Is anyone else perplexed at the "Law Commission" and their recommendation that unmarried couples should be treated the same as married when it comes to splitting up?? Forgive me if I'm mistaken here but I thought that was the very point of living together! So you don't have all that aggravation should you come to part ways. My wife and I spent 3 years living together before we got married. We did that for a variety of reasons including that we wanted to see if we were compatiable when living together as opposed to just seeing each other at evenings etc. If it hadn't worked out we'd have gone our own way realising that it was a sensible thing to do rather than rushing into marriage ... Instead now, it's suggested that should someone else be in that situation there could be claims for maintance, pension sharing and so on ... This country really is fooking mad ...
I think the point is if there is a dispute regarding payments made into the home etc. I split up last year after 3 years living together, completely amicable, agreed who had what etc….but that’s not always the case. In instances like mine then it wouldn't have any affect. Many people just choose to live together without ever giving thought to getting married, they have kids etc, I think it's these couples that they are looking to address.
Ditto. Whether married or not most couples share the bills, mortgage, car payments etcetera - if one half is to keep the car and the house in the event of the split it's only fair that they should be compelled to make some sort of payment to the other. I think it's a shame that such legislation should be enacted but I don't see why only married couples should get protection...
