Unmarried couples to gain property rights and possible wider implications

[MsGreying]

Unmarried people to gain rights to partner's property
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/millions-of-unmarried-couples-to-get-stronger-rights

Whilst a simple glance makes it sound appealing I think this has serious consequences.

There's a 10 week consultant from Friday

This has the effect of taking away the right to cohabit without being married.

I wonder what impact it will have on people's decision to cohabit.

Someone else said it will make it incredibly difficult for older people to live together without marrying, because they have property, children etc.

But I wonder what impact it might have on couples further down the age range?

If people stop living together, and start running separate households, councils will rake in more council tax, because even with the single person's discount, there will be two council tax bills being paid instead of one. The single person's discount is normally 25%, so instead of one household paying £3,000 annually, there will be two households paying £2,250 each (on same band).

But, honestly, I don't think the government has even given this much thought.

In which houses are these people going to live? Given there is already a shortage of suitable housing at an affordable price for families it will only push more pressure on this section of the market.

If there's more single adult households with children because of the risks associated with cohabitation, then you are going to end up with lots more homeless single adults households with children because they simply can't afford housing on one income.

This will completely eclipse any gains made by more households paying council tax.

So if the idea is to raise revenue in this way, then whoever has decided this is a good idea has sniffed something and their brains rotted in the process.

Absolutely, it's not a winner. Forcing people to live apart has all kinds of implications for housing. I can't even begin to understand why they would want to do this. You're right that more council tax won't come close to being worth the issues that will arise. It's just that it's one thing that could happen. And, if they also scrap the single-person discount?

And they always put it out to "consultation" as if they haven't already made up their minds about what they're going to do, and as if they won't drop it if it becomes politically expedient to do so, no matter what the public thinks.

They only "ask" us so that they can say they asked us when people complain.

But, they wouldn't even be thinking about this if they didn't think they could make some money out of it.

If people avoid cohabitating, this will make the housing crisis even worse with even more single person households.
30% of UK households are single person.
51% of UK households age 65+ are single person.

I think this is outrageous tbh. People have recourse to civil partnership and marriage, why not campaign on this. In particular the intestacy change is awful:

’it is important to note that, under these proposals, should a cohabitant inherit the whole (or most) of their partner’s estate upon intestacy, any children from previous relationships would probably have standing under the I(PFD)A 1975 to bring a claim to the estate. This may be the inverse of what would happen in this situation currently, whereby the cohabiting partner is not entitled to the estate under intestacy rules, as it would go to the deceased’s children, but they could make a claim under the I(PFD)A 1975. Claims made under I(PFD)A 1975 are complicated and their merits depend on the facts of the specific situation. As set out above, the unwelcome consequences of intestacy can be avoided if individuals choose to make a will.’

So after three years (or no years if there is a child, or a child of the family) there’s a whole set of rights accrued on a needs basis to things like pension, lump sum etc. after five years you can become the sole beneficiary of an estate if there’s no will.

this will just create a new situation.
now we have women who think they have rights losing out - why not educate people?
soon we will have people who think they don’t have any rights losing their estate or savings to people they didn’t intend to marry.

there are a lot of single middle aged women in my life who will really need to know about this and will probably not live with anyone as a result . Who’s going to sign to say actually no let’s opt out? That requires action .

I have my own home, pension etc and there is no way looking at this development that anyone is ever moving in with me again.

Some very good points on this thread! I’ve not read anything about the proposal yet so I have no idea if it’s as ill thought out as feared, but I hope you’re all feeding back on it.

Given this government has massive housing targets to reach, the points about unintended consequences on the availability of housing could actually land. The main counter argument would be that people don’t look ahead to the consequences of living together anyway, so won’t choose not to until they’ve been burned by it - which brings us full circle back to needing to educate people and get them thinking in the first place.

I wonder if anyone has thought about repurposing civil partnerships so they can be socially viewed as “marriage-lite?” I always thought it was a bit crazy that we’ve ended up with two legal contracts that are exactly the same except in name, now that same sex marriage is legal and straight couples can also have civil partnerships.

Terrible idea. Marriage should be opt-in, not auto-enrolment. People would be incredibly vulnerable to fraud if some randomer uses their address and claims a relationship after murdering them they die. It would be really hard to flat share or have a lodger and even harder to have a Co-habiting relationship as an older adult with your own assets and kids you want to inherit from you.

I used to have “aunts” of the older second cousin variety who cohabited. They had been married to brothers and were both widowed relatively young. I have no reason to believe that we’re in a clandestine same sex relationship - they had separate rooms, one had a boyfriend (not cohabiting), they lived separate lives but together. They both had dc (1 had 1, the other 2) I think it was a sensible set up for 2 single women to share costs and be company for each other - they’d been friends since they were kids but weren’t related in the sense that marriage would be precluded ie they weren’t siblings. The government would have them married off and their assets would ultimately be left to the kids of one through the survivor. The kids were my generation and perfectly nice people with a seemingly healthy relationship but plenty of people will screw over their own cousins to inherit a house.

From what I can tell these rules are only for situations where theres no will?

But I agree that this default is not good - it automatically assumes that women are more vulnerable and need paternal assistance.

Obviously some people are in bad positions and need help but why is the government getting involved in this issue in particular? And why now? As opposed to making sure women are educated about finance and legal matters to help avoid problems in the first place?

The point about cukooing made by a PP is a very good one.

It’s purely to save on the benefits bill, nothing else. They don’t care about the thousands of people being forced into a legal partnership against their will, as long as it cuts the benefits bill

Truly dreadful idea for all the reasons outlined eloquently by others on this thread.

Not remotely surprised this Labour government thinks it’s a good idea - the perfect combination of symbolically righteous and pragmatically braindead.

Wills don't currently cover relationships ending. They cover what happens on death only. These proposals are total Government overreach and an excellent way of Labour losing the vote of all property owners. Their talent for poor policy is incredible.

Its ridiculous.
People who don't want to get married because they don't want to enter into that binding contract now will not want to live together either.

Which means more pressure on housing stock.....Labour fail to understand supply and demand basically.

Older widowed people who decided not to remarry to protect their assets for family could find those assets being used to calculate the care home fees of the cohabitant. Or with a recently ended relationship with an older couple where one now needs care, they could go after the assets of the other person in order to fund the care.
But again, it’s all about reducing the benefits bill because Labour backbenchers wouldn’t let them tackle the rising bill in other ways

Living alone is so good for mental health? LOL what are they trying to do to society? Have us all in individual rabbit hutches.

Study after study has found that, in average, unpartnered women without minor children are happier than any other group of women.

I also think it's a bad idea but perhaps it will make people think twice about moving in with someone a few weeks into a relationship which seems fairly common

Studies eh...how about lived experience? If my husband died, I would not want another man in my life as nobody is talking my kids' inheritance but there is definitely a risk I would be a bit lonely.

I'd agree. As a lone parent if I were a home owner I'd probably want to co habit first to make sure things definitely were working well before marrying someone due to the impact on my child's inheritance in the shape of our house. I wouldn't cohabit if I thought it was going to give someone a stake in our home. At that point I may as well just marry them.

Is this in comparison to their male counterparts or other women of the same age? I'd say I'm definitely happy and content but equally it would be nice to meet someone and have a genuinely happy marriage. I think women are generally just better at recognising that it's better to be 'on the shelf' than feeling stuck in the wrong cupboard because of the harms men tend to cause women.

That doesn't matter though. This is about knowing someone well enough to want to combine assets. I am as old-fashioned as they come but even I moved into a jointly purchased house a few months before our actual wedding.
You are not going to go back to no sex before marriage days (contraception killed that) but do you really think people shouldn't try before they buy?
I am actually wondering if this is to increase demand for flats lol. It's not a vote winner but that won't stop the Labour fanatics.