Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

No rights because i'm not married

171 replies

SweetPea2017 · 01/01/2017 23:12

I've been with my (now ex Partner) for 11 years, he owns the house. Does anyone know what rights I have as we never married? he kept saying we would, he refused for me to pay towards mortgage and was abusive if I mentioned been added to property.

OP posts:
Sixisthemagicnumber · 02/01/2017 10:23

Same here insancerre. I got married very young but I knew my rights and I knew that there would be no way I would be having children with somebody I wasn't married to and not would I be moving into a house where my name wasn't on the mortgage if I wasn't married. Nobody gave me any lessons about it but I still knew.

Beebeeeight · 02/01/2017 10:54

There's no need to berate the op.

There are plenty of women who do t know they have no right to stay in the family home if unmarried.

Ignorance isn't a crime.

It's a good point that legal rights should be taught in schools.

People on this thread being smug about the op's lack of knowledge seem themselves to be naive about what rights they have.
Marriage isn't a guarantee of financial security.

Plenty of absent fathers don't pay child maintenance married or not.

If you really want to protect yourself you need an independent income.

Sixisthemagicnumber · 02/01/2017 10:58

Of course you need an independent income beebee but an independent income won't buy you a home in many parts of the country. Making sure you are entitled to half of the family home and half of any pension fund (there will likely be gaps in any woman's who has taken mat leave) is still important and marriage is the best way to make those provisions.
There is no way of guaranteeing that an absent parent will pay maintenance.

conkerpods · 02/01/2017 11:05

What about the other way round?Lots of posters saying they wouldn't have children unless married etc. I bought myself before I met DP,it's in my name only (we've been together 11 years and have 2 kids).
I have told him that if we were to marry I would put him on the deeds,but if we're not married than no way. I am financially independent and have property. Why do so many women rely on men for this?

0SometimesIWonder · 02/01/2017 11:05

This makes me so sad and angry; I've been a feminist all my life, bleating on about women's rights and the need to educate ourselves.
I married in 1971 and knew my rights (or lack of them) even then.
And still, 45 years later, we have threads like this.
It has never been easier to find info. and read up on stuff and still this goes on.
If you are on here, you have access to a wealth of information; women, educate yourselves please, 'cos no-one else will.

Greypaw · 02/01/2017 11:16

I feel for you OP, because whether or not you ought to have known your rights, it still must be a huge shock to be only just finding out about them. I hope you get good legal advice to help you make the most out of what the situation is now.

It's no secret that marriage changes things legally, but I agree that the implications aren't made clear enough. People seem to get wrapped up in the romance of marriage and the big day itself, worrying more about whether the table cloths are going to match the bridesmaid's knickers than about the fact that with a sweep of a pen they may be changing their pension and inheritance rights, for example. As other posters have said, you keep hearing this "it's only a piece of paper" nonsense, or you hear about people not marrying simply because they can't afford a big party or whatever. If both my marriages are anything to go by, in the run up you are encouraged to only think about love, devotion and what colour scheme you're going to have, while mentioning financial rights at this point seems terribly taboo - the legal implications then get swept under the carpet a little bit. If people discussed it more openly, perhaps the difference between marriage and co-habitation would be better understood.

Sixisthemagicnumber · 02/01/2017 11:22

I did own my Own property before marrying conker. My DH owned his own house too. I bought a house at 18 before I met DH. But when we married we sold both houses and bought a bigger family home together (well a few months before we got married actually). But the thread is about somebody who wasn't married and was living in a house where she wasn't on the deeds. In those circumstances I think it is very foolish to not get married and to have children with the man.
There are circumstances where one parent has to give up work, for example: having a child with a severe disability as unfortunately childcare doesn't exist in most areas for the most severely disabled children and due to the pay gap it is often the woman who gives up work. We can't forsee everything but we can protect ourselves as much as possible and marriage is a start.

magoria · 02/01/2017 11:27

I am the same as conkerpods. DP lives in my house (no joint DC) and I have been clear it is mine. He doesn't pay towards mortgage, property repairs or improvements or large furnishings.

We have talked and even if we married I would ask him to sign to say he had no rights to the property apart from to be able to stay there for some period if the worse happens to me. I have roughly 20% of the property as a mortgage the rest is my retirement/my son's inheritance.

I don't know what the answer is to educate people on this.

Sixisthemagicnumber · 02/01/2017 11:56

But presumably if you had children with your DP magoria you would make some legal agreement that says your DP can stay in the house at least until your children are all 21 if anything happened to you? I don't think there is anything wrong with protecting an asset that you brought into the relationship and wanting to preserve it for your children but if your partner has children with you and has contributed to the ownership of any assets then I don't think it is right to keep it for yourself in all circumstances. it isn't even just about financial contribution either as in relationships with joint children a non working persons role often enables the working parent to earn the money that they do.

Sixisthemagicnumber · 02/01/2017 11:59

And yes in your situation magoria I think you are right as your DP isn't contributing anything and is aware that you will not be giving him any ownership rights. If you were being sneaky and having him contribute towards the mortgage / doing childcare of joint children to enable you to work and pay the mortgage then I would think you were being immoral.

Streuth · 02/01/2017 12:09

I hope people do get more educated about this issue, though I am sympathetic to those who aren't. People make some understandable (but wrong) assumptions.

Because children are supported in break-ups, its easy for cohabiting women to assume they will be supported too, and confuse the issue!

Equally, lots of people don't realise the full implications of the marriage contract. See that wind-farm millionaire guy who had to pay his ex-wife from over a decade ago, a share of his fortune (made after they split!). You could say that - regardless of divorce - marriage is for life!

caroldecker · 02/01/2017 12:12

Marriage is not just a contract between 2 people, but also between them and the state. Tax laws for married people are different to those for unmarried people.
A co-habitation law could easily affect tax treatment for friends living together if they chose to use it that way.

Streuth · 02/01/2017 12:14

^ And really agreeing with BeeBeeRight, there is no need for posters to berate the OP for her naievity or legal ignorance on this issue.

RedMapleLeaf · 02/01/2017 12:22

I'm not sure what the basis is for saying, "you should have known".

Why should people know what we know if they haven't benefited from the same education and opportunities we have?

SandyY2K · 02/01/2017 14:52

Many people think cohabitation is the same as marriage. It's not. It's a myth.

Nothing protects you like marriage, unless it's marriage. I must admit that the naivety does suprise me a bit.

SandyY2K · 02/01/2017 16:13

Why should people know what we know if they haven't benefited from the same education and opportunities we have?

I'd say it's more life experience and knowledge, as opposed to education. I'm educated to post graduate level, but that isn't why I know that not being married can be a financial nightmare if you split up.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 02/01/2017 16:35

Why should people know what we know if they haven't benefited from the same education and opportunities we have?

If their circumstances genuinely prevent contact with those able to advise, use of the internet and so on then fair enough - but surely not in the case of somebody articulate, who's more than capable of reaching out for information when they want to?

I agree with the PP who said ignorance isn't a crime ... but then, it's not always compulsory either

insancerre · 02/01/2017 16:41

Ignorance isn't a crime, no, but ignorance of the law is never a valid defence either

StripeyCover · 02/01/2017 16:42

Lots of well-educated people make legally naieve decisions! I think if we all "knew everything" there would be very little on MN Relationships board, which is often a source of knowledge.

SheldonCRules · 02/01/2017 17:44

Why would someone not married have the same rights as someone who is?

It literally takes minutes to check things on the net or to make an appointment with a solicitor.

Unmarried people are usually that way in a relationship to protect themselves and their assets. Given anything already owned is usually thrown straight into the pot on marriage it's a huge leap of faith for the person who stands to lose a lot.

I'd not be encouraging mine to get married if they already owned property or their partner didn't want to contribute their fair share financially as I'd rather they protected themselves. Many relationships are very unequal and benefit one party far more than another.

Kr1stina · 02/01/2017 17:56

I think that people should have the right to live together without any legal ties if that what they want.

OneWithTheForce · 02/01/2017 18:02

Today 17:56 Kr1stina

I think that people should have the right to live together without any legal ties if that what they want.

They do.

insancerre · 02/01/2017 18:06

That's the whole point of this thread
People do have the right to live together
Its just that people think that then gives them legal rights, which it doesnt
The legal rights only come from the legal process of getting married

Kr1stina · 02/01/2017 18:13

I know they do. But some people here seem to be suggesting that this is unfair and should be changed .

TheCuriousOwl · 02/01/2017 18:15

My OH and I were talking about this yesterday. I always said I wouldn't have children unless I was married. Yesterday I clarified with him that part of that (a big part) is that I would be foolhardy in the extreme to do that from a financial point of view.

He'd really never thought about how vulnerable women are just living with someone. I also said unless he marries me I'm not selling my house in order to buy one with him Grin so he's got that to think about now as well!

I actually think there are a lot of people who DO think that just by living with someone and having children with them it makes them somehow a 'common law wife' or gives them more rights than they actually do have. When you are in love with someone and you don't really understand why you would need to get married, you don't research the thing you're not doing, because you're not doing it IYSWIM. It's only after the fact when you're getting your ducks in a row that it all comes out.

And actually I do have some sympathy with the OP in that if you've been brought up not to have a lot of 'general knowledge', within a strict religious household and you have been brought up to believe that men do know best and will always act in your best interests then going out and researching your own rights is a much bigger step than if you've come from a liberal, broadly educated, questioning background, or even one where you have had to fend for yourself a lot.