!

To the original question.

If I met someone who had been engaged a long time I would assume:

(1) one of the couple had agreed to engagement to placate the other but was in no hurry at all to get married

(2) one of the couple does not 100% trust the other in the couple and wants to literally be wearing a ring as an outward sign of the other party belonging to them.

This could also be a status thing (often for the woman) - for example I know a woman locally who has been dating a widower for a very long time and after 7 long years rumour has it they have got engaged and only now her car appears round the clock 24/7 in his driveway where up to the engagement she literally left every night and came back in the morning (according to neighbours) - they are both in their late 40s early 50s and it is a second marriage for her too. My guess is that their engagement might also be very drawn out but apparently she is extremely happy so good for her; or

(3) they both desperately want to get married to an equal degree but cannot afford it (which of itself I would be puzzled by but I respect peoples private reasons for that whatever they might be).

What does confuse me a bit is the logic which is often offered about why the actual wedding (but not the engagement) has been delayed - being that "You only get married once so everything must be perfect" (usually meaning how one party always dreamed it would be namely involving £££) which I get to an extent unless that means the wait is 20 or 30 plus years from engagement or one of the people saying this in on their second marriage.........

My experience is people in the it’s just a piece of paper/we’ll get around to it group aren’t usually shit hot on the paperwork.
It’s people like sisterhyster that have made a conscious decision not to marry that have everything in order.
If you are unmarried you need to be 100% sure you’ve completed all paperwork to nominate partner for death in service/pension. Unfortunately lots of men don’t get around to it - easily overlooked if you are moving jobs.
I’ve mentioned this before on here but a case that vividly stayed with me from my time as a trainee solicitor was a man who died in a local factory accident- front page of local paper. Woman in her 40s came for advice. They had married as teenagers, separated not long after and everyone thought they were divorced but never got around to it. He’d lived with his girlfriend for 20 years. But as well as no divorce he had no will and not put his gf down for pension/death in service. Wife inherited the lot. I can remember the secretaries being aghast and naive 22 yr old me saying well she’s his wife she inherits..if he’d wanted gf to get anything he’d have sorted it.

One day I may marry but I’d never want the circus of a “wedding”.

@millymog11

You misunderstood.

If the couples are married then divorce laws kick in and default there in a long marriage with kids is 50/50. Doesn't matter if on deeds or not.

If unmarried then its different rules via TOILTA where it looks at intentions at time of purchase and there it's very hard to get a share if not on deeds.

@Rhaenys @Superscientist it would seem there is no standardised cost for a registery office do, our local office is £400 just to get the piece of paper, that’s no rings, dress, suit, etc etc whilst a pp has posted that there local registry office wedding would only be just half of that cost.
(btw our registry office is and utter dump, so not even any nice picture to be had…..)

councils don’t charge the same.

I don't consider anyone engaged unless there's definitive plans to marry. 'After I graduate' 'when we've got the house deposit' 'after we've moved' 'spring 25' are just about definitive plans. 'When the kids are older' or even simply 'later' is not a promise/commitment/plan so not an engagement in my eyes. An engagement is a prelude to marriage. A ring and/or a party does not make an engagement.

This is us. Its just happened that way. We got engaged and pregnant very quickly. Had another child and although we both want to be married neither of us wants a wedding. We wanted to elope and mentioned this and the inlaws kicked off. We are both introverts so a big wedding for other people is our idea of hell. We will do it eventually I'm sure but it doesn't really bother us so not sure other people care?

burnoutbabe · Today 19:56

That is bang on correct.

I am not sure what bit you think i misunderstood.

Perhaps it was me talking about whether or not the woman should work after she has children.
I think a lot of people think provided they are married then once children come along as they are married they can give up work (maybe indefinitely) and if the husband threatens divorce then she takes 50% of everything under was married now divorced rules - which is very far from the case. It does happen but certainly not every time. (So even if you are legally married for family law purposes that should not be a deciding factor alone in whether or not to work for financial reasons).