By Ellery Johannessen
October 5, 2022
Congratulations, you’re in love! You’ve been with your partner for about a year and you’ve decided to move in together. You haven’t broached the subject of marriage yet, but you both want to take that next step in your relationship. Fast forward a year. You’re living together in a house that you bought. You bought it on your own credit, but opened a joint bank account so that you could pool money for bills. Fast forward another year, and you’ve made significant home improvements together, building a deck off the back of your home and remodeling the kitchen and a bathroom. A few conversations about marriage have been had, but they’re still very much on the periphery. And, you just found out you (or your partner) are pregnant.
Another two years on and you’ve got a one-year old toddling around. You’re both exhausted. You opened a credit card together to manage your child’s expenses, but you’re experiencing some friction over balancing household responsibilities, parenting duties, and your respective careers. The frayed edges of the relationship begin to deteriorate more quickly and you decide to split up. You start talking about a parenting schedule and then suddenly, two weeks after your partner moves out, you’re served with what looks like a lawsuit for…a committed intimate relationship? In it, your partner is asking to split everything you’ve acquired since your relationship began. But wait, you think – we never got married! How can they ask for this?
Washington law recognizes the existence of a relationship that is more than dating, but less than marriage, and subjects that relationship to a quasi-marital community, called a committed intimate relationship (or “CIR”). In other words, if one of these relationships is established, everything acquired during the relationship is subject to division. A CIR, once known as a meretricious relationship, looks to a number of factors – whether you’ve lived together continuously, for how long, whether you’ve combined resources, and the purpose and intent of the relationship. Some of these things are subjective, others are not.
In this scenario, a court is most likely going to find that there is a CIR and will divide assets. Your cohabitation has been continuous, and while you’ve maintained somewhat separate financial lives, you have a joint bank account and credit card. The house is in your name, but your partner has made significant contributions to its improvements (whether financial or labor). Having dated for a year and lived together for two, the court is likely going to find that you’ve been together long enough to show a lengthy commitment to one another. And while there may be some dispute about your respective “intent” and the “purpose” of the relationship (namely, that you never had more than discussions about marriage), that you have a child together pretty much seals that deal.
So, what assets are in play? Everything you’ve acquired since you were together. Retirement assets, real property, vehicles, bank accounts, debts, all of it. Everything you bring in during this period is considered to be community property and is subject to division. The water gets even murkier when you have to factor in things such as the value add of a home improvement or the increase in value of retirement portfolios where the there are both pre-and-post-relationship funds.
Often times, nobody “wins” CIR cases. This because, unlike divorces, courts cannot award attorneys’ fees based upon need and they cannot award spousal maintenance. In other words, the financially disadvantaged partner has to bear all their own costs. Once a CIR case is filed, the books open on all of your finances, which means discovery is almost inevitable and is going to be expensive. Untangling the complexities of community-versus-separate property usually requires the hiring of a financial expert to trace and value each contribution. If there are significant assets in play (for example, an early stock purchase whose value has skyrocketed or the equity in a home), the financially disadvantaged partner just might push to have those valuations done in spite of the out-of-pocket cost.
So how do you avoid a lawsuit like this? With the first “P” – planning! If you decide to move in together, have a frank conversation with your partner about what the relationship is going to look like. Discuss finances openly and honestly. If you are concerned about your financial future, work with your partner on a cohabitation agreement that says in no uncertain terms that your relationship is not in the nature of a CIR and that it is your mutual intention for all of your property to remain separate.
If your partner balks at the idea of a cohabitation agreement, it might be time to re-evaluate your relationship. Don’t let the lawsuit out from under the bed.