Common Law Marriage in the Canadian Forces - Mega Thread

[DAA]

We're aware of the issues that would arise if we got married once he's posted out... that we would have "chosen" to "start" our relationship when we're separated and while he's paying rations and quarters, that we'd have to continue to be separated and pay out quarters until his next posting.

That's only one part of the equation.  What about the fact that he will need to relocate you eventually, at "his own expense" and that there also exists the possibility that Real Estate and Legal fees to sell "your" home may not be reimburseable, even though his name is on the deed, because he never "occupied" the residence.

 

[armywife2013]

Well that's exactly what we're talking about, there are significant financial implications, especially if I decide to follow him to this posting and pay for it on my own (then we potentially have 2 cross-country moves to finance on our own)

 

[DAA]

Well that's exactly what we're talking about, there are significant financial implications, especially if I decide to follow him to this posting and pay for it on my own (then we potentially have 2 cross-country moves to finance on our own)

He is covered, while you are not.  I was hesistant to even bring the financial aspects up because "money" is always a touchy subject and did not want to see the two of you basing your personal decisions on "what if's" and "how much will it cost".  Sometimes $$$ is the maker of bad decisions.

Nevertheless, I am glad to see that the two of you are considering all aspects and possibilities.

 

[PAdm]

I can see why it was denied, and I would agree.  The fundamental criteria were not met.  As you have no starting point for your relationship clock, I do not see it being recognized.  You have to remember that dating or living together is not the same as holding yourself as husband and wife.  I have seen a number of applications where folks try to say their year as husband a wife started soon after they started dating. They thought that because they were living together for e.g. 15 mths, they were good to go.  Not true and COs will deny.  Common Law requires very little for a mbr to have the same status and privileges from a benefits perspective than someone who actually gets married and puts a commitment in a public forum - thus the need for scrutiny.  While there is a definite need for common law, some folks try to hold a casual or very new relationship as common law just in order to gain access to a significant benefit package.

My intent with this post is not to judge your arrangement or question your commitment or personal situation.  I just wanted to provide comment as to why the CF scrutinizes common law applications. 

 

[armywife2013]

I understand that there are rules, but we have been living together, and presenting ourselves as life partners, and intend to get married when we legally can... what I don't understand is the rationale for the decision that was given to us, since its based on the fact that he pays R&Qs at RMC, but there is legal precedence in R v Acting Sub-Lieutenant J.J. Rotchford that you can pay R&Q but not actually live there. We have both signed affidavits as to the nature of our relationship and the start date of us living together, which is a legal document that should be weighted in establishing the start date of the "living together". We even had in our application a sworn affidavit from our former roommate in the first apartment that we lived in!

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Bottom line is even if all that is true you both screwed up by not having him file something official and now it's time to start living with that and making future plans.
Sorry......

 

[jwtg]

Bottom line is even if all that is true you both screwed up by not having him file something official and now it's time to start living with that and making future plans.
Sorry......

What do you mean by official?  Do you mean a request to live off campus?  Or the request to be recognized as common law?

To the OP, I know you said that requests to live off are never granted at RMC anymore; did you guys submit one?

 

[Shamrock]

What do you mean by official?  Do you mean a request to live off campus?  Or the request to be recognized as common law?

To the OP, I know you said that requests to live off are never granted at RMC anymore; did you guys submit one?

When I moved in with my (now) wife, I submitted a memo.  Subject line, "Intent to form common-law relationship"

 

[PMedMoe]

What do you mean by official?  Do you mean a request to live off campus?  Or the request to be recognized as common law?

To the OP, I know you said that requests to live off are never granted at RMC anymore; did you guys submit one?

And that's probably the problem right there.  If the mbr did not submit a request to live off campus, his "residence" was the campus, at least to the CF.  Whether or not he paid R&Q and/or didn't spend his night there would be a moot point.  Just my  :2c:

 

[DAA]

If anyone is interested, have a look at CANFORGEN 008/11 which amplifies Mil Pers Instr 15/06.  The CANFORGEN provides additional guidance and clarification regarding CL Status requirements.

 

[BinRat55]

If anyone is interested, have a look at CANFORGEN 008/11 which amplifies Mil Pers Instr 15/06.  The CANFORGEN provides additional guidance and clarification regarding CL Status requirements.

Crap man - welcome to the thread!! I quoted that yesterday, about 20 posts back!!  :nod:  I also brought up the very valid point of "OCdt Bloggins failed to request to live on the economy VIA memo" I believe this is the sticking point here - ArmyWife, you have to understand that it is a matter of protocol and paperwork. I know you are trying to battle with a "my sworn word should be good" defence, but the bottom line is if I DO NOT HAVE PERMISSION to move out of the shacks, my CoC will not recognize anything until I do. VIA Memorandum. Especially RMC.

 

[PAdm]

but there is legal precedence in R v Acting Sub-Lieutenant J.J. Rotchford ......

Please appreciate that this is an admin process and not a legal one. I have been doing admin for 25 years now and the millisecond someone makes any reference to legal precedent I immediately suspend both the file and the conversation as I am not a lawyer and cannot have the conversation. As I read this thread, the Cf believes his place of residence is R&Q as there is nothing formal requesting otherwise. We live and die with our paperwork. This is a classic case of inadequate paper trail. The mbr can redress and perhaps emerge vindicated when the CDS renders a decision in your favour in 2 yrs time. Welcome to the CF. just chat with my wife and she can tell you all about the wacky world you are entering. While there is tremendous reward with the military lifestyle, come to grips with the fact that life is not fair or timely. We live by BOHICA - bend over here it comes again.

 

[392]

No, we hadn't considered a chaplain. I'll discuss it with him tonight and see if we can go and talk to him.

As for the living arrangement/situation: We're in the exact same situation as the court martial case we quoted. He's an OCdt, pays rations and quarters at RMC. I own a house, and he slept at my house every night for over a year. I pay the mortgage but he contributes what he can in terms of utilities/groceries/maintenance of the house. He has been up-front with his chain of command about the fact that he doesn't sleep or eat his evening meal at RMC (and it was recorded every day in the "sign out book"), and they had no issue with it. I have tried to find a definition of "living together" in regulations or the military administrative law manual but there is nothing I can find.

What was his primary address listed in Peoplesoft one year ago? If it was your address, you may have some additional ammo to redress this. That being said, if he did not request to live out (and odds are because he didn't, his primary address is most likely RMC) and his primary address in Peoplesoft is still either where his F&E are or RMC, they will start the 1 year clock from when his residence officially changed in HRMS.

Guaranteed once the CL paperwork went up, the first thing the Chief Clerk did was open up Peoplesoft to confirm the date of residence change to the one he said he was "living at". I know both times I claimed CL status, Peoplesoft was the first place the clerks looked after my memo was submitted to confirm what I was saying. Things were very different in my case because in both instances I was already living out, but the process isn't.  :2c:

Edit because I removed the last of my last sentence before hitting "send"  :facepalm:

 

[ances]

I'm hoping someone might be able to help me out.

I'm entering 4th year at RMC this summer and will be a MSEO. I met my girlfriend 2 years ago ago on basic training, she is an army LOGO and posted to pet. When I graduate this year I will be off to Halifax for training an then serving on a ship. We want to get posted together. she has already tried an elemental change with no luck. I'm now going to pursue a VOT to EME. The problem is, even if successful there is no guarantees of being posted to pet. (Yes I understand there are never any guarantee,  and you go where you are needed). However we have no way to improve the odds I.e can't pursue common law because we are posted to different bases. Besides getting married (or having a child) is there any way to hedge the bet?

 

[JorgSlice]

I'm hoping someone might be able to help me out.

I'm entering 4th year at RMC this summer and will be a MSEO. I met my girlfriend 2 years ago ago on basic training, she is an army LOGO and posted to pet. When I graduate this year I will be off to Halifax for training an then serving on a ship. We want to get posted together. she has already tried an elemental change with no luck. I'm now going to pursue a VOT to EME. The problem is, even if successful there is no guarantees of being posted to pet. (Yes I understand there are never any guarantee,  and you go where you are needed). However we have no way to improve the odds I.e can't pursue common law because we are posted to different bases. Besides getting married (or having a child) is there any way to hedge the bet?

Until you're married or common law, she does not exist to the CF and the vice versa for her.

 

[PAdm]

Prairiethunder made point 1. Until you are married, there is no conversation.

2.  Once married, DMilC will try to co-locate if at all possible, but service needs rule. Co-location can be Pet-Ottawa vice under one roof. By being a MSC, you must appreciate you are knowingly choosing a very difficult path.

3.  If your "soul mate" has to be in uniform, you again have to appreciate that your career path is driven by uniform colour and MOS.  the reality is a field engineer marrying a sea log officer will never be co-located. This would be an example of a bad combination from the get go. You are entering a similar path. She has a set career path that will not be able to intersect with yours for many years even if you marry today. And my opinion is that as you will undoubtedly try to force the paths to merge, one of you will be sacrificing your career. One of you will have to accept lesser jobs to be near the other.  The CF does not like complications. The CF would be happier/more able to cope if you married the girl next door.

In summary, I am not criticizing or judging. As an HR guy, I just want you to know you are looking to follow a very difficult path that the CF will never be able to fully facilitate. You cannot hedge this bet so make decisions now vice be unhappy in three years time when you are trying to start a family via long distance.

Good luck.

 

[grizzly25]

I have been living for now a year with my girlfriend under the same roof. Just don't know what proof the CF needs to become common law ? These are the ones we have ; driver's licence , health card , bank statement, insurance policie , a letter from CFHA saying she's living with me , all these showing the same address. 

Thanks !!

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Unit requirements seem to vary, might be good to enquire thru your Orderly Room on what your CO has set as the acceptable supporting documents.  Having said that, I'd also look up the regs and see what the CAF requirements are as well;  my experience is units like to make their own shit up.  In one former relationship I was in years ago, my CO signed off and recognized my CLS but CFLRS refused to (at the PO2 level in the clerk world; my now-ex was attending trg there as a DEO).  However, once my units Admin O called the CFLRS Admin O, the problem mysteriously went away...

 

[grizzly25]

ok thanks but anybody would know where to get the answer? Which section ?  It has to be wrote down somewhere I guess .

 

[Ayrsayle]

ETIS was hinting at the problem with it just being "written down somewhere" - it will be in your best interest to actually go speak with your orderly room to find out exactly what THEY will need to see before they confirm it.

To my understanding (and how it worked for me): you will need to make a declaration of your Common Law status (and provide proof) - which in turn gets signed off on by the CO (or designated authority) who confirms they are satisfied with your claim of being common law.