Legal protection for unmarried SAHMs

[lilyaldrin]

Basically, what do I need to do to confer the same financial/legal protection as marriage would?

We have joint children and although we don't currently own property together, we hope to in the next few years.

First thing I'm tackling is wills leaving everything to each other. What next?

This is long overdue for me but I think I should "do the deed" at a registry office to save the faff with a solicitor. It really sticks in my craw to do it but I will if it's the most practicable option. For those of you that have done it, do you have to say anything like vows or can you just sign a piece of paper? & can they do it totally fuss-free, like no congratulations, enforced joviality, etc

MIL wanted to say a few readings, but other than that, we said the generic vows they give out to you, and that was it. Very quick ceremony. My own parents got married at the register office too. It's not that bad!

The registrar just walked out after saying her bit, said good luck congrats, something along those lines, and that was it all over with.

To add to chunderella's point about IHT, whilst £325k seems a lot, it could affect your "average" family.

Average UK house price is £242k,
add in an £8k car,
death in service benefit (assuming you are entitled to it as many are not if unmarried) of 4 x average salary £27k = £108k

and you're well into paying IHT

idlevice - we just read out the pre-printed words, signed on the dotted line, the registrar said "congratulations" and that was it, off we went.

Death in service benefit is rarely part of the taxable estate though, is it? It's paid directly to the beneficiary where possible for precisely this reason, and only goes into the estate if no nomination form has been signed and the scheme does not have a "default" nomination.

And your scenario would only arise if the house was in the sole name of the deceased, with the whole value forming part of their estate. Even so, in the scenario you suggest the IHT liability would be 13 grand, which would be annoying but (given there was a 108k cash payment on the table) would not result in the loss of the house.

Ok, quick question. Am sahm but property and savings are all mine, all in my name, separate bank accounts etc, but have dc, born after 2003 with dp's name on birth certificate, so he has parental responsibility.

It is in my interest to not marry isn't it? That way my dc inherit the property rather than dp, I assume that I need to have someone named as trustee until dc reaches 18?

It is in my interest to not marry isn't it? That way my dc inherit the property rather than dp

If you write a will leaving it all to the children, then that makes it pretty much irrelevant as to whether you're married. And you need to write a will appointing guardians and trustees anyway.

However, if this really what you want? How old are your children? Are you saying that if you died, you'd want your assets to go in trust to your children, and their father to have none of it? Where and with whom would they live, and using what money?

Our wills appoint my brother as guardian, and give him very wide discretion to spend the assets. If he took my children in, he'd need a larger house. If he took my children in, I'd hope that they and his children would be brought up as quasi-siblings, so would have similar amounts of money for holidays and education: that might involve "my" money supporting "his" children for parity.

The scenario of both of us dying and triggering trust/guardian issues is similar to yours if just you die, and I'm not sure what you envisage happening under intestacy. My guess is that the money would be with the court of protection, the children would be reliant on your partner's income to get them to 18/21 but they'd be rich then. That strikes me as a very bad outcome.

"£325k seems a lot"

Haha, our property is nowhere near this amount!

Ok, so children are tiny, under 2. DP is tbh rubbish with money, I can see the house being sold/remortgaged for ridiculous reasons and that there would be nothing to pass on.

If we remain unmarried, my understanding is that as my next of kin, it passes to my children. I am more than happy for dp to stay in the house with them and that money from insurance & savings is to be used for them all but not that he has financial control of the house, it's the biggest asset I have for the dc and something that I worked bloody hard for. It's worth well below inheritance tax thresholds (160k, so noone's going to be loaded ).

Aside from the death side of it, I also assume that were we to marry that he would then have spousal rights to the house under those terms, so again, my asset would be under threat, or would it remain mine because of the dc's?

It's hateful all the emotions that go into money & assets. No wonder so many people die without having sorted anything out. And i'm just talking about from the point of view of upsetting people.

Sorry, that was a reply to friday16 thanks for taking the time to reply

I can see the house being sold/remortgaged for ridiculous reasons and that there would be nothing to pass on.

Support that after you die, your husband's job relocates? Suppose that after you die, one of your children falls ill and it's necessary to buy an adapted bungalow? Suppose that after you die, your partner kindly offers to merge households with your mother so that the children can be raised better by both families, but can't?

I am more than happy for dp to stay in the house with them

Without a will, that isn't certain. It depends on what the trustees (if you are intestate, the Court of Protection) decide is in the best financial interests of the children once they reach eighteen. They are not responsible for ensuring that the children's homelife is beneficial, just that the investment makes the best return.

and that money from insurance & savings is to be used for them

Without a will, it can't be: it'll be in trust, and unless that trust has an explicit provision for its use for their education and maintenance, the money's tied up until they're 18. So if your partner wanted to, for example, be a SAHF for your children, he can't. If your partner lost his job, they can all live on benefits while looking at the money via the medium of bank statements. I doubt that's what you'd want.

I also assume that were we to marry that he would then have spousal rights to the house

Consult a solicitor. It's not as simple as that.

If you don't have a will, however, all your assets will be unavailable for any purpose for your children (education, ponies, cancer treatment) until they are eighteen. I don't see how that's a good thing.

Chunders makes a good point about maintenance.

Suppose you die tomorrow. Your partner decides to move to live with his parents/sister/whatever so that there is more childcare and support available for his children. Your children hold your house in trust. After sixteen years, they can sell it. But in the meantime, who pays the (not inconsiderable) council tax, insurance and maintenance bills? He'd be a mug to do it out of his income, probably couldn't afford to, and may not be able to (can you get buildings insurance on someone else's property?)

I've not dealt with the court of protection in this guise. But my father did have to get a full-on court of protection arrangement for his mother-in-law, because she became incapable of administering her own affairs without an EPoA (as it was in those days) having been set up. It was a complete nightmare, and also extremely expensive, with very complex accounting requirements As things stand, (chunderella may know the details) your children's assets after your death would be administered by the court of protection. That would be expensive, inflexible and possibly have perverse outcomes. Get a will, at least, to sort this out.

Whilst I see your point of view ammicissima, where one party has brought very substantial family assets to the marriage and dies young, you do occasionally end up with bona fide "Cinderella" situations where the dead mother's assets are passed to the father, who then remarries and dies, leaving everything to the second wife - who then leaves everything to her children, cutting the child of the first marriage out completely. Rare but by no means unheard of.

Unfortunately, you have to think with your head not your heart when it comes to Wills, and working out the future in the long term once children come along.

I love DH, but I also want us to both we very aware of what will happen if one passes away before the other and what we'd be entitled to. You have to remain transparent as a couple.

This thread is properly fascinating! Friday & Chunderella - excellent & useful know-how, thanks ladies

If you want all the legal protection of marriage,get married.otherwise see solicitor
Become fully informed of all the facts,implication of being unmarried,how affects you
Marriage isn't desired by everyone,but I'd say if you're really wanting to be married have that marriage conversation v early on.and if one partner isn't for marrying at least you'll be clear.

So I made the suggestion on Wed evening. Described it as 'cheaper than paying solicitors to do the Wills, contracts etc' so as not to frighten him. Our RL is WAY past the romance stage and that would seem odd to me and to him. He completely ignored what I said (often does this when something serious needs to be decided).

We are going through mortgage and finance stuff at the moment so perhaps a chat with a solicitor will need to be arranged.

Chunderella on a political note I think it is absurd that people have such little knowledge about law and rights (myself included). I know a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, but knowledge is also power.

The media contorts any government messages including things like budget statements, which can be quite useful for knowing how to plan your life - everything is distilled to the most controversial point and we are left still clueless.