Ok, so the lass wants to move in with me...
- Thread starter leaskovski
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 78,808
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
He does not, there are no common law wife in this country. If she contribute towards the mortgage directly then there might be grounds for some dividends if she gets a good lawyer but anything she get might be sucked up from legal fees anyway if she pursued, unless the contribution is regular AND substantiate for a length amount of time.
To remedy that, just call any money she contribute rent and household expenses.
Although if you're doing that, be sure to keep the amounts involved below the rent a room limit or you'll be taxed on the income! Wouldn't want to dodge one pitfall and charge into another.
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,087
- Location
- Berkland
Ok, she said she wants to contribute, so I won't bother with paper work. Instead, she can give it to me in cash just before I go out for the evening to visit the local gentlemans club.
</end thread>
</end thread>
One of the more sensible thread suggestions!
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,114
Common sense wins!
You dont agree rent payments with your girlfriend, If you are at the point where you are going to live together than the financial side of things should together of their own course.
IE, If she doesnt contribute of her own volition within a reasonable time, you tactfully broach the subject of your (as a couple) financial arrangements.
You dont present her with a rent contract, not unless you very quickly as in instantly end up single.
*edit*
Should read whole thread first, common sense wins! A victory for living in the real world etc etc etc.
IE, If she doesnt contribute of her own volition within a reasonable time, you tactfully broach the subject of your (as a couple) financial arrangements.
You dont present her with a rent contract, not unless you very quickly as in instantly end up single.
*edit*
Should read whole thread first, common sense wins! A victory for living in the real world etc etc etc.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Have you read the thread? Specifically the bits where this has been debunked?
It hasn;t though? There are situations when the woman can claim and does have a chance of winning.
Shall I tell the person I know who is in court soon for a claim on part of his house from his ex gf of 15 years that it's not true?
Perhaps his solicitor and barrister is just having him on?
Suggest you read up on House of Lords in Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17
Pay particular attention to Stack vs Dowden case which is in fact that opposite as she had all the money compared to him. She had a house and a mortgage and all the bills were in her name and they had seperate bank accounts. He won his case for 50% of the profit on the sale of the property when they split up but was later on appeal reduced to 35%. They had been together but not married for 28 years.
To quote the Judge:
Last edited:
So you should rephrase that to, depending on the amount of income this guy is wrong. Or you could just not say anything since that's a lot of "ifs"
Please see:
In fairness, you can't jump on someone saying they're wrong, then be wrong yourself and get annoyed when someone points it out. Never try to simplify tax like that, it's rarely that simple!
Stack v Dowden is easily distinguishable from the OP's situation though and is not especially relevant to deciding if the girlfriend has a beneficial interest in the house, only to how one would be divided up if she did. Mr Stack and Ms Dowden had bought the property in joint names without an express declaration of joint tenancy or tenancy in common. The case was concerned with whether in the absence of such provision the proceeds of sale should be split 50:50 or not.
In the OP's situation, there would only be a constructive trust of the value of the house found in the gf's favour if there was a mutual understanding that the property was to be shared and 1) she made direct contributions to the house by paying off the mortgage loan or 2) she relied on this to her detriment and made indirect contributions with bills etc. that was far beyond just paying her own way. This could well be the case with your friend in court. There are loads of cases on this sort of scenario, like Barton v Wray, Eves v Eves, Gissing v Gissing and James v Thomas (2007), for example.
There is really very little chance of her getting a share of the house from what you have told us, but that is not to say that she could not sue you for a breach of contract, for example, if she were paying you rent or bills informally and you kicked her out (i.e., she had a licence rather than a lease). Telescopi's advice is the best - always check with a solicitor when you are unsure (you can always sue him for negligence if he screws up and a solicitor's indemnity fund has deep pockets).
