Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Flip

Original poster

Question About The Common Law Wife

25 replies

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 08:40

DHs DF is 69 and is in the process of splitting up with his GF of 4.5 years.

She wants a financial settlement. What would she be entitled to. She was in a flat through work when they met and moved into his house selling/giving away some of her possessions. He has paid for everything, bills, holidays etc. She gave up her job but has used her pension for clothes etc for her. In the time they were together they moved house and bought a doer upper which FIL paid for the property and all the building work etc.

OP posts:

LaComtesse · 05/04/2008 08:42

How old is she? Pensionable age - would she be able to go back to work?

TotalChaos · 05/04/2008 08:43

I imagine her entitlement would be non-existent, as she doesn't seem to have contributed to the property, directly or indirectly.

chamaeleon · 05/04/2008 08:45

afaik she is not entitled to anything as a common law wife. if she feels he owes her money i am guessing she could try small claims but if you split and are not married i dont think you are automatically entitled to anything

hecate · 05/04/2008 08:47

common law wife is not legally recognised so she's not entitled to support, like a spouse would be. Like TC says, if she's not paid in, she's not entitled to a share of the house (which she would have been if they'd been married, regardless)

edam · 05/04/2008 08:51

No such thing as a 'common law wife' in English law. Your FIL should consult a solicitor but I agree with posters here, unlikely his lady is entitled to much.

Original poster

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 08:53

She is in her early 60s (not sure of exact age). She is a young 60s and could work.

OP posts:

WideWebWitch · 05/04/2008 08:53

She's not entitled to anything, agree, no such thing as common law wife afaik.

WideWebWitch · 05/04/2008 08:54

She's not entitled to anything, agree, no such thing as common law wife afaik.

tatt · 05/04/2008 08:54

legally don't think she can hope for much. Morally if she has no home as a result of moving in with him he should help her find somewhere/ claim benefits if she's now out of work.

WideWebWitch · 05/04/2008 08:54

sorry

Freckle · 05/04/2008 08:57

She may have acquired a beneficial interest in the house. Even if she didn't make any direct contributions towards the purchase of a property or towards any mortgage, she could argue that she made equal contributions towards household expenses which enabled her partner to cover other expenses. Has your FIL kept detailed records of what he has paid, etc?

It does seem harsh that, having given up everything to move in with your FIL, she should be expected to walk away with nothing. Perhaps your FIL could make her an offer, pointing out that, if she pursues a court action to obtain more, she may end up with nothing, plus legal costs.

LaComtesse · 05/04/2008 08:57

I'm guessing as she wants money then she feels hard-done by in some respect or wants money to get her own property. She hasn't paid out for much though and if she didn't even pay utility bills etc whilst the house was being done up, then she hasn't got much of a claim, as others have said.

He can give her some money off his own back to give her a helping hand of course, there is nothing to stop him from doing that but he would have to make sure it was clearly flagged as a one-off payment.

I'm puzzled why she'd want to claim from a former partner, with no marital/property/children in common tbh but then I am a very proud person .

Original poster

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 09:01

Yes, there is a moral issue. FIL said she could have a 3rd of the house (so 3rd for her and 2/3rds split between DH and SIL) which amounts to about £130K. Apparantly she wants everything she can get....though FIL said she would have to take him to court to get anything...I think alot said in heat of moment as has got bitter. FIL and SIL etc coming for lunch tomorrow so want to give him sound advice like better to agree settlement and not get solicitors involved as will incur costs etc.

OP posts:

Original poster

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 09:03

There is no mortgage btw.

OP posts:

Original poster

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 09:06

FIL said she could have the 3rd of the house when they moved in but was meant to be in the event of his death, assumming they still together.

DH and I think he should offer her £100K cash and to pay for the solicitors to write up documents to say she has no further claim on the estate. Thoughts?

OP posts:

Original poster

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 09:08

Para you all think I am a troll now as is a lot of money and to me like monopoly money as I am from single-parent/working class background but DHs family are well off.

OP posts:

Freckle · 05/04/2008 09:09

I think that is a huge amount for a relatively short relationship. If she's hanging out for more, then she's an idiot. I hope she's not basing her ideas on the McCartney divorce .

If nothing was put in writing, then he is not bound by his original thoughts, especially as that was meant to be in the event of his death, not in anticipation of the relationship breaking down. For such a short relationship where she has effectively contributed very little to the finances, £20,000 would be a generous offer. So if your FIL is happy to offer more, she should grab it and run.

hecate · 05/04/2008 09:12

I don't think you are a troll, you nit!

Personally, I'd advise him to say to her that he has checked the legal position with his solicitor, and it is clear that she is entitled to nothing but that out of the goodness of his heart, he is prepared to give her £100,000 but she will have to sign a document drawn up by the solicitor to say that she understands she has no entitlement and it is a one-off gift to her. If she does not want to agree to that, he will give her nothing and she can take him to court! - where she'll get nowt!

welshdeb · 05/04/2008 09:25

my fdil got divorced last year from his third wife. The marraige lasted just over 10 years Coincidentally.
She had her own house etc which she handed over to her son and moved into my fil's house which he had owned for over 30 yrs, and a better pension than my dfil and she was awarded nearly that much by divorce judge.

I think that 100k is very generous under the circs . If youir fil wanted to put her in the position she was in before the relation ship, a small lump sum to cover rent/deposit and value of any posessions given away.
I think £50k would be more than enough and much more than she would get if she went to court.

welshdeb · 05/04/2008 09:26

dfil not fdil

LaComtesse · 05/04/2008 09:38

I'd offer her 30k myself.

chamaeleon · 05/04/2008 09:39

£100k for 4.5 years and she came into the relationship with nothing? blimey, can i meet him?

if i were her i would expect enough time to find my own flat, some money for the stuff i had to get rid of and maybe some help with the deposit

LaComtesse · 05/04/2008 09:43

I wonder if she gave up work voluntarily or he asked her to? She could have contributed towards her current predicament by being too reliant on him. I'm guessing that he ended the relationship hence her demands? I'm stunned really.

Catz · 05/04/2008 10:39

As others have said, the term 'common law wife' has no legal status and so there is no equivalent of a 'divorce settlement' for her. There are some proposals that might go to Parliament in the near future to allow partners to get something like a divorce settlement but nothing in law yet.

That means she'd probably have to resort to trusts law to try and argue that she has a beneficial interest. Trusts law is horribly complex but essentially if there is no written agreement then there's two routes to claiming: (1) to establish that she had made a financial contribution to the house itself - it seems that she can't claim that here (subject to what Freckles has said about indirect contribution through bills) OR (2) to show that there was a common intention that she would have a beneficial interest AND that she acted in reliance on that.

My concern would be that she'd try to establish (2). From what you've said your FIL intended to give her a gift in his will i.e. he was only expressing his intention to give her a gift in the future. However, she could presumably argue that they had agreed that a third of the house was hers but that there was no need to actually formalise this until his death. She might also be able to say that she only gave up the job/flat/possessions in reliance on the financial security that would bring.

Hmm. It's impossible to say whether this would work from the brief details on an internet forum but I'd definitely see a solicitor before planning your position. Unless her case is strong I think I'd be tempted to tell her that she's not getting anything and only make offers if she looks serious about legal action (and I wouldn't start at 100K).

Original poster

WestCountryLass · 05/04/2008 11:48

Went off to the hairdressers...

Thanks for the info everyone, I will certainly pass it on to the FIL tomorrow.

OP posts:

Flip

Swipe left for the next trending thread