Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 I see this heap of shiii1iite is making it's way through the Lords. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2014-2015/0010/lbill_2014-20150010_en_1.htm Couples decide to live together for a variety of reasons, most in cohabitation don't want to get married. Quote: I think marriage for men is stupid because the divorce rulings are generally so unfair – but at least there is a CONTRACT – what the cohabitation bill proposes is state enforcement of a liability based on NOTHIING! I think one of the most annoying parts of the claims for cohabitation is that it will :-.“improve the rights of cohabitants & give protection for all”.or similar such rubbish being spouted. It’s flowery BS.What you are doing in reality is giving rights to one party and removing rights and protections from the other..It’s a zero-sum game – there is no extra money, you are just forcibly taking money from one party and giving to the other based purely on the whim of a Family Court Judge..In fact on average it will be a negative-sum game (!) because there will be plenty of extra litigation fighting over the assets and so lawyers will take their inevitable cut. Lawyers want to keep the whole thing nebulous- this way they retain total power over people’s lives. The one thing they don’t want to give to people is certainty. If they did, we would be allowed binding pre-nups, like most civilised countries. But ...oh no....we can't have a binding contract. This Bill is a disaster for men. Living with a girlfriend will be like sticking your head under a guillotine. At a whim she could turf you out and release the blade. We'll end up with blokes living in one house and women in another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bossybabe Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 We'll end up with blokes living in one house and women in another. The best way to live. My partner and I (no contract, no marriage), lived happily apart for 17 years until his death in May this year. We still managed to support each other through rough times, in sickness and in health. Is that unusual? I think it's ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sPinwheel Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Utter stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justthisbloke Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 We'll end up with blokes living in one house and women in another. Wouldn't all the blokes be deemed to cohabiting then? Ditto the birds? If you can get round it though, best to live apart. I'm sure most blokes would prefer it - and now they'll have a justification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Opt out section is amusing. You have t be over 16 to opt out. Well tbh I hope you aren't cohabiting if you are under 16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sPinwheel Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 "Will allow someone to apply for a Financial Settlement Order. An applicant will need to show that s/he has suffered either an economic disadvantage or that their partner has retained a benefit as a result of a qualifying contribution they have made." And who decides? The same clowns who make these decisions in family courts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 Having looked at it (did the OP?), it doesn't seem as bad as it sounds. It's mainly about protecting the rights of any child if one of a cohabiting couple dies, and enabling them to take out insurance. But still could be the thin end of a wedge.... With all due respect....just spent at least an hour going through it. Scares the Hell out of me as been dithering about living with partner. The Bill has far greater reach than a child's well-being. It's about dividing assets....property, pensions etc. Marriage is a formal contract...but this Bill is based on no contract what-so-ever !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 What about 'Friends with Benefits' ? Plenty of people have that sort of relationship. Are they to fall under this Bill ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 What is proposed is that the legal system come in and interfere on a case-by-case basis – we’ve seen how well that has worked with marriage, it’s dying – which is why lawyers (who want more work) and people looking for a hand-out are desperately trying to force through these idiotic cohabitation laws. It's a Gold-Diggers dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knock out johnny Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 "Will allow someone to apply for a Financial Settlement Order. An applicant will need to show that s/he has suffered either an economic disadvantage or that their partner has retained a benefit as a result of a qualifying contribution they have made." And who decides? The same clowns who make these decisions in family courts? Sounds very much like the law of equity (as it stand at the moment) to be honest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Hovis Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 What is proposed is that the legal system come in and interfere on a case-by-case basis – we’ve seen how well that has worked with marriage, it’s dying – which is why lawyers (who want more work) and people looking for a hand-out are desperately trying to force through these idiotic cohabitation laws. So divorce laws mean that people with assets won't get married; now they won't co-habit either. Next they move onto relationships. It's pernicious, breaking down every social norm one step at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sPinwheel Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Suppose you bought a house, paid 100% of the mortgage, totally paid all bills and taxes, and even paid your partner an 'alowance'. If you were married none of that matters because everything is split 50:50. What does this bill do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitevanman Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 So divorce laws mean that people with assets won't get married; now they won't co-habit either. Next they move onto relationships. It's pernicious, breaking down every social norm one step at a time. Isn't that the intention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Another eu initiative? Brought in before the referendum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 The other thing is that it increases the demand for more tiny houses in the UK - more singles. Then split "larger" houses into smaller and even tinier units. More work for the builders (land hoarders). It's as well to remember that most of the UK's social engineering law is also linked to supporting house prices. It's getting to be like ant hill living. No wonder Cameron likes the eu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 Suppose you bought a house, paid 100% of the mortgage, totally paid all bills and taxes, and even paid your partner an 'alowance'. If you were married none of that matters because everything is split 50:50. What does this bill do? 50:50 You're stuffed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 With all due respect....just spent at least an hour going through it. Scares the Hell out of me as been dithering about living with partner. The Bill has far greater reach than a child's well-being. It's about dividing assets....property, pensions etc. Marriage is a formal contract...but this Bill is based on no contract what-so-ever !! I read some bits I missed first time, and deleted my post that you quote above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sPinwheel Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 The more I read about this the more it looks like an initiative by lawyers, for lawyers, and lawyers have the most to gain. Are they running out of divorce cases pr something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 I read some bits I missed first time, and deleted my post that you quote above. No worries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 The more I read about this the more it looks like an initiative by lawyers, for lawyers, and lawyers have the most to gain. Are they running out of divorce cases pr something? Yes ... Too many Lawyers chasing less and less work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wherebee Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 What a disaster for men. And it will be men who suffer for 90% of the cases. I lived with 2 girls when I was younger. They could have taken me to the cleaners if this bill was in place. sigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonguest Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 I see this heap of shiii1iite is making it's way through the Lords. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2014-2015/0010/lbill_2014-20150010_en_1.htm What a truly shocking and outrageous piece of legislation! THIS is a perfect example of how the media are failing in their duty to inform the public of matters that will matter to the public. I was completely unaware of this. Three questions..... Does the fact this is now in the Lords mean to is very close to being passed? Have I really read the text correctly and the law will be retrospective, without time limit, and apply to 'former cohabitants' also???? What are the 'origins' of this proposed legislation? Whose brainchild? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_northshore_* Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 What are the 'origins' of this proposed legislation? Whose brainchild? http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/cohabitationrights.html It looks like the Bill stalled in 13/14 and 14/15: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/cohabitationrights.html http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/cohabitationrights.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted November 23, 2015 Author Share Posted November 23, 2015 The more I look into this the more it means a feeecken disaster for divorced men with assets. One reason why people cohabite is to protect assets from a previous divorce. Once this crock of shiiite is passed, there is no protection. How do you define cohabitation? Sleeping with your girlfriend 2, 3 or 4 nights a week? What if you live with someone but there is no sex....happens often enough. What if your girlfriend has a child from a previous partner and he has no assets so pays £1.00 / week maintenance. Are you suddenly responsible in the eyes of the family court for maintenance? What if you both have houses but one partner has a pension the other doesn't...suddenly bang, your pension is valued and split. Marriage is a CONTRACT signed and the outcome is clear on ending it. Cohabitation has NO contract....nothing, but will be treated as if you both signed something. When word gets out about this, couples will be splitting fast.....only a LIBDEM idiot can come up with this pile of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.