I'm awake!

[mrsbrown]

I'm glad we're only throttled off-peak at the moment.

I can't surf!

It's 5am, and I'm awake. But I can't surf!

But I can tell you that amongst the things I'm currently worried about, the woman I met last night seems to have inserted herself as something else for me to worry about.

She's lived in a defacto relationship for 16 years, had 3 children and has never had any of the family assets in joint owenership. Her name is not on the title for ANY of the multiple houses they seem to have owned. Even the house her sister put money towards buying for their mother is solely in his name.

I'm sure my mother and I talked about Sexually Transmitted Debt, when I was about 17. But this is sort of the opposite.

Now they are separated and the law doesn't recognise the common ownership of the assets that it would if they had been married. She has to go to court to get anything (despite having full custody of the children)

I think that if he wants to deny that it was a marriage, she should sue him for back paid wages. Shes been his nanny, housekeeper and escort for at least 12 years (the age of their eldest child). That's at least $200+$200+$1000 per week or $436 800.

Also,she kept on talking about how she had nothing. But didn't include her obviously fabulous work skills in her personal list of assets. And was too drunk and focussed on complaining to hear me when I tried to tell her. I just got a nod from across the table.

There. That's what's been keeping me awake. Can I go to sleep now?

Comments

[lurextoga.livejournal.com]

And just add domestic violence and to make it all even more charming. Alcohol, violence, 7 properties, shares, the works, and only two of them have the woman on the title but she is guarantor on the rest and has been paying it all off while he pockets (I call it stealing) the rental money and paying no maintenance for the kids. And three years after the separation, he's still monstering her, and trying to bully her into taking less out of the settlement. ERGH! For them, if they can't settle, the bank's coming on 28 April to take it all, which she seems to be considering to be a relief after years and years of battling for a fair outcome.

I personally find it emotionally exhausting to listen to - but listening must pale into insignificance compared to actually being 'in it'!

[martinlemechant.livejournal.com]

From my understanding of the law, if they have lived in the same house together for 16 years, and she has raised their children, the law recognises that and will give her some reward, wether they are officially married or not.
She needs a good divorce lawyer though!

[(Anonymous)]

Gah...I don't understand people sometimes. Ok, a lot of the time. I thought the law in this country was fairly tight as far as defacto relationships go. I'd say she'd surely have a legal leg to stand on but if she's been chasing a resolution on this for some time then obviously it's not as clear cut as I thought it was..

[sacred-chao.livejournal.com]

Oops, that was me.

Common law

[erudito.livejournal.com]

Common law/de facto marriages have no standing in Commonwealth law but are recognised under Victorian statute.

I can imagine it might get a bit difficult.

Frustration

[erudito.livejournal.com]

I suppose this is where I put my Hayekian institutions-as-embodied-learning hat on and say marriage evolved for a reason.

That being said, I do like your idea of suing for services rendered.