REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events

Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events The off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-21-2013, 06:32 PM   #26
HELP ME PLS!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,544
Thanked 652 Times in 346 Posts
What is the legal definition of living together?

Sharing the same mailing address?
Advertisement
willystyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 06:45 PM   #27
Head Moderator
 
Lomac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1982
Location: Great White Nor
Posts: 22,586
Thanked 6,400 Times in 2,052 Posts
To be fair, common-law has always been two years in BC. It's merely some of the fine details that are being changed.
Lomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 07:08 PM   #28
RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 8,500
Thanked 2,593 Times in 845 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tapioca View Post
I think the intent is that people should not be living together if they aren't serious about spending the future together.
That sounds like something the church would say.

My opinion is that people should be living together for whatever reason they bloody well want and the government can stay the hell out of it.

If it's to make the court cases easier, the government could just as well have said "No marriage/union/formal partnership recognition, no sharing of financial assets" and left it at that.

If the partners wanted to up the level of the relationship to sharing financial assets, then they would be forced to have a "good hard look" at their relationship, because they would have to get said relationship formally recognized to move up to that level. I took that step with my wife, but I don't think it's right for others to have to automatically be subjected to it if they don't want to.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2

A vehicle for all occasions
Great68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 07:13 PM   #29
Rs has made me the man i am today!
 
urrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancouver
Posts: 3,293
Thanked 1,275 Times in 263 Posts
what an awful law.
i hope everyone will be made aware of it so that work can be done to get it repealed.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fei-Ji View Post
haha i can taste the cum in my mouth
Quote:
Originally Posted by orgasm_donor View Post
organge7 has spoken, and we have done the opposite. yay!
urrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 08:18 PM   #30
Everyone wants a piece of R S...
 
hkRicer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: richmond
Posts: 391
Thanked 140 Times in 34 Posts
Maybe they try to stop "fake sponsorship". Too many fob are using common law to get permanent residency.
hkRicer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 09:24 PM   #31
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
 
bobbinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,442
Thanked 2,251 Times in 436 Posts
If you don't live together with your partner for long enough to be considered common-law (or live with them at all), then it doesn't matter, as it would not apply. However, if you CHOOSE to become common-law (either by living together for X period of time or having a child together), and therefore reap the benefits of being in a marital status equivalent to that of "married" for tax purposes, then I can see why something like this would be put into place. if you want the benefits, then you have to take on the negatives/risk (just as you would in marriage).

the alternative would be to completely remove "common-law" marital statuses, which would piss off a helluva lot more people.
bobbinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 02:51 AM   #32
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
corollagtSr5's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancouver
Posts: 2,048
Thanked 1,028 Times in 287 Posts
Time to become duece bigalow male gigolo
corollagtSr5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:54 AM   #33
nuggets mod
 
freakshow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: richmond
Posts: 6,700
Thanked 3,045 Times in 840 Posts
This thread has kinda turned into common-law vs no common-law..

I'm definitely for removing common-law. Marriage should be a conscious choice that two people enter into. If you live with someone for 25 years and they don't want to marry you, you did it wrong. You should have left them a long time ago.
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You

'00 323i (Sold)
'01 Civic Si (Sold)
'95 240sx (Sold)
'02 LMB M5 (Sold)
'92 4Runner (Sold)
'92 Civic VX (Sold)
'03 SL500 (Sold)
'92 NSX
'99 M3 (Totalled)
'07 A4 2.0T (Sold)
'01 CB M5 (Sold)
'01 540i (Sold)
'11 535ix
freakshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 08:33 AM   #34
My homepage has been set to RS
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,210
Thanked 1,410 Times in 521 Posts
Better decide if she/he is a keeper on month 23......
__________________
86 944 Turbo with 340rwhp Lindsay Racing kit
15 991 GTS with Aerokit Cup
10 AMV8 6sp manual
16 Audi Q3 Technik Pkg (S Line)
Z3guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 08:45 AM   #35
Banned By Establishment
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: surrey
Posts: 155
Thanked 77 Times in 33 Posts
Sigh... This shouldn't be about the common law vs no common law.

1. This is about people rights. One person's right to choose either or.

2. Government creating a law the favoring one sided relationships.

3. And the other person"s" rights is being infringed apron.
duc_evo_sp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:20 AM   #36
Rider
 
gdoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Surrey
Posts: 3,269
Thanked 2,078 Times in 530 Posts
Spoiler!


government way of thinking. "well it will be cheaper in the long run"
gdoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 10:04 AM   #37
RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 8,500
Thanked 2,593 Times in 845 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by freakshow View Post
This thread has kinda turned into common-law vs no common-law..

I'm definitely for removing common-law. Marriage should be a conscious choice that two people enter into. If you live with someone for 25 years and they don't want to marry you, you did it wrong. You should have left them a long time ago.
You can't really say they're "Doing it wrong". Each case is different.

My Aunt (mom's sister) and her partner have been together for over 15 years (I consider him an uncle at this point). They are not married, but they are happy. They have no kids of their own, but he has one from a previous marriage (who is 22 now). I think maybe the previous marriage has soured him to wanting to get "married" again, but my aunt obviously doesn't care or she wouldn't have been with him so long.

I don't know how they work their finances, but I don't think they'd be at all upset if "common law" was removed.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2

A vehicle for all occasions
Great68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 10:53 AM   #38
RS.net, where our google ads make absolutely no sense!
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Richmond
Posts: 916
Thanked 691 Times in 226 Posts
So if i was housemates with someone for two years and over, and they decide to move out, they can potentially accuse me of being in a gay relationship with him tht went south and sue for half my assets and half of his debt?
Posted via RS Mobile
Geoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 11:19 AM   #39
Banned By Establishment
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: bedroom
Posts: 3,111
Thanked 3,491 Times in 1,176 Posts
this law also sounds like it was written by frustrated women who want their boyfriends to shit or get off the pot in regards to marriage.

like, if the bish is good enough to live with for 2 year, marry her or move the fuck on...if shit is going to be joint anyways, you might as well do it.

on a srs not, however, im not digging this law....i feel like it forces relationships to move too fast.
dinosaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 01:24 PM   #40
nuggets mod
 
freakshow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: richmond
Posts: 6,700
Thanked 3,045 Times in 840 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great68 View Post
You can't really say they're "Doing it wrong". Each case is different.

My Aunt (mom's sister) and her partner have been together for over 15 years (I consider him an uncle at this point). They are not married, but they are happy. They have no kids of their own, but he has one from a previous marriage (who is 22 now). I think maybe the previous marriage has soured him to wanting to get "married" again, but my aunt obviously doesn't care or she wouldn't have been with him so long.

I don't know how they work their finances, but I don't think they'd be at all upset if "common law" was removed.
I meant, you're doing it wrong if your intention is to want/take half of their stuff, but stayed with them for 25 years.

If your aunt an uncle are fine taking what is legally theirs if there happens to be a split, then that's doing it right.

If you somehow agree to pay the bills and groceries for 25 years, and not have any legal contract in place and not have your name legally owning any asset, then you did it wrong..

sorry if i was unclear..
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You

'00 323i (Sold)
'01 Civic Si (Sold)
'95 240sx (Sold)
'02 LMB M5 (Sold)
'92 4Runner (Sold)
'92 Civic VX (Sold)
'03 SL500 (Sold)
'92 NSX
'99 M3 (Totalled)
'07 A4 2.0T (Sold)
'01 CB M5 (Sold)
'01 540i (Sold)
'11 535ix
freakshow is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 02-22-2013, 01:50 PM   #41
reads most threads with his pants around his ankles, especially in the Forced Induction forum.
 
Mr.HappySilp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,528
Thanked 1,659 Times in 843 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoc View Post
So if i was housemates with someone for two years and over, and they decide to move out, they can potentially accuse me of being in a gay relationship with him tht went south and sue for half my assets and half of his debt?
Posted via RS Mobile
Exactly!!! I have friends who have roomates or they live in a place where there are several roomates.

2years is way too short. Make it at least 5years. Also I don't agree with the part with then debt. Why the hell would I be hook onto someone's debt when I didn't even borrow it or even use it. I think deb should be seperate unless it is being sign by both party. If I sign for it then yea I am on the hook but if I didn't sign anything I refuse to pay a penny for it.

Financial is a touch subject. I had a long term relationship which lasted over 3years and we never discuss about financial and debt at all.

So now when getting into a relationship not only we have to check for HIVS with our partner we also have to run a credit report on them?

edit SO WHAT about if after 23months I change my address to another place(parent place for example) and then change back to the orginal address after 1month? So then we will be unaffected by the law then? Since my address was change going into the 23 month.

Last edited by Mr.HappySilp; 02-22-2013 at 01:57 PM.
Mr.HappySilp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 02:41 PM   #42
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
corollagtSr5's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancouver
Posts: 2,048
Thanked 1,028 Times in 287 Posts
Lol what if your bills like cable electric etc.. you can't change the address on those. That's evidence that you reside at that location. So bam half of your shit belongs to someone else.
corollagtSr5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 02:57 PM   #43
My homepage has been set to RS
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,410
Thanked 1,467 Times in 559 Posts
It should be longer than two years and any personal debt, especially anything incurred before you met should not be part of the deal. It's not entirely impossible to be with someone a couple years and have no idea they have a huge amount of debt in their name...it's not exactly something someone likes to mention.
Posted via RS Mobile
MarkyMark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 03:23 PM   #44
NOOB, Not Quite a Regular!
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Richmond
Posts: 31
Thanked 30 Times in 14 Posts
There are a lot of aspects to consider here.

The first is the relationship status. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. I know people who are married and have a horrible life and people who are common law and have the best relationship ever. A title is a title and that means as little or as much as the people want it to mean.

The issue here is clearly that of money and finance.

Under current law, one married person can run up debt to the moon and provided it is in their name only, the other people is not liable.

Under the new rules, as it states, both parties are now responsible for the other persons debts.

Consider the following REAL example that my friend is in currently:

You are 27 years old and you are working making $80k a year and you are making money trying to save up for a home. You are currently living with your girlfriend for a year and a half who is in med school with about $100,000 in debt but will start working in 2 years making good money. The plan is to buy a home together once both people are working as their combined income will be healthy.

Based on this new rule, after 24 months, she can leave and he would have to assume half of her student loan.

OR

I hook up with some woman and I don't disclose some debt that I have. Maybe I have $80,000 of debt that she didn't know about because I didn't tell her. After 3 years of living together we split up and I shove a $40,000 bill in her face to take care of half my debt.


I know the law is often dynamic and there are appeals etc so that those cannot manipulate the system but I see this as a serious problem.

As I said, even the old statute under marriage allowed both parties to remain responsible for their own debt.

That's like saying creditors can come after your parents or kids if you rack up too much debt. Talk about slavery.
Marco.911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 04:11 PM   #45
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
m4k4v4li's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AB
Posts: 2,697
Thanked 218 Times in 89 Posts
where was the public consultation for passing this law? this is fucking bullshit
m4k4v4li is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 06:32 PM   #46
I answer every Emotion with an emoticon
 
Nightwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Van Isle
Posts: 7,653
Thanked 443 Times in 188 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoc View Post
So if i was housemates with someone for two years and over, and they decide to move out, they can potentially accuse me of being in a gay relationship with him tht went south and sue for half my assets and half of his debt?
Posted via RS Mobile
Why gay? I've had female roommates, there was one I eventually slept with a few times as well. No relationship beyond that whatsoever, but I bet they could have used this law very effectively.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco.911 View Post
That's like saying creditors can come after your parents or kids if you rack up too much debt. Talk about slavery.
Maybe that's the real point behind it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajinHurricane View Post
who would ban me? lol. Look at my post count.
Nightwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:57 PM   #47
Need my Daily Fix of RS
 
Majestic12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 295
Thanked 199 Times in 87 Posts
It's not just living together. It's living together in a "marriage-like" relationship.

So what makes up that class of relationship? Lots of things... kids? shared finances? shared chores? sexytimes? etc. etc.

Just because you're living with someone doesn't make it a marriage-like relationship. Hell, even fucking your roommate a couple of times doesn't make it a marriage-like relationship either.
Majestic12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 10:54 PM   #48
Rs has made me the woman i am today!
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,351
Thanked 1,791 Times in 822 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majestic12 View Post
It's not just living together. It's living together in a "marriage-like" relationship.

So what makes up that class of relationship? Lots of things... kids? shared finances? shared chores? sexytimes? etc. etc.

Just because you're living with someone doesn't make it a marriage-like relationship. Hell, even fucking your roommate a couple of times doesn't make it a marriage-like relationship either.
The thing with a roommate relationship is that you typically need to formalize that relationship in the form of a residential tenancy agreement with your landlord. For more certainty, you and your roommate can state in the agreement that you are roommates and not in a conjugal/common-law relationship.
Tapioca is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net