Buying house with partner

When I did this we ring fenced my deposit (20k) so if we split and sell I get the first 20k equity and the rest is split 50/50. However we have been together 20 years and dh has paid the mortgage for nearly ten years due to my health and being a carer to our son, so I doubt I'd enforce it now!

I wouldn't even bother with TiC, just don't do it although you absolutely should do TiC if you go ahead. I did it with my ex partner and he literally refused to sign the paperwork so the house could be transferred in to my name when we split up. He tried everything to argue himself out of it, lots of solicitors and threatend to take me to court etc....I spent thousands on conveyancing fees as he refused to sign anything. As my solicitor said, there was absolutely no way a court would rule over the trust deed but it would have to get to court as he won't put pen to paper.
Also if you get married, you need to re make wills after marriage so the TIC still stands.

@Praying4Peace

It might be 'cynical' but it's also practical, although I expect if the roles were reversed and the woman was going into the relationship with nothing the advice would be different.

It absolutely is possible to rent out your house (if you actually want to become a landlord, which there are lots of downsides too). If it's something you are serious about, I would look into moving into a rental yourself for the short term of your fixed term mortgage, and get a consent to let your property.
When your fixed rate ends, you can remortgage to a buy to let mortgage, and if you need to, release some equity from your current property to put down as a deposit for the new house.

Definitely not. If he can't come up with close to half the deposit then the ownership split should reflect this. If it turns out that he's able to save well during the next few years, you could move and buy a new property together 50 50 or even let him pay you out of part of your share.

I wonder if he moved in his girlfriend when she had no house, no savings and a bad financially history. Oh and he had two young children

Somewhat cynical approach. Love comes into it too. I am currently purchasing a property from a couple where the house was originally bought when the guy was single.
If OP loved the guy enough to have a baby with him, that makes them a family.

You possibly can't do that as your first mortgage might need to be changed to a buy to let which is a higher interest rate.

You'd also have to pay tax on your income from renting it out.

You'd be buying with a Tenancy in Common agreement drawn up by a solicitor.

That means you get back the share of equity you put in. So if you put in 90% you'd get that proportion back if you split up and sold the house.

This is very common and cohabiting couples do it all the time (as do friends who buy together.)

Didn’t seem realistic.

It also seems unrealistic for him to match your investment in such a short space of time.

Have you discussed the options likely to be best for you, of owning in proportions; or you buying a different place by yourself and him investing his money elsewhere?

can you personally afford and get a mortgage for a second property, and the costs / tax of being a landlady?

OP ask dp about tenant in common and the percentage share as posted on the thread. Come back and tell us what he says and will agree to. It will tell us everything we need to know.

I'd be careful. My male friend bought an expensive house with his then wife. He put in the proceeds of his house sale and she put in about £10k. She earned double what he did. No children.
She asked for a divorce about six months later (so she must have been considering it when they bought the house).

She ended up getting half the proceeds of the house sale in the divorce despite earning double his wage and there being no children.

Also when things go pear shaped, as can often happen, if you have all your money tied up in an asset that he has the right to live in, you are rightly screwed.

Focus on the worst case scenario and how you would cope, because unfortunately when you don't, that is often what happens.

He will have his highly paid job and quick access to money where as you would be dependent on a sale of a house.

You and your children have so much to lose.

Don't leave it until you hit a bump to fully realise that.

Only way is a tenants in common mortgage to protect your share. You’d be mad to do 50-50 with that equity

This thread is pretty wild imo OP. I have no idea if your DP is a waster or not but I know that perfectly responsible adults often have a point in their life before which they had saved nothing. I recall my DP telling me that when he was 30 he decided it was time to stop spending and start saving (he’d always had good jobs but had spent all his money on nice cars and traveling). By the time I met him when he was 39 he owned 2 properties and a decent pension. He want a waster when he was 30, he’d just not prioritised saving. People can change (and typically do, as they get older).

anyway, I digress. His suggestion is clearly not sensible but protecting your deposit (in % terms) would create a perfectly reasonable and commonly used solution. This is really not the catastrophe it’s being made out to be.

I read as he was on 35k when he moved in and is now on a 650/day contract.

It's a bit vague and contradictory - he earns 35 which isn't more than average - and yet has huge earnings on a contract. How long is the contract for? Does he pay towards the mortgage and if so what proportion or amount - running costs covers what exactly? Do you work and earn?

Whatever you do, do not give away your property which is the only thing you have for you and your children, from your former marriage. And do not risk it being lost to you or them, even in part, in the future.

Get all your facts, figures and circumstances organised and precisely set out on paper so that you can get comprehensive and accurate legal advice before you go any further.

2 options I would consider. Matching his deposit and owning a property 50:50 whilst I invested the balance elsewhere (potentially a buy to let). Or invest my equity in the home and go 50:50 on the balance and If he then wanted to increase his personal future ‘worth’ then he can buy a rental property.

No way would I invest my money in the property without protecting it first, if he expects you to do that then he’s not a keeper.

is ring fencing the deposit not the same as percentage of equity if the property was to sell?

Not necessarily.

Imagine a house costing £200k
You put in £100k deposit.
And pay the £100k mortgage 50/50
You have paid 50% of the value with your deposit.

By the time you have paid off the mortgage and then decide to sell the house is worth £400k. You have now paid £100k deposit plus. £50k mortgage. I.e 75% of the total cost.

So 50%, the % of your deposit, does not represent yout investment.

Even worse if you ringfence £100k, get that back and then split the remaining equity 50/50.

Ringfence your deposit as a % of the value of the property.
Then stipulate that the mortgaged amount / remainder of equity is split 50/50
And pay half the mortgage.

I speak from bitter experience.

You must protect the % you put in as a deposit (including its capital growth). The same for his 10k plus growth. All debt/equity after that can be 50/50 as he requested. Solicitor can help you with a declaration of trust.

Whatever you do, don't marry him or you might as well rip up the declaration of trust as he'll become entitled to 50/50 anyway.

Be so careful OP.
MN is littered with awful tales of women who threw away their childrens home and security.
Be as bad minded as you can be to protect yourself.
The alternative is unthinkable.....left with 3 children to house!