Basic first advice about separation please

[2019change]

My friend is making an appointment to see a solicitor but cannot see one for over two weeks. She is not married but has two children, both teenagers, with her partner of nearly 20 years. The house is in his name and she has never contributed towards bills as she has been a homemaker and looked after the children for most of this time. The relationship seems to have run its course. What can she hope to be entitled to? I know there is a difference between legal entitlement and what amicable ex partners agree to but strictly speaking what is she entitled to as she is panicking. I do not know so can anyone please advise and/or point towards some information on line? Thank you.

She'll be entitled to child maintenance. That's it.

Assuming it isn't Scotland where cohabs have a few more rights, yes the above answer is correct - Child maintenance only, and that depends on his income and how the children's residence is divided.

Now, talking about the state rather than the ex-partner ...
If she isn't working, then once single she can apply for Universal Credit, but that will be based on her searching for work (it is the new name for, among other things, Unemployment benefit & Income Support). That may include a payment towards rent if moving into rented place.

It's really grim for non-marrieds who give up a work/career, in terms of any kind of compensating payments.

As per @MadeForThis. She is entitled to didly squat. Child maintenance only

Bugger all basically!

Even cm can be incredibly hard to get especially if you've not been married.

Myself and others get flamed all the time for advising mners NOT to become financially dependent especially with children on an unmarried partner. It's insane.

Even here in Scotland there's no guarantee that the very few possible rights ex cohabitees can sometimes access will be granted.

So just to clarify there is no concept of having to maintain her as per what was happening before the break up?

Also what about the "marital" (his) home? Nothing has been agreed yet and hopefully an amicable agreemnt can be reached but if not do the same consideratons apply to what happens to the house as they do when people are married as there are children involved - such as the woman and the children being given the right to stay there until the children are 18? or is the position different as they are not married?

Please can someone point me in the direction of useful information pages as cannot find anything that detailed. Thank you.

No, she has no rights over his home unless she appears on the mortgage or can prove she has contributed financially. She could leave their teens with him so she only needs to provide a home for herself but that will make her less of a priority with the local housing team.

I hope her ex is willing to provide her with a house deposit because the alternative is her savings or universal credit.

"So just to clarify there is no concept of having to maintain her as per what was happening before the break up?"

Nope!

"Also what about the "marital" (his) home?" It's NOT A marital home - no not even in quote marks because they were never married. This is why myself and others on here repeatedly point out that becoming a sahm with ZERO protection from marriage is a terrible idea!

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/living-together-marriage-and-civil-partnership/living-together-and-marriage-legal-differences/

Basically even though there are supposedly possible rights conferred on children to live in the family home that very rarely extends to the ex who has no legal claim to the property. What it can mean is the property owner may be able to use claim to the family home as a way to get residency of the children in their favour if they so wish.

I've known of that happen, I've never known of an ex partner being able to stay in the family home and the owner be forced out! Not even when there's been abuse.

Your friend has been extremely foolish in being a sahm AND not making any contribution to the family home without ANY formalisation of the arrangement. There are some contracts/legal papers that could have mitigated some of the issues of being unmarried but as the couple are splitting I really can't see him retroactively handing her a huge deposit or anything! Most of the time even IF you're married it's hard enough getting child maintenance!

Frankly women should not be having children with a man without marriage first. It's really the only way in the uk to have a hope of fair treatment in the event of a split AND women who do this can also be royally screwed if their partner becomes incapacitated or dies.

It's why I'm so vocal on the matter having seen a relative turfed out of the family home by the late partners family (who she had previously got along well with) and while she and the children were still very much grieving having to return to full time work and put the kids in childcare. If they'd been married she would at least have kept their home and would be in receipt of his pension and death in service pay out.

If the children are now in their late teens she’s had ample opportunity to work and contribute to the bills. Guess you friend will now find out she needs to do this the hard way though now

Sometimes you can use section 1 of the Children Act (I think) to temporarily have some kind of payment. But seems rare, higher income cases mostly, and only a kind of 'loan' anyway.

I should have said, schedule 1.
www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed143067

There are powers to permit the mother+child to remain in the home, but it's rarely done, and (when it is) tends to be a time-limited thing.

I’m just wondering in a scenario like this the best option for unmarried people is to get their name on the mortgage/title deeds, surely then there would be a fair division if a split occurs?