Rights of unmarried women when separating from a partner

[Ilovemymum1]

I find it both alarming and disturbing that women in England have very few rights when they separate from a partner. I’m not talking about divorce or a civil partnership - just couples who live together either of the opposite sex or the same sex. In my case, I spent 20 years with my partner under the same roof but the ‘roof’ was in his name as were the cars. I kept the home and as he’d already retired, we spent all our time together. We didn’t have children as I had an underlying health issue. He thankfully had children from a previous relationship (marriage). He broke up with me whilst I was away via an email. There’s no-one else in the relationship. I thought we’d always be together but there were many days when I thought of leaving him as his bullying was terribly upsetting. Why didn’t I? I was weak and scared as I didn’t have money set aside as the money he gave me was for housekeeping and if I needed anything extra, I had to ask. Yes I know - what a darn fool I’ve been. Anyway, to cut a long story short I spoke to a lovely lawyer who said that the law in England desperately needed changing and apologised for being unable to do anything for me. I’m in my 50’s with a chronic health condition and a head filled with cotton. He doesn’t have to provide me with anything even though he always promised me that he would look after me no matter what. He wa obsessed with money and sadly no heartstrings that I can pull on.

Here’s a link to the Rights of Women that the lawyer gave me. It’s a guide for people who are living together. For some silly reason, I always thought I was somehow ‘protected’....that if he left me then the law would be on my side. Sadly it’s not. I thought of approaching the Daily Mail to see if they would like to start a campaign to have the law changed so that people in the future aren’t caught out. If nothing else, it would get the word out there that people, like myself, have no rights and it might just help people make better decisions.

Thanks for listening. Have a good Wednesday.

Here’s the link:-
rightsofwomen.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/PDF-guide-to-living-together-and-the-law.pdf

I think it would be a difficult area for a judge to consider. Your ex partner fed,clothed and housed you for twenty years and then expected to continue doing so for how long the rest of your lives?? A change in the law may bring real difficulties with lodger claiming that they were in a relationship. Also how long would a relationship have to be before they could claim? I’m an unmarried woman with a long term relationship and two children. The reason I am unmarried is that I have my own and a final salary pension. I’m a firm believer that if you want protection you get married. Sorry about your situation, are you entitled to benefits?

So what law change do you actually want?

I feel terribly sorry for you that this has happened but I disagree that a petition or law change is needed. The onus is on the individual to know what’s what before they live with somebody. You didn’t do any research! You lived in a house that isn’t in your name and you had no access to any assets. Anybody who wants to live with a partner needs to insist on their name being on everything before agreeing to move in or have a contract drawn up that agrees a split of assets accrued during the relationship. Marriage is fine. Not getting married is fine but self knowledge and self awareness and being sensible is the key here. That’s the info that should be widely distributed. You should have seen a solicitor before moving in together. One hour would have saved you all this pain. Oh and never ever listen to friends! Unless they’ve been to law school!!!

All that would happen is that (in situations like the ops) the man wouldnt move his girlfriend in.

If the law changed, I wouldnt move my dp in. I bought my house, paid the deposit and thats my kids inheritance. I wouldnt allow someone to move in and be able to take half of that. I have told Dp that if we get married, I still want to protect my initial investment in the house so my kids get it and he doesnt get half if we were to divorce. He is complete agreement.

A lot is made of spousal maintenance but if the stbex puts down they are on a really low salary. (Even though it is complete BS) For the duration of the divorce proceedings you are unlikely to get a thing.

Spousal maintainance is vanishingly rare nowadays.

One of the problem with the widely held ‘common law wife’ beliefs is how do you change it? If you are married/civil partnership there is a legal agreement between 2 people.

If you live with someone in their property how long before you get ‘rights’ 6 months - a year? If they/you have lived with several people over a period of years - which one gets the ‘rights’?

I wouldn't move my DP in if the law changed either. It would be completely unworkable anyway.

At what point would 'rights' kick in? Five years living together? 10? And when would they end? You could easily have three 10 year relationships in a lifetime. Each of those people get to take half of your assets? Or are you expecting to have some maintenance paid? For how long? That could be extremely expensive if you had a few ex partners.

Ha! X post with person

I find it incredible in this day and age that women still believe that common law marriage is legally recognised. Sadly it isn’t.

I slept walked into a relationship, we had children and I became a sahm. I thank my lucky stars every single day that I married my abusive possibly narc ex, even though divorcing him has been one of the most horrific processes that I’ve ever had to endure.

The current laws work just fine. Start a campaign to highlight the benefits of marriage. At the very least the importance of having joint ownership of assets.

There’s a couple currently fighting for civil partnerships to be available to hetero couples. I fully support them.

There was no such thing as a CP when DH and I got married, so we got married to protect us both. Nothing romantic about it - just saw it as a legal contract.

There is so much information about this available. Relying on girlfriends is rarely a great idea when it comes to legal matters, unless they’re members of the bar!

I would like to see civil partnerships extended to all couples but that's the only change in the law I would support.

For those for whom de facto relationships are difficult to define here is the law of NZ:

De facto relationships
In most cases, only people who have lived together in a de facto relationship for at least 3 years are covered unless there is a child involved or 1 partner has made a significant contribution to the relationship.

Defining a de facto relationship
The court will look at many things when deciding whether 2 people are in a de facto relationship, including:

how long the relationship lasted
the extent to which the couple share a home
whether they have a sexual relationship
their financial and property arrangements and how much they depend on each other
their ownership, use and purchase of property
how committed they‘ve both been to a shared life
their care and support of children
who does the housework and other household duties
if the partners are known to family and friends or other people as a couple

The whole point of marriage is to acquire the rights you want.

I would like the right to live with someone without being legally entwined. When I want that I will get married.

If you didn't work then and no kids then what exactly do you think you are entitled to? You'v basically had free rent, bills, food and lifestyle paid for the last 20 years with no contribution.

I’m really struggling to understand why the law needs changing.

If you are living together, you are no more than girlfriend & boyfriend, I don’t see where the commitment is?
Marriage maybe antiquated however, it’s legal protection, and will normally benefit the person who has less to offer a relationship financially.

Like others, I feel for you and your situation sounds complex and upsetting.
I also don't think the law needs changing. If people wish to have the legal protection of marriage then they need the legal contract of marriage/civil partnership.

People shouldn't be forced to take on legal responsibilities just because they've lived witj someone. There's a growing number of blended families, couples meeting later when they both have adult children etc. Why should someone with adult children give half their assets to a partner they lived with for a few years? It's very open to exploitation.

Education about rights and protection needs to be better though. As another poster said on here, there's so many threDs about people making excuses about why they don't need marriage, they say i mustn't trust them if I push fir marriage, we have children and that's a much bigger commitment etc. And there are many threads outlining the consequences of not having that protection.

The law doesn't need changing, it's fine as it is. You can't expect someone you are dating to have to hand over assets etc for daring to be in a relationship.

The joining of assets comes with marriage.

It takes seconds to google the rights of living together unmarried vs married.

Sadly, as far as the Law is concerned, you and your ex partner were just flat mates

The law is fine. If you want rights/protection get married. I’m sorry that you are in this situation but there is no common law spouse thing. I’ve lost count of the women I’ve told who’ve been horrified that they have no legal rights.

The key is education not a law change.

It's not because of the law that youre in this situation. Hate to say it but if you didn't do your research and find out your legal standing, its hard to see how its not your fault or why he should now provide for you. If you want the protection that marriage confers, get married.

A lot is made of spousal maintenance but if the stbex puts down they are on a really low salary. (Even though it is complete BS) For the duration of the divorce proceedings you are unlikely to get a thing.

Spousal maintainance is vanishingly rare nowadays*

So what exactly if you jointly own the family home and any other property. Etc and in my case named as the beneficiary of dps will, pension, life insurance policy etc would change for the better if we got married

Ireland changed the law a few years ago and it doesn't mean people cohabiting automatically get the same rights as marriage, it falls far far short of that. But it does mean there's some opportunity to take into consideration commitments made.

If you've been living together for five years (or two with children) you can apply to be courts who will look at the situation. You won't get anything like you would in a marriage breakup, but the situation will be examined- so, for example, if you've lived
Together for ten years and put a lot of money into doing the house up, etc etc, the judge might rule your partner has an obligation to pay you X amount compensation, or to let you stay in the property for X months if you have children.

It is possible to opt out of it. But the problem is, a lot of people can end up in situations accidentally.

I entirely agree that marriage should be the main protection, but a law that provides essentially shelter in the event of a break up so people don't end up financially worse off through believing the lies of their partner seems fair, especially if it's opt out rather than opt in as nobody can claim to have been misled in that situation.

I don’t think there is any point for a petition either. There should be an option for those who don’t want the burden of financial support. And that’s about not getting married. Why take it away?

@Oliversmumsarmy the problem is the pension and life insurance can be hanged overnight. Joint accounts can be cleared out, and if money is in separate accounts, that can't be claimed.

If your partner is decent, with all legal steps are taken, and dies, the main issues you have are inheritance tax and not being entitled to survivors benefit (sorry don't think that's the right name).

If he suddenly decides to leave you, or vice Versa, a lot of things you've set up together can be reversed overnight.

I am very very sorry for what happened to you OP, but do not come to the same conclusions.

I wish more women KNEW the law as it stands.

I was in a long term unmarried partnership and as a woman who had saved and saved to get the security of a home of my own I had a flat in my name, equity etc. I do not want a law that would have taken that off me even though I had chosen not to enter into the contractual partnership that marriage is.

I WANT a choice as to whether to legally commit. (Obligation to children is s different matter, and I think there could be a case for ‘parental maintenance ‘ )

It is good that you are using your experience to raise awareness and educate people: know your rights, know the law, make smart decisions.

Unfortunately you were also in a relationship with an abusuve bully.

I don't think the law should be changed. I am married and take that seriously. But I also have a good job & assets and children I want to inherit them. If (god forbid) I lost my lovely DH I would want to be able to move on - but I would not want any bloke I shacked up with having any claim on what DH & I have built up for our children. A change in the law would require older people to stay single to protect their children.