Source: Radio New Zealand
RNZ’s money correspondent Susan Edmunds answers your questions. RNZ
Got questions? RNZ has launched a new podcast, ‘No Stupid Questions‘, with Susan Edmunds.
We’d love to hear more of your questions about money and the economy. You can send through written questions, like these ones, but even better, you can drop us a voice memo to our email questions@rnz.co.nz.
You can also sign up to RNZ’s new money newsletter, ‘Money with Susan Edmunds‘.
I’ve been in a LAT (living apart together) relationship with my partner of six years – meaning we are considered partners, but we don’t live together, and we have completely separate finances. We spend about a night or two together a week, normally at my place, but sometimes at his. I understand these sorts of relationships are becoming more common, particularly for those of us that have been through a divorce.
From a net worth perspective, I’m worth more than my partner. From a relationship property act, we’re over the three-year threshold, however given our separate finances and living arrangements could I be at risk if we ever did break up? Note we will eventually move in together and at this point we plan to put a legal agreement in place.
I think you could find that you’re already caught by the relationship property laws, depending on your situation. In the past when I’ve looked at this, I’ve found that not living together is often not enough to stop the timer from starting.
Public Trust said what would define a “de facto” relationship would depend on a range of factors.
“It’s not just about whether you live together or not, or share finances or not. In deciding, the court will look at the overall nature of the relationship,” a spokesperson said.
“This can include things like how long the relationship was, whether the couple lived together, whether there was a sexual relationship, and how financially connected they were. This looks at whether one person relied on the other for money, whether they shared finances, and whether there were any arrangements to support each other financially. It also considers who owned or used property, and how property was acquired.
“Other factors include how committed the couple was to building a life together, whether they cared for or supported children, how household tasks were shared and how the relationship was seen by others – for example, whether they presented themselves publicly as a couple.
“All of these factors are considered together. No single factor automatically carries more weight than the others. We recommend you get legal advice from a specialist property relationship lawyer.”
Public Trust said, if you do not want the Property Relationships Act to apply to your relationship, you could have a contracting out agreement set up.
“This enables you to decide how your assets will be dealt with if the relationship was to end or one person was to die.
“Another important point is if you’re putting a will in place and you have a contracting out agreement, you’ll need to make sure they work together and don’t contradict each other. If they don’t line up, it can create complications after death, adding time, cost and unnecessary stress for those left to deal with the estate.
“If your situation changes, these documents need to be reviewed and you may wish to seek additional legal advice.”
As I understand the annual superannuation adjustment is calculated based on a percentage of the average wage increase (2.91 percent) up to December the previous year. If inflation (CPI) is higher (3.11 percent) an adjustment can be made to ensure that purchasing power is not lost.
What percentage increase was applied for the 2026 adjustment for married and living alone rates? Generally superannuants carry the cost increases in the year they are incurred. But the adjustment is applied for the forthcoming year and not backdated to the year they occurred.
Is this the reverse of compounding interest? If so what could be the cumulative loss over a 10, 20, 30 year period? For example, I get the living alone superannuation rate. Last year my major expenses like rates, utilities, insurances, food and transport costs all increased at a much higher percentage than the increase (2.22 percent) that was applied last year.
NZ Super went up by 3.11 percent this year.
You’re right that it reflects the increase that has happened over the past year rather than what is going to happen over the coming year.
While you lose out in situations like we’re facing into at the moment, where inflation is expected to pick up, you might potentially be in a better position next year when your increase will reflect the inflation over the past 12 months – and hopefully the rate of increase will have slowed by then.
I received an email from Tower Insurance that says if my vehicle is written off and I make a total loss claim, it will no longer refund any remaining premium on the policy. Is this now standard? I moved to Tower and monthly payments because I had been screwed over by one of their competitors previously on a total loss claim? I had just reinsured and registered an old Corolla before the total loss and didn’t get a lot back.
I asked Rebecca Styles, Consumer’s insurance expert, about this. She says it’s standard across insurers. State said it did not refund or credit any premium after a total loss, Cove said it would cancel the policy and give no refund. AA said it would take any unpaid monthly installments from the settlement amount if a claim was a total loss.
“I can understand why people would think it unfair because it’s unlikely insurers are upfront about this clause when people take out the policy, and people only discover it when they make a claim,” she said.
“However, it’s unlikely to be deemed an unfair term under the Fair Trading Act given it’s an annual premium – even if you’re paying monthly.”
Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand