AIBU to feel undervalued when my husband keeps score financially?

She may be 'only' working PT (and four days a week is still quite a lot) but by doing so she enables him not to have to pay for cleaning/cooking/childcare/house and life admin.

Hmmm…. I think you can’t really ring fence your deposit and then expect him to pay the majority of the bills. Having separate finances is fine, but then you should expect to pay 50/50.

You could have paid less into the house deposit, so that you had an equal share of the house, and then used the remainder of your money for bills.

So we works FT, contributes to the majority of the household expenses and has no DCs?

Buy you only work PT, contribute a lot less than him and you’ve got 2 kids?

He is a lot worse off in this situation.
He is paying for 4 people instead of just himself.

I don’t understand why you don’t work FT?
This would annoy me more than someone earning less than me, which often can’t be helped.

There is absolutely no reason why he should treat you less because you contribute less, but I can see how resentment can build if my DP was only working PT and I was paying for him and his kids.

Him not keeping an eye on the dinner is pathetic and I think this needs a serious conversation but I’m wondering if for him, it’s just one more thing.

How old are your DCs?
Unfortunately, blended families can be incredibly difficult to manage.

The EH contributes no CM so go through the CMS and claim some?
The EH refuses to change the child’s school if you have them more of the time then it's not up to him, he doesn't get to unilaterally make all of the decisions.

@boingcatmavenvulture the event that triggered the OP posting was him complaining after she asking her DH to keep an eye on the dinner she was cooking, for ten minutes. So from that, we can gather he isn't pulling his weight. You do know marriages are supposed to be love matches and that includes any children? Children need care, including picking up, this hasn't come as a surprise to the DH. The OP put down the deposit on their home. There's no profiting from the marriage, they both get to live in a house they otherwise couldn't have bought. But then we don't know if the OP could have bought the equivalent closer to her children's school.

Assets owned prior to marriage are not automatically considered marital property.

@PinkCatStripes as you're back, what of the various wild assumptions on this thread are completely wrong? I suspect some of mine.

In particular, did you move to him? I'm wondering if the reason you can only work 4 days is because you moved to him. That changes things a bit from my perspective. Although I still think that you're on a hiding to nothing and if you both can't move away from treating this relationship as a balance sheet of who does more, you will either need to put up with being long term unhappy or accept you need to leave.

They are legal. They’re not specifically legally binding, but they are given significant weight by courts and are adhered to in the majority of cases.

I assume OP is well aware of the enforceability of her prenup and where she lives and so doesn't need advice on that!

They're not pointless - they're persuasive. If OP goes on to give up her entire life to care for him and the 20 kids they have together the court will tell her DH to piss off with his prenup ideas. If they carry on roughly as they were in the beginning, and the OP isn't going to be in dire financial straits if the pre-nup is maintained (and particularly if a short marriage) then they will generally be followed by the court.

It’s hardly like he lured her in under false pretenses. She knew what he wasn’t going to coparent with her prior to marrying him, and chose to go ahead anyway.

As the one actually responsible for the children, it was up to her to not go near him if this wasn’t what she really wanted.

I’m not seeing how he’s financially benefiting from the marriage, considering he is the one paying the mortgage and bills. Op meanwhile is able to work part time because of this, and her contribution to the house is protected.

Pre nups are not legal in the UK which I assume they are. Pointless articles here.

If they are married, any assets he owns elsewhere also now belong to his wife. And vice versa.

I agree he doesn't sound like much fun! But that's her trade off.

She hasn't said she has less disposable income. If she was on benefits then she presumably didn't have any disposable income before. She's just said she doesn't have any now (once she's covered a list of things which are 90% things she would have had to cover before ). As I've said above it seems impossible that his financial contribution isn't much higher than any in work benefits she was getting. The expenses she covers that are also for him are groceries. He covers the mortgage and all other household bills. We don't know what happens if they go out as a family, or if they go out as a couple, or if they go on holiday. She didn't mention that in her list of expenses (just activities, which I take to mean after school stuff) and she hasn't actually complained about him being tight, so I would assume at a minimum that's he's picking up the bulk of her costs, if maybe not being willing to cover family days out and holidays for her kids.

She's also not said she has to clean up after him. I agree it's likely she does but she's not mentioned it at all. He could be a slob but he's one man - that's basically just paying for a cleaner a few times a week, and a meal plan. If he's a neat freak that expects a super high standard of cleaning from her then presumably he's also not a complete slob. I'm a bit of a slob - but my standards are also much lower than my husband's so whilst he ends up picking up more cleaning than I do (which can annoy him) the reality is I'm not doing less than I would if he wasn't there!

How much do you both earn? You say his earning are 6x yours but if 60% of yours is used up on food for 2 adults and 2DC who are only with you 50% of the time, you are either very extravagant or not earning much. But then you say you work 4 days in a professional role, but also had received benefit top ups. It's hard to know if he's BU without knowing figures involved - big difference between £10k/60k versus £50k/£300k.

I would do the same as you btw. I wouldn't be in this relationship but I suspect that in reality OP is getting a significant lifestyle bump. I don't judge her if she looks on this relationship with a business head a bit or if she's willing to put up with an arse of a DH because of it. It's not clear what her financial position was before except that she was on benefits (but managed to have a substantial deposit saved, which means she either owned her own home or the deposit was under 20k) and living in poverty is no fun. I don't live in the UK, believe me I know a lot of women who are willing to put up with a lot to be able to lift themselves and their kids out of poverty. It's just if she wants to look at it that way, she doesn't have a leg to stand on with her argument that he's undervaluing her contribution and it won't help her to take that approach.

I'm not clear how she's enabled her DH to keep assets though? He could presumably have liquidated other assets to buy the house in full if that's what he wanted to do, or even to cover the deposit amount. Then they'd probably be in the position that OP wasn't getting any equity in the house at all. This really isn't a bad financial deal for OP. Remember there are 4 people living in this house, DH is paying the whole mortgage for a house he gets 25% of the benefit. The need to purchase a bigger house might even have been because of the need for bedrooms for OP's kids.

@boingcatmavenvulture the OP was topped up by in-work benefits. She gave them up to live with him. She has less disposable income now and another person to clean up after. Plus it doesn't sound fun in their house.

If you read all of the OP's out you'd see that the house split isn't going to be 50/50 and she works part time because a court order means the children have to go to school an hour away.
OP he married you knowing this. If you don't want to be a step parent, then don't marry someone who has children still at school, you then have a legal connection and moral responsibility towards them. I agree that you need to talk about things and ask him outright if he regrets the marriage. My DP (of only five years) Mum (84) has needed a bit of help, I've done it and I don't know anyone who wouldn't. Likewise he's heped my adult DD and grandchildren, in practical ways, including babysitting. We have less obligation to elderly relatives of our spouse, but it's the norm to help a bit (even if it's just sorting a prescription etc). Have you discussed at what age he'd want your children gone? His attitude now doesn't bode well. Posters on here are all about money. You can love children that aren't biologically your's. You can get positives from having children/young adults in your life. If he wasn't capable of tgat, he shouldn't have gone near a single parent.

@Decacaffeinatednow it sounds like he gas married her for her contribution to the home they live in.

The OP's husband owns other properties, if they split, he'd potentially have a home to walk straight into, plus a proportion of the current property he's bought with the OP!!

So? How is the OP worse off if they split than she would have been if they hadn't married. She hasn't come back to the thread so a while so we're all on in fantasy land with many assumptions that are probably all wrong, but OP hasn't mentioned any sacrifices she has made for this relationship (well except for living with her husband who sounds like a petty arse). If she has made personal sacrifices, for example if the long school commute that means she can only work 4 days is because of her DH and where he wants to live, then there's an argument that she should financially gain from the marriage over time. If not then I don't see why she would possibly expect to only pay for part a house and get to keep it all. She will still benefit from equity increases but he's already covering the whole mortgage - why would she and her kids live rent free and expect to be gifted all of the house at the end? She hasn't paid for a whole house with her deposit, she's paid for part of one.

She is potentially putting herself in a financially vulnerable position if she stays with him long term because she is likely to need to take a significant lifestyle drop and he won't have to if they split. But that's because she's getting a lifestyle bump now that he's funding.

[If they have kids together whether or not this structure is 'fair' all changes of course. I would assume that's covered in the prenup.]

The OP has enabled her DH to keep not inconsiderable assets.
He earns 6x what she does.
He throws a fit at being asked to check on the dinner or to pick up kids on one day.

Those giving the OP a hard time need to wind their necks in.
OP, if I were you I'd take my share of the house and get the hell out. He doesn't demonstrate any respect or basic concern for you. That the kids are not his is no excuse; he knew that when you got together.

How dare you ask that?

From what the OP has said in her updates, her husband owns several properties, that have been presumably ring-fenced as any deposit he put down for their current home, has been. The OP put a much larger deposit down, which again presumably has been ring-fenced but the mortgage her husband pays, is also helping him gain more ownership of the property.

The disparity in their salaries, should have been glaringly obvious prior to purchasing a home together. Even if the OP, went back to work full-time, she's unlikely to ever equal his salary, so will never be on equal financial terms with her husband.

To be honest, I can't see a way forward here. Her husband resents paying the mortgage and bills, with the OP contributing less because she has 2 children to pay for. He doesn't want to help on any level with her children, because it's not his responsibility. No, it isn't but if you've married a woman with children, they all come as a package. If the OP was constantly asking her husband to help with her children (as we often see with men on here), to the point he was doing more parenting than she was, then I could understand him being peeved. However, it sounds like she asks occasionally for him to pick the children up etc.

The OP's husband owns other properties, if they split, he'd potentially have a home to walk straight into, plus a proportion of the current property he's bought with the OP!!