Couples who live separately so they get additional financial support

[slimline]

A couple I know got married over a year ago, yet they still live separately. She has two children from a previous relationship and lives in a 3 bed house. He lives in a 2 bed house and has no children. I mention the size of their homes because it’s clear that there is ample space for the entire family to live under one roof. I can’t think of any other reason for their separate living arrangements (considering they have made a commitment to each other through marriage) aside from financial security, as her eldest child has SEN and she doesn’t work. He is working, which I assume could complicate things if he were to move in. Yes, I understand it’s legal, but I can’t help but think they’re taking advantage of the system in some way. This isn't the first time I've heard of couples or families living apart in order to increase their income. I’m ready to be accused of benefit bashing or called all the names under the sun. Don’t care sorry!

Some people think that you shouldn't be able to enjoy the benefits of a loving romantic relationship unless you are also willing to cope with the downsides like financial blending which they see as a necessity for a committed relationship. If you try and circumvent any of these downsides through an "alternative" approach to relationships, it causes resentment in people. They find it unfair.

No one gives a shit unless you are taking money from the state. Have a unconventional relationship. Walk your man like a dog through the streets, hang bells on his balls but just don’t expect my taxes to pay for it.

So they don’t get married and stay in a LTR. You still pay regardless.

It's perfectly legal unless you live together. Nobody is taking money they arent entitled to.

How on earth did you come to the conclusion that this is benefit fraud? There may be if he was living with her but not declaring this. Marriage in itself does not preclude one party claiming if they provably do not reside in the same household. I have vast experience in welfare benefits and you are literally talking nonsense.

I knew of a couple (friends of my grandparents) who lived in entirely different countries for “tax purposes”. It was all the husband’s doing, the wife didnt want that, I felt so sorry for her.

I have taken cases such as these through social security tribunals, have you?

Yes, in exceptional circumstances eg at the end of a relationship when a couple are still legally married but have broken up their relationship they can make separate claim. This is done to help women flee abuse.

This is considered very differently (by DWP) from the OP’s scenario where the couple have got married and present to the world as a married couple.

The final decision will take into account a number of factors such as sleeping arrangements, shared meals, shared shopping, doing shared leisure activities, whether they are considered a couple in the community, any shared bank accounts or debts, any shared assets, the list is long.

It’s a very unpleasant situation to be in having investigators watching each house, taking photos to compile evidence, even doing room inspections.

I would advise anyone to avoid being put under this investigation regardless of the outcome.

I would advise anyone to avoid being put under this investigation regardless of the outcome

Um, how? I have been with my DP for a few years. We have no plans to move in with each other.
We share nothing financial. But we go out together, have meals out. He stays at mine (a grand total of twice this year). I am on UC, he is not.
At what point are the DWP going to say that we should have a joint claim?

That’s fine. Do that instead. Marriage is meant to be a joining of two people into a union. It makes a mockery of the whole thing, to get married and then continue to live separately with separate finances.

Can you post the rules about marriage and what it means.

No - he has a mortgaged or outright owned house.
She will lose all her UC. He will have to fund all of that. Half the bills is not equal to all the UC especially as she gets disabled child element.

Does it?
Times change things progress. Marriage used to be the only acceptable way you could have children. The only way women could have a megre bit of financial security.
Even conventional modern marriages are "a mockery" of marriages from the last century - working wives, blended second families and not forgetting same sex marriage.

Marriage is what the law defines it as. Social judgement about what it is, is something else.

This is nonsense. If you appear on the council tax at another address, they leave you alone. This has happened to my neighbour numerous times because people report that her partner lives with her. He does. But as he also has a home elsewhere which he maintains, they can't prove anything and let it go.

If he could not provide this information, then there would be trouble.

Why is a mockery? Who said you have to have joint finances and live together? This is what I mean, just because YOU chose that married life, and I chose it too, other people don't have to.

Can I post the rules of marriage and what it means?

Well what a snarky little comment designed as a gotcha and with an implied faux naivety that really doesn’t cut it online anymore. Don’t bother getting married if you’re not going to support each other financially and you’re still going to expect the state to raise your kids and pay your bills. There. That’s rule number one.

I’m not married. Weirdly we’re managing to NOT be married and raise and pay for our own kids alongside paying for everyone else’s. How Avant-garde. You’re welcome.

But why should the husband pay to raise HER kids??

Because he married her and society assumed that when you marry the woman the children come as a package alongside her. No? You might need to go and look in the Relationship board as this stuff is talked about every day. The implied contract that goes along with the legal union. Two people coming together. The sanctity of marriage. What is yours, is mine. In sickness and in health.

To be fair your confusion might explain why so many relationship fail nowadays though 😆

Why should the State pay to raise HER kids? You're basically asking net tax contributors to happily fund this but think it's too much to ask of a man that has presumably chosen to commit to the mother and by extension her children?

When starting a new relationship everyone knows parents come as a package deal with their children. I'm not even talking about just financially either. It's totally unfair on the kids for the mother to have a partner that isn't willing to support the children emotionally, practically and financially. Where does this leave them in this setup?

I've never asked any partner of mine to support my kids either financially or emotionally ( including a husband)

Nor did I consider myself as a " package" with my kids. I'm allowed to have something or someone for myself only

What's wrong with getting the child's father to support them.? And if that's not possible then maybe get some benefits for the child but not the mother

Id be damned if I was going to cough up for a partners kids . Not that it would ever happen as a man with kids is a def no no for me

Of course the children's father should be supporting the children too. That's a completely different issue.

I am bewildered by your attitude to be honest. How can you progress a relationship and begin to merge lives with another person whilst seemingly trying to keep your partner/husband completely separate from your children? Logistically and emotionally this seems almost impossible and potentially very damaging for the children who basically would have some strange figure in their life that wasn't a step dad but was their mum's husband. A core part of their mum's life but nothing to them. It is incredibly dysfunctional and fragmented IMO and not at all conducive to building the healthy relationship and (blended) family units that benefit children and society as a whole.

Blended families?? You've only got to look on here to see the amount of hassle people have trying to do that

Maybe they are not keeping the dh ‘completely separate’ from the children, @Itchthescratch - they spend plenty of time together, but the final step of living together doesn’t work for the children or for all of them? Maybe this is the best way she can balance the needs and wellbeing of the children with her need for a meaningful relationship.

I think you need to keep editing your post until it makes sense. What on earth are you talking about? Have you talked to a therapist about your bizarre idea of what a healthy relationship looks like? What did your own family look like growing up? Your post is the epitome of dysfunction.

So stay single. Lots of people do it.