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

In regards comments about OP's partner not paying rent to her . At the moment he is paying a mortgage on his own property - which he is not renting out (from what I can gather). It sounds to me as if it's a bit of a trial of spending time together in one house before formalising this with a complete sharing of costs and the other property being let . That's what it sounds like to me . And very sensible - OP is already finding areas of incompatibility regarding finances .. better to find out any issues before things are more formal and it's far more difficult to return to separate properties .

They BOTH have an asset that is 100% theirs. Why should he have to pay 1.5 mortgages?

because he’s able to avail of some benefit (that op seems reluctant to disclose) from his property. Either it’s appreciating massively; he’s letting an ex / child live their in lieu of maintenance; or there is some other benefit.

he’s able to do that because he doesn’t have to pay rent for his own living and is additionally able to put away £1500 pcm.

if he was paying his fair share to OP she could save that additional money. It’s not her problem that he has liabilities that’s he’s offsetting with his own house

He’s paying his own mortgage

Is it an inherited house? I do know some people who’d rather their other property remains empty if they don’t need the money. After dealing with letting agents and properties I jointly own with relatives we don’t use letting agents. Yes it’s a pita but so are letting agents.

I’m internet dating again, yes a real insight into personalities and spending habits.

The vast majority of men have nice sports cars, especially if children are grown up. I had 3 dates with a man who rented a penthouse flat in an exclusive area but was very much into high risk investing and he was kicking himself for not buying a previous flat in the same development, he says he has the money for this. He pays extortionate service charges though.

Another man I am about to have a first date with, he’s divorced with an adult daughter but he likes travel and concerts, preferably together.

Lots of men save or are property rich, cash poor.

I can’t see a huge amount here but if your spending habits are different they won’t magically change for him as he’s “saving” and that’s what he wants to do. Either you’re happy with that or not.

What so he has an empty house that could be getting a rental income yet he is saving £1500 pm by going camping instead of to a hotel and having cheap meals out?

How long do you think £77k would last someone in retirement without taking a hit on lifestyle? That's a handful of years of a safety net being realistic about it.

Exactly that. It’s bonkers.

My DP is very similar. I used to find it a bit strange, but after nearly two decades together, I’m grateful to him for being so sensible (and so used to him being tight that it doesn’t bother me!). It means when we’ve needed a bit extra (private SEN assessment for child, emergency house repairs etc) it has never been a worry.

I don't see this as a problem. It's his money. Unless you're married it's not really your business IMO.

I think he's sensible.

I do think you are subbing him though.

Maybe she doesn't want the argument if they break up. It's very clear. Your house. My house.

It’s been said on here many times the cocklodger would have no claim on the house should he start paying rent.

Maybe she doesn't want him contributing to her house. Wise.

Who wouldn’t love to live rent or mortgage free? You are subbing him - can’t you see he’s in a great financial position maintaining his asset (his property) whilst living with you paying no rent? You’re enabling him saving that money. I can’t imagine living anywhere and not paying some kind of rent or contributing to the mortgage, it’s just wrong.

He’s living there!

I have not read the whole thread but I don't understand the fact that you are saying he lives with you but own a property that is not rented.

Why doesn't he rent it out? that would give him even more income and therefore savings.

Beyond that I don't see anything wrong with him wanted to save as much as he can.

Better to be a saver than a spender.
I wouldn't be complaining.

He's ripping you off OP, he benefits from living in your house but you get no benefit from his house.

GoldenLegend · Today 16:53, she'll be getting a visit from 3 ghosts soon.!

I'm on Team DP here.

First, if he decides he wants to change job to something less well-paid, he can do that without changing his lifestyle.

Second, money doesn't go off like milk (assuming of course that the savings are put somewhere like [mostly] shares, so they keep up with inflation, etc etc). You can come back to it later when you need it.

Every 3 months that he puts £1500 in the bank is £4500, which within rounding is 2 months of spending at £2300. Put another way, after 6 years of saving at that rate, he can have 4 years of not working, while still spending the £2300 Four years of not working could time to do a degree, or be a SAHP for a crucial part of a child's life.

18 years of saving at that rate buys you 12 years of not working. That could mean retiring at 54 instead of 66. 12 solid extra years of life when you're probably still in pretty good health, versus frittering it away on slightly swankier consumer goods? I'll take the first of those, thanks very much.

Cocklodger.

I never used to be able to save as a sp! My dp of 14yrs was always on at me to save. Now I love watching my savings grow.
Your dp is to be commended.
However, I can only dream about saving the amount most of you wealthy mumsnetters can🤗

100K is enough for most emergencies but nothing like enough for retirement. I suspect that's what he meant by security?
If you haven't given that much thought, in simple term, just think how much interest / return on investment £100K can produce:
At 7%, which is very high, it only gives you £7000 per year. In recent years one would only get 3-5% which is £3000 to £5000 per year. Even with state pension of approx £11000 (current level), you're looking at something between £14000 - £18000 per year, ie £1166 to £1500 per month. That is substantially less than the £2300 he has now after saving 1/3 of his income.
That's probably a good level of saving, he should probably invest the money though and not just keep it in the saving account.

This with bells on

They BOTH have an asset that is 100% theirs. Why should he have to pay 1.5 mortgages? Why is that fairer than each paying for their own mortgage? OP’s mortgage is not higher for him living there, she’s paying that regardless. The bills which are higher for him being there he pays 50% of which means actually she’s no worse off and isn’t subsiding him at all. But yes men are all horrible and he should be paying for every bill on both houses because that’s fair!!!