Views on proposed cohabitation rights changes and the opt-out model

[PokemonQueen]

NC for this, as I've been pretty vocal about it in real life.

How do people feel about the fairer end to relationships consolation? Especially changes to cohabitation rights on separation.

www.gov.uk/government/consultations/a-fairer-end-to-relationships

I don't dispute the problem, women who've sacrificed careers, done the childcare, or been financially controlled in long cohabiting relationships are genuinely left exposed. But I have real issues with the automatic opt-out model, especially for people already cohabiting. Lots of us (including women with assets to protect) have already deliberately chosen not to marry because we wanted to keep finances separate. That was a conscious decision. An opt-out scheme just reverses that default and makes us go through hoops to preserve it.

What if one partner refuses to opt out? That suddenly gives enormous leverage to whoever has least to lose. And there's a horrible irony where a financially controlling partner could use the opt-out process against the very women this is supposed to help. There's also a pretty obvious perverse incentive: if your savings become claimable, why save? Especially if one of you is a saver and the other a spender.

I'm also a bit annoyed that the whole consultation reads like the decision's already been made and they're just sorting the details (what qualifying period, what if someone's still married to someone else).

On a personal note, the opt-out framing is already causing tension in my own relationship. The assumption that wanting to opt out means you're expecting it to fail, or don't trust your partner. I suspect I'm not the only one who would have that problem.

I support relationships with kids being treated the same as marriage because cms is fucking pitiful.

the rest I’d need to think about

I think this is a terrible idea and will have all sorts of unintended consequences, including partners living apart when they would prefer to live together, with the added costs that involves + effect on housing market. Just educate people about the pros and cons of marriage and CP.

Exactly. Maybe kids is the deciding factor.

I don't have kids with my partner, so I don't see why he should have a claim on my savings if we separate.

Agree where there are children the law needs to change.

There also needs to be proper sanctions for those who won't pay maintenance, or even where they are deliberately difficult when it comes to access for their children. If you refuse to pay without acceptable grounds, be declared bankrupt perhaps, or lose your passport and driving licence until you pay up.

I think now there is the option of civil partnerships for anyone, agree this should be taken into account.

It’s really bothering me that nobody seems to be considering coercive control. I was in a financially abusive cohabiting relationship and had these rules been in place he would’ve been entitled to a lot. No checks, no safeguards. It’s a terrible idea.

Thanks for linking the consultation, I tried to respond but the questions are incomprehensible.

The separation aspect is one thing but I do agree that long term partners should be considered as spouses in death. The amount of unmarried couples who get done over when one dies as it all goes to parents or kids is insane

There are three separate parts to the consultation, it looks like. One of them is specifically about death of cohabiting partners with no will. This aspect is separate to the part about separation.

But you're right, that's a very important aspect too re cohabitation rights.

I hope this consultation doesn’t go far. There is both marriage and civil partnerships to offer these protections as well as jointly buying a property. An individual shouldn’t be forced into this legal tying of assets if they have declined the above. At what point will this end, could opening up house equity rights extend to savings and pensions later down the line?

My partner has very different spending habits to me. We jointly owned our property and now have a fairly equal income. However I have been putting into a pension for 15 years, invest in a LISA, invest in an ISA and still have a substantial disposable income for things I enjoy such as holidays. My partner doesn’t have a pension or savings and fritters money on takeaway coffees and lunch out multiple days a week. I certainly don’t want to lose my savings and pension to someone who has the capability to also save but fritters the money away

I'm in the exact same situation. My partner loves to fritter away money, while I save.

I found the questions baffling.

I do not see the need for this. Civil partnerships exist and if anyone in a longer term relationship refuses to get one, that’s a sign to leave the relationship.

But they can just make a will!

Very true!

The will one is odd too.

Because, with proposed changes, if I want my assets to go to my children (from a previous relationship) instead of the partner I am living with, then I need to make a will in that case. Whereas now the reverse is true (I need to make a will to give assets to my partner).

It feels like a better solution all up is better education about the limited rights of cohabitation vs marriage. The need to make a will etc. Similarly, more support for women leaving abusive relationships, including better practical support like high quality accommodation. And then probably better rights for people with children together who are cohabiting.

What a batshit policy.

Are they really saying that because so many people believe the myth of the 'common law marriage' (do they?), that they will make that myth a reality rather than educate the population?

I would be one opting out or choosing to live separately from my partner if this came into effect.

The point at which women get screwed over is when they have DC. Something affording better protection to mothers would useful and also in the interests of the DC.

Two independent working adults cohabiting should be assumed to have made a positive choice not to bother with a marriage or civil partnership and the state should not assume it on their behalf.

Marriage is a binding contract and the government should not enforce a contract on a couple. People shouldn't wander into a binding contract by living together for a while. It's a stupid idea.

Cohabiting relationships with children should be treated as a marriage. The fact that they aren’t is costing the country £££ every year in benefit payments to women who have been screwed over by men who are only expected to pay the bare minimum for their children.

Exactly.

And imagine two people move in together with no children, so they make the joint decision to opt out. But then a few years later they decide to have kids, or an unplanned pregnancy happens. Do they now have to actively opt back in? And what if one partner refuses to at that point?

It also raises the question question: wouldn't virtually every couple without children, at the point of moving in together, choose to opt out anyway?

Getting married, formalising a civil partnership or just making proper wills addresses this problem. There are several ways to make sure partners can protect each other without removing the option of living together casually and with no financial strings. People need to be educated on how to protect themselves, rather than protected from their own foolish decisions.

Excellent post.

My DP wastes so much money despite me telling him he should start saving, his financial immaturity should be his issue and not mine.

If we both wanted to marry we would.

I think it’s a dreadful idea. I have completed the questionnaire as part of the consultation and I have actually stated on several questions that they are hard to decipher. There are already steps people can take to leave assets to an unmarried partner (marriage, civil partnership or will). The suggestion that should ‘opt out’ to protect assets is absurd. I am divorced. If I ever meet anyone else, this would absolutely put me off moving in with them. I would want my children to get my assets on my death. I also wouldn’t want my assets at risk during my lifetime as I’ve worked so hard for what I have. Aside from this, my mum died when I was relatively young. My father met someone a year or so after. They now live together but have never married. He has made a will to ensure she gets to live in the property until she dies (if he dies first), after which it goes to me. The house was pretty much paid off when she moved in. He wants the house to go to me and my mum would have wanted this too. Why should people have to ‘opt out’ to protect their assets! I hope people fight against this and complete the questionnaire as part of the consultation.