Concerns about living together/not marrying...

[IcyViper]

Partner and I both planning to live together in the future. No plans for marriage. I was never keen on marriage - and remain so. (I am childfree and don't see children in my future, so for me, I always said marriage would only be 'necessary' if I were to have children).

I'm obviously aware of the legal protections marriage offers etc... he is not keen on marriage having been married/divorced.

I'm becoming increasingly agitated about living together as I feel like I would have no protection. In fact, it is not just a feeling, but a fact.

My concern is also that he has an ex-wife and children. I've never been married and (as above) have no children, so I am totally unencumbered. The imbalance has often been a problem in this relationship - and I've had to work through a lot, in truth. I do not trust (for very valid reasons) that I would be protected in the event something would happen to him - even though the place would be 'ours'. Not because of 'him' per se, but external factors.

He has a tendency to be (overly and sometimes wrongly) optimistic - whereas I am more cautious - and just want to protect myself here. I do not want to be made to feel 'highly strung' now or down the line by him, so I'm hoping to see what my options are now. If it's a 'raw deal' for me, I am happy to not live together.

Would you live with someone you weren't married to? AIBU to feel the way I do? Is there any way I can protect myself without marriage?

Apologies if this comes across as naive. Please be kind.

This is not necessarily the full answer, a marriage doesn't give someone full rights over existing assets, there can still ne assets tied up. OP needs to work with this man on what is or isn't fair, then do legalities or split if she doesn't like it.

It’s an anonymous forum l can make a comment, whether you disagree or not, it isn’t necessary to resort to name calling.
I’m not naive, to understand, op can make an informed decision herself.

But you are WRONG.
What part of that do you not understand?

I don’t understand you or other posters, with this incessant need to keep going on, ganging up on 1 poster, which says more about you as a person.I made a comment you disagree, that’s your prerogative, please let it go now.

I don't disagree with it. I and others are pointing out that it is wrong, incorrect, not true and that you were giving the OP incorrect advice.
It's you who won't let it go because you won't admit that it's wrong
There is no such thing in law as a Common Law spouse and it offers no protection.

As l said, this has just got too much now, you’ve made your point.I haven’t pushed my opinion, you’re deflecting now.My comments have been about posters, who have been name calling, because they’ve disagreed with my comment.
I’ve asked, to move forward, with your above comment you’re unable to let it go.This is just getting relentless now.

Careful now, Orange, challenging something that is blatantly untrue is 'ganging up'.

I'm going to blame Michael Gove and his "we've had enough of experts" bullshit from 2016.

Mostly, if I'm honest, because it's fun to have someone else to name when "I blame Thatcher" doesn't work.

But partly because the idea that facts are something that carry the same weight as uninformed - or just plain wrong - opinion is a depressing state of affairs.

Sadly we live in a post-truth age of "alternative facts"...

And yet here you are, jumping in, isn’t that ganging up.You’re probably the same poster, just very sad, been the highlight of your day.

@Freeyourminds - first of all, Mumsnet doesn't allow sock puppets. You cannot change a username on a thread. So @OrangeTeabags , GRex, Precipice, Heron, Osiris, myself and others are all different people, and no, we don't know each other. We do, however know a little about the law in this regard.

Sympathising with a poster who is dealing with someone so obdurate is neither jumping in nor ganging up. I wasn't adressing you. I feel Orange's frustration and am letting her know she's not the only one.

I was referring to you and orangeteabags
You’re the only ones who can’t let it go, again.
You weren’t addressing me, but you feel orangeteabags frustration😂Have you heard yourself, your comments are ridiculous.As far as, MN not allowing sock puppets, well the jury is still out on that one, the only ones you’re fooling are yourselves.

Jesus, stop tagging me if you don’t want me to reply, it’s weird!

Mumsnet HQ announced changes in Site Stuff some months back about preventing users from changing names mid thread to prevent socks. It also affects who you see Thanks messages from.

If you don’t understand the rules of this site, that’s on you.

You’re tagging me.I understand the rules of MN, shame you don’t.You jumped in on a comment, defending 'another’ poster because you feel their frustration.Every comment l’ve received, you’ve been tagging me, yet again.If you’re going to dish it out, then expect responses.

And yet again, didn’t tag that same relentless user, woke up to a notification that they’ve done it again,

@IcyViper it would be worth looking into inheritance tax. If you're married, you (as it stands currently) wouldn't pay it. But if you're not married, you would be liable to inheritance tax rules. A friend of mine whose partner sadly died recently, realised this very late and realised that she would have had to sell their house just to pay the bill, and would effectively be made homeless. All this while sorting out various finances and stuff and waiting a huge amount of time for his insurance payouts etc.

They got married last minute to avoid this (terminal illness for him) and she's kept the house. But then they didn't realise that when you get married, it nullifies your previous will which caused other complications.

So whatever your views on marriage, sadly tax is a big reason to consider it, or at least factor that into your decision. It's not as simple as just leaving something to each other in a will.

Flagging inheritance tax is a good shout.
I have a couple of friends who have married in later life for this exact reason.
It's not romantic, it's not great that you have to do it but sometimes you just have to play the game.

Playing the game😂

😂😂😂😂 back at you.
🤷‍♂️

I stick to 1 name though, on every thread, that’s the difference.

As do I.

Just imagine, if you can, that more than one person could see the untruths you were posting & each one chose to point it out.

Because that's what happened.

Anyway, you clearly seem obsessed with this and I have better things to do right now.

Mumsnet can clear up for you how many posters there are @freeyourminds. The rules of the site do state you should report rather than troll-hunt, so that might be a better option.

By the way the reason everyone else was agreeing with each other is because they were agreeing on legal facts, not opinions.

Don't buy jointly 🥰

Thank you GRex, I don’t really need your involvement.I’m not going to be responding to any more quotes, by the person who has been continually tagging me.It’s not about my opinion, whether posters agree or not, it’s about when posters who are unable let things ago and think it’s ok to name call and continuously quote.
I don’t really require your advice, because it’s so ridiculous.I’d rather you didn’t tag me again and just leave it.