To think this level of saving is extreme and I’m right to question it?

You need to look at this differently- it’s not about how much he saves or spends- it’s about how much you allow him to save by letting him live in your house for FREE. You are subbing him. He could disappear in a puff of smoke along with his money which you have enabled him to save. Why don’t you suggest going to live in his house and you pay have the bills? You outgoings would plunge and you could save lots yourself.

And no it’s not extreme. Extreme is going out for a family occasion, refusing to have something to eat and getting a glass of water to drink, and then patting yourself on the back for having saved yourself money.

I think this is just a different outlook on money.

You seem quite content that you are not supporting him remotely financially, so I’ll take that off the table.

The fact you think £77k is ‘nearly a £100k!’ And that it is an abundance of safety, lets me know what wavelength you are on.

How long have you been together?

But presumably he’s paying his own mortgage. If she accepts rent that he starts to gain rights to her house/equity so she would need to get legal advice.

OP has said he doesn't rent his place out???

Except the OP has said he isn't renting it out...so no other income

Are you losing the single persons rates discount ?
If so does he make it up ?

Of course you’re subbing him! Where else could he live where he only paid half of food and bills. Why are you refusing to see this?

Op says he's not renting his property out - and presumably still has to pay his bills on that while also rightly giving OP half for bills incurred at her house.

I suppose it could be cheaper to cater for two - but not by that much surely - plus he'd have to pay all his council tax heating electricity bill and mortgage/rent at his place and half of bills at OP house.

In fact seem like the current arrangement may be costing him more - has that impacted on need to save with him?

IL old neighbour rented like this for over a decade - spent bulk of time at partners and paid rent and bills at property next door. IL like him but liked less lack of adequate heating and corresponding damp with that side and garden being left to go wild. When he finally moved in with partner - landlord sold it at auction as it needed a lot of work by then.

Him staying with you rent free us allowing him to rent out his property and keep all that income to himself. Hence he can save whilst you can't.

He should be paying her rent then. No wonder he can save if he’s living there rent free.

Why would he pay towards her mortgage? They each own their own house that they each pay for. The OP wouldn’t want him contributing to her mortgage because he’ll then gain rights to her home/equity.

Of course you’re subbing him! Where else could he live where he only paid half of food and bills. Why are you refusing to see this?

His saving is fine - I only wish I could afford to save as much! Fair dues to him for having 77k saved, and I respect his dedication to saving. If that doesn't work for you that's okay though.

But you are certainly subbing him by letting him live with you. For one thing, he's paying half the cost of heating a home instead of all of it.

(Edited because I cross posted with the OP about renting out his own home while living with her)

Its a bit of a stretch to go from £77k to close to £100k! At £1,500 a month it'd take another year. Perhaps there is a huge difference between the two of you in your approach to money, if you really think that.. Saving a third of your income is relatively normal, IME

But, it would help if you could say whether the house on which he is paying a mortgage is rented out...

He is living with you for free while he saves his own money? Isn’t he paying anything towards the mortgage, I.E rent?

old mantra of spend a third on housing, spend a third on living and save a third.

Did that in my 20s - when rents were cheaper and when I was trying to pay of uni incurred debts early and save house deposit - worked well for me.

Seems odd to save so much - does he not have much pension or have some longer plan - seems odd to never enjoy having the money unless it's for some purpose.

If he's not increasing your costs - it may be stick to your guns give lots of notice for more expensive fun things and if that doesn't work then I think there some incompatibility to talk though.

You ARE subbing him. You pay to live in your house, he pays nothing. Yes you each pay a mortgage but he gets two properties- one for himself and another one (yours) to live in free of charge.

You just need to have a chat about money and finances, neither of you is unreasonable as you're each saving, contributing to the shared household and buying some treats, but if you have drastically different attitudes to lifestyle, money and future goals it could cause issues down the line. Does he have a pension or are you including that in the 1.5k saved? Is he miserly about money, or does he just not feel that expensive dinners/holidays are worth it to him?

Why should we assume that the other property is being rented out? Most people I know, when they got into a longer term relationship, didn't get a tenant in straight away. Indeed, usually not for years...just in case. And then they tended to sell both houses and combine funds. But I agree, it would be helpful if the OP confirmed this

Yes. It does sound a bit unnecessary, and due to insecurity, rather than for a purpose.

It sounds like he's never going to want to spend that money, even if there's a crisis that calls for it, because the money saved is his security, not what he can do with it.

I'm a saver and have always lived well within my means. Having that cushion gives you real choice about what to do with your life, rather than choice about where to go on holiday.

His money his choice. If that makes him an unsuitable partner for you, that's your choice.

I think there’s a fine balance in life between saving and spending. If neither of you owned a property and you were desperate to get on the ladder I could understand him sacrificing treats and trips as he had a huge goal in mind to save for.

However the fact that he already owns a property would leave me a little miffed. What is he saving for? Why don’t you talk about a middle ground of him still saving but once a month you have a treat that you both pay towards like a nice meal, trip, date etc.

I think he's being super reasonable? He maybe should be putting it in a pension/ investments rather than letting it sit in an account but otherwise, I'd encourage this!

Is he thinking of retiring early or something? X

Why isn't he paying you rent, OP?