keeping my money for myself, but asking for some of the OH profit in house sale(223 Posts)
So, before my OH and I got together, I owned a house and they owned a house.
We got together, I moved into THEIR house and rented my house out.
we BOTH paid into a joint account for about 7 years and split the mortgage payments and household/living expenses equally (based on income) on the house we were living in, and for the last three years i have been the sole contributor to the joint account, whilst the other house (my old one) ticked along paying for itself via tenants.
Last year I sold my house eventually and got a nice little sum of £'s.
We are now going to sell the house we are living in. My question..
AIBU if I keep all of the profit from my house AND expect a percentage of the profit the new house has made from the date i have been contributing/paying the mortgage?
My OH believes that we should also spilt the profit made from the sale of my house because we just happened to have chose THEIR house to live in, but I say, imagine that i had SOLD my house as soon as i moved out of it to move into the OH's house and the invested that money into, say, stocks and shares which then went on to make a nice profit (about the same as the profit i made on my initial investment in the house for instance!) would they THEN be entitled to that profit? I see the keeping on of the house as a continuing INVESTMENT of my money, so my OH has no claim on any of it, but when i started contributing to the mortgage of the OH's house, i TOO became a joint investor in THAT investment...
Emotion aside, what are peoples thoughts on this?
(sorry for length..and that something i NEVER thought i'd be saying)...
the details dont matter really as it is the facts that are pertinant, the rest is emotional guff that , as i expected, has clouded peoples view of the situation anf my motives and intentions. I'm done now. Thanks to those with helpful advice and to those who are just nosey baised and bitter, i wish you all that you deserve.You all know which category you fit into, whether you chose to admit it to yourselves is not my concern
And this attitude may well be why his wife is looking at protecting her financial interests, particularly after a period of -- according to Gingernutz -- "not contributing" (because bearing & raising children is obviously nowt).
And why many women are sensibly cautious about the personal economic costs of giving up work.
Oh, the mansplaining and arrogance. Delightful!
I think you Both keep the profits from your own houses. Consider what you have paid towards bills etc as normal living costs. Including some rent money - you don't get a share if his profit.
You mean we will be mansplained in print as well? <twirls>
Let us know when the article's published. It will be intererrsting to see which scenario you pick although I'm fairly sure the misconceptions about the people, especially women, on this thread will be repeated as fact and bits chopped out as "evidence". There will be no mention of the op's fudging of the truth and dripped information because that doesn't fit.
There is an agenda. We can't win.
JoinYourPlayfellows - Now, that is a reasonable mans response!
Well I'm totally with Join and her DH and everyone else.
I'm really annoyed with this thread, it's got under my skin with all the twisting and turning and I really hope the OP is not so greedy and unappreciative in real life.
If you are still reading, I'm not sure you really got what I wrote.
And I got even more confused with your explanation.
Just asked DH this question, also gender neutral, as in:
"Say we got together and each owned a proper and one of us moved in with the other and then rented the other house out."
He had a think and said "Well, if you weren't married... then there's an argument that each person should keep the profit from their own house. Or obviously, you could split the profits on each house. Those are your two options."
Then I said, what about a third option whereby the person who moved in got a share of that property because they had "invested" in it, but got to keep all of the profit on their own property.
He looked like this
"Er... no. That's bullshit. If you take that argument they've both been investing in both properties because the rented property could only be rented because of the cohabitation."
Then he said
"Shit, you wouldn't want to be in a relationship with someone who would try to get one over on you like that."
AND he's not even an "irrational sexist"!
I am calling you A&B because your pronouns are very confusing.
You happened to choose to live in person A's house and rent person B's house out. You shared the costs of living in A's house, and B's house paid for itself via rental income.
If you had lived in person B's house and rented out person A's....what would have happened then?
handcream do you not think that maybe it's the other way around? As in, relationships where the people are prepared to marry are more likely to last than ones where they don't make that step? I don't believe that being married is in itself a guard against relationship breakdown, I think that people who decide to get married are more likely to stay together anyway. In general, obviously there will be exceptions.
OP you've gone about this all wrong, as others have said. Be honest and people will try to help, put a new thread in relationships. But it does seem like you don't value the contribution your wife has made by being at home. The emphasis by you of the fact she wasn't paying the mortgage, with no reference to the fact that this is because she was home looking after your children, makes this quite clear.
Maybe have a think about your attitude towards your wife, and have a proper talk to try and sort this out.
Gingernutz - you've probably gone. But you've re-framed your question. again.
This time you've said if you had a investment (instead of a house) that pre-dated you getting together with your current partner and that neither of you have paid into since you married, would your partner have a right to a share of it when it comes to fruition after your marriage.
Yes she would.
Marriage is sharing assets unless you have previously agreed not to.
If either of you want a safety account then agree it between you in advance otherwise when you married everything became each other's too.
On a practical note, as others have said, the partner who gives up work to look after children stops bringing in money but saves a massive cost. Unfortunately this can leave them feeling financially vulnerable.
You do not sound like you have accepted the huge saving your wife has made the family by not working, you seem to feel that she has not contributed towards the mortgage. If this is true in real life then she may well feel a very real need to protect some cash for herself as you are not acknowledging that she has a right to half your salary.
You don't seem very able to handle not getting the answer you want or viewing it from your partner's perspective.
But you've probably long gone.
We also dont know the sizes of the properties.
What if Gingers property was a 1/2 bed flat, and his wife's property a 3 bed house?
Did she already have children prior to meeting Ginger, seeing that he mentions she has been burnt before? He does not say. .. But this could be the reason why he moved in with her...
Ooo I love the smell of mansplaining in the evening. Give Gingernutz a gold star for mansplaining efforts beyond the call of duty.
Turn the situation round to imagine you are in your OH's position and they are in yours.
Do you still think it's fair?
If my DH had rented out a property while we both lived in 'my' house and contributed to the mortgage, and he then sold that property I would expect a contribution based on the fact that if I had known this from the beginning I would rather be the person moving in with him rather than vice versa.
Ahh, here I was all ready to reply with a sensible answer, and I read ol' Ginger has wandered away...
Just in case...
How about taking initial investments into each house as 'own' then split everything else 50/50...I would say from the point you moved in together, but I'm guessing nothing was valued then and you have to take some pragmatic stance.
Might be 50/50, 60/40...who knows? If it's a joint tenancy it literally will not matter, so insist on tenancy in common to 'protect' the proportions.
Good luck! And please resolve this quickly so you can get on with enjoying the new house :-)
And it is a bit rude to flounce without even acknowledging that you made a mistake in not being open about the situation in your OP.
In the interests of fairness I am going to admit to nosy.
I agree with StuntGirl it is very important what the details are in this. I know someone whose DH didn't work for years and they had a cleaner and childcare while he did nothing. Not the same as a SAHP doing all the childcare/housework. It is also important what both your feelings are about marriage and divorce. And, whether her house was worth more.
I am inclined to believe that someone who comes on here and asks for advice has their reasons. This smells like a person who wanted AIBU to go a certain way (ammunition from women to argue with DW?) and didn't get what they wanted.
OP, why not write an honest, heartfelt OP, with all the facts, name change and put it in Relationships? See what happens. If the evil nest of vipers attacks you again, you can have your flounce confirmed.
When my children were nursery age (the are 11 and 8 now) so a good numbers of years ago, we paid £900 per month nursery fees for two children part time. I understand fees are a lot higher now.
I assume nobody forced you into parenthood? By being a sahm your wife has not only saved you money, she has facilitated that you can progress your career and your earning potential. She has supported your career ambitions, to the detriment of her own.
OP don't be silly, you didn't get the answer you wanted so you're going to flounce? Come back and listen to some very wise people who are trying to help you out!
The details matter because for example - the three years not paying towards the mortgage. It could have been because the 'OH' was dossing around doing bugger all, or not earning due to illness, studying at university, or because they were lazy and wouldn't look for a job.
As it happens it's because the 'OH' was your wife, who was not financially paying towards the mortgage because by being a stay at home parent she is contributing in another way, namely by supporting you to earn the money you do.
See how the details make a difference? If the reason you'd put all your money into this house was because you were shacked up with a lazy cunt who expected you to work and support her while she did nothing and contributed nothing, believe me you'd have got entirely different answers.
I dont get how he can on the one hand insist he wont leave her bleeding if he leaves, yet on the other hand insist he gets a share of her assets NOW.
It is not a reasonable request.
I think he is protecting his interests and I suspect she is protecting hers.
Very sad tbh. I actually think the breakdown of marriage is key here over the last 30 yrs. People think it fine to have children BEFORE making the real committment to get married. Its all the wrong way around. There are tons of studies that say children do less well in single parent families. I know its not a popular view but why do people think having children is not the real committment - marriage is.
Prepared to get flamed but relationships without being married have a far higher chance of breaking down....
nosey baised and bitter? Would that be 'nosy, biased and bitter'? <passive aggressive >
Yup, Quint Hope she sees this thread!
Well, that's another eight minutes I'll never get back ...
From your responses in your last post, I can see that your wife would be very wise to
a) insist to keep her 60% share
b) buy a house without you.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.