Financial arrangements moving in together

Why should he be contributing towards the cost of raising these children when they have two capable parents who are already financially raising them?

I’m not reading ‘us’ in any of his proposals. I’m reading me and you. And he’s making it really clear that he has every intention of protecting all his assets, not being a penny out of pocket, definitely not contributing anything towards the cost of raising your children … you want to be with him why? This is a man who values money over your relationship. He’s showing you who he is and he’s organising his exit strategy up front.

Obviously his deposit would be ring fenced, then 50/50 on payments and proceeds. Obviously.

I too am interested in whose name / names the house will be in.

If you’re really going to go ahead with this, he should have his deposit legally protected and then you should own the house 50/50.

If you were to split he’d get his deposit back and you’d split any profit 50/50.

Yes it sounds fair splitting the bills 50/50 because you’re bringing 3 people to the home and he’s only 1. There’s also to factors of needing a certain sized house in a certain area for you and your children’s needs.

I still stand by my statement that you shouldn’t sell your house though. If you’re not contributing to the house deposit why do you need to? Rent it out and have yourself some security behind you, just like he does with the property he’s not selling.

Would you own it 50/50?

Would you own the house 50/50, it isn’t obvious about him paying the deposit?

Don't sell your house! That is your and DC security for the future.
In fact, I wouldn't live with him full stop. He's rolling in it, you're not but he is accounting for every penny he spends over 50%.
Doesn't work like that in a real relationship.
I really think you'd regret it

Maybe rent out your property or sell and invest the money.
Then let him buy the new house and pay all the mortgage, split the bills.
And when in time you want to get married then you can be put on the house deeds and pay a bit more. By then you might have been able to save a little and feel more financially able.
If the relationship fails you can purchase a new property for you and the kids and he's left with his house.

Similar position as you were but my partner moved in with me and rented his house out. I was going to be losing out on £400 UC so it seemed unfair that I would not benefit whatsoever if he just paid half the bills and he would be considerably better off (almost 1k) we split the difference so both better off by equal amount.
My house is mine and my boys security after my divorce and I'd never make myself vulnerable. In an ideal world we have a home that we both bought together but I don't fancy a massive mortgage either. If it doesn't sit right don't do it. Rent somewhere together or he moves in for a while

I would say, stay as you are for the time being as moving together would mean either you would financially loose out and him as well to a lesser degree, moving in with someone else children is not easy.
You can review the situation when your children have grown up as there is too much of an imbalance atm.

Don't move in with him. Let him come and stay at URS as much as he likes. Keep your financial issues separate from his. He already sees u and Ur kids as financial liability, hence laying boundaries u r not happy with. Protect yourself and Ur children. He probably wants a woman to cook and clean for him and do all the domestic stuff but he wants 50/50 financiallt from u. Things situation has red flags all over it. Date him, but just don't change Ur set up because of him. Could go very sour very quickly.

Given you are going to incur financial loss, and tbh, the proposal for you having to pay back amount while you wait for your house to be sold would put you in further financial distress. Wouldnt more caring and loving option be dont buy until your place is sold and you have equities pooled in such you dont need much mortgage? Btw Im a single mom with 2 teenagers and my monthly bills are only 10% lower than my partners’s who I dont live with. So its not that much more. This is not equal by any means and I would not put all my financials eggs with this kind of person.

Men like this seek out desperate women.
There is something particularly odious about a man that is happy to leech off a single parent 3 nights a week, and throw her the odd bone of a pub meal out, like he's being generous 🙄.

Happy to have all the comforts of a single parent, but everything 50/50 while he banks loads of money.

He has his bolthole and a woman to keep house and pay 50/50.

I feel so sorry for her children whom she seems so ready to play roulette with their security.

A larger house costs money to maintain and she is on the hook for half of it.

I agree and I also think she’s in a good position now.

I'd be telling her to protect her financial interests.

This man is doing just that. But if they move in, OP will be significantly worse off financially and so will her kids. They might have separate bedrooms but this relationship seems a bit tenuous. The kids will be adversely impacted also by having less funding available for university because of the live-in having a high income. How is OP going to support 2 in university with higher living expenses and lower income?

She can't afford this guy.

Would the answers be the same if the OP was a high earner buying a large house with a man who has two DC.

He’s getting a great deal if this goes ahead. He’ll be going from a flat to a house, aided by OP. Unless he’s living in a really expensive part of the country, he could have done that already, but was probably too tight to. He gets to keep the flat as an occasional WFH space / bolt hole / potential BTL and even though he earns triple what OP does, he wants everything split 50/50, thus leaving him every month with a ton of his favourite thing - MONEY. Add to the deal him getting a live-in chef. I don’t see any compromise on his side.

If you that close to each other, you need to have an honest conversation about finances. If he wants a 'high-end' lifestyle, he must understand you cannot afford to match him, especially as you have 2 kids to pay for (why no child support from the father?).

My partner and I have been together for 9 years, and we started our relationship with a detailed understanding of our financial circumstances. We got all the potentially awkward stuff out of the way early on because we'd both had past partner financial issues. We know what each has financially and share the same wealth management company. We have a joint account which we contribute to for daily expenses; food, eating out, dogs... but we pay our own utilities, insurance, etc. We each have a house. My partner's son lives with us, and she pays more into our account for his food.

You need to marry before you move. You need a legal agreement that secures your payments into the shared household, so that if things go wrong you get your money back. 50/50 is reasonable in a marriage, if both partners can afford it. Otherwise it is ungenerous and possibly a bit unkind. Is it possible that he is uncertain about committing to this? Nail him down. Wedding, small or one where costs reflect the relative wealth of the two parties. Life is no rehearsal. Good luck

I think he is compromising. OP says ‘He is going to have to move to the area I currently live in as I need to stay near the kids school, so he is giving up the area that he grew up in and loves so there is some sacrifice on his part.’

OP said her and kids have outgrown their current home as it’s a two bed and her kids are desperate not to share anymore.

And her partner needs a WFH space which he currently has, so it wouldn’t be fair for OP to have two bedrooms for her kids but he doesn’t get a room for his WFH.

I think she is losing about 750 a month in benefits and can't imagine she will be saving that by paying 50% of the mortgage and bills in a house that's double the size. She will have to meet the cost of the childcare herself as it doesn't sound like he will contribute and the loss of CB is solely due to his earnings, but again he is not taking that onto consideration.

Agreed. If the OP's half of the mortgage will be more than her current full mortgage for her 2 bedroom house, I'm guessing he's being quite specific about what kind of house he's willing to move into. I believe OP said he said it had to be a 4 bedroom house. It doesn't seem like compromise is his strong suit.

Neither of you are unreasonable.
He's protecting his financial position ( as he should).
You have two dc to consider.
If you want to live together, why does it need to be in a house that is outside your affordability.
Surely you buy one that is within the budget of the lower earner.