Blended family finances

My husband was absolutely fine about me protecting my larger share of our initial deposit on a house. After all, it's not going to matter if you never split, is it? My husband and I only had a very limited degree of joint finances 25 years in and that was a joint account mainly for our children's expenses. I'm sure your grandfather wouldn't have wanted any share of your inheritance going to this rather shifty individual.

How can you be selfish when you currently rent and split everything 50/50 but you pay for holidays, takeaways and days out? You also treat your step-daughters with clothes, makeup and give them pocket money of £20 a week each and pay for their phones"? In fact, you seem not so much unselfish as a right chump. He might have a brain injury but your dp seems to be perfectly capable of trying to set himself up to get a 50% share of your assets should you ever split up.

I am a solicitor - not in the UK - and your situation is almost giving me palpitations. Stand firm. My husband is a wonderful and honourable man, whom I adore, and to whom I have been married to for over 30 years. He has been a great husband and I was lucky to meet him. But I also adore being in control of my own assets. It gives my ageing complexion the kind of glow no over the counter serum can match.

I’d echo the earlier comments - he’s taking the piss and now trying to emotionally blackmail you into it. Lovely.

Yeah usually when someones called me selfish they were trying to screw me in some way.

“Selfish” is an attempt to control and shut down your independence and sensible planning.

In what way are you - protecting your future - being more selfish than him - trying to benefit from or even obtain your assets?

I don't know if this would work for you but when my husband and bought together he had a big deposit and I had none. He paid his half of the house (so he is you in this situation) with his deposit and I pay the whole of the mortgage to cover my half of the house.
I do benefit from lower repayments because of the LTV due to his deposit.

I'm no legal advisor though and we are married so it is different in that a 50:50 split would be the starting point anyway.

I think given that you already split costs plus pay for holidays, treat his children and treat him he’s taking the piss. If I had two kids and a boyfriend who was generous towards me and my children I think I wouldn’t be trying to grab a bit more.

Btw I would feel the same about kids I’ve known since they were very little and would have no problem with Dh paying some CS in these circumstances so the kids are comfortable at their mums house too, I think thats absolutely right and moral tbh. However it is perfectly reasonable to ringfence your deposit. He still benefits if you split from any increase in equity.

You say you don't want children and you don't want to get married. This is clear. What if this man will want more children - with someone else? He already has one ruined family behind him - his ex wife and two children.

So, no, don't do joint finances and 50/50 on the house. Just don't.

Sorry, it feels manipulative to me. You’re not married, he just wants half of your money. When you say he feels xyz, rephrase it as “he says he feels xyz”. I’m so hurt you wouldn’t give me what I want, I feel so powerless you won’t give me what I want, do you really love me if you won’t give me what I want?

Everybody here can see it’s fair to ring fence your highly unequal contributions. He sees it too. He just wants more.

A man who loved you, would want the best for you, and wouldnt want you to put your inheritance at risk! This would make me doubt the whole relationship as I cant possibly see how anyone who actually loved me would want me to put myself in a financially vulnerable position!

Thanks - I did a bit of googling after I originally posted. I might look into this. I assume the earlier you do it, the harder it would be for them to cry foul.

No they can’t whilst the surviving tenant lives in the property. However if one spouse dies, their share would then pass to whomever in the will and in theory that is ring fenced (albeit local authorities can challenge)

I've read your response op. If he really has an issue with his 'lack of agency' you should buy a cheaper property together. One that is a better match for his finances.

I agree with what everyone is saying on this post re protecting your assets

However, I am also trying to assume he isn’t a gold digger since you’ve been in a relationship a long time. If I were him I would be worried about my security if we were to split or if you were to die.

Ordinarily, you’d expect the house to increase in value and this be split equally, however I’m assuming this wouldn’t be the case in this instance. in which case, he’s probably concerned long term.

Could you match his investment instead? Then the relationship wouldn’t feel so unbalanced?

Also, in your will would you leave the house to him?

I am interested in this. How is this different to not being tenants in common? Adult Social Care can’t sell the house from under the surviving tenant now any way (can they?! ). Or do you mean they can’t put a charge on it?

I see that it protects your half - so that can be passed on. Also need to be aware of deprivation of assets. For you prob not an issue but they could ask more questions of your PIL. I am not convinced how often the LA actually go after anyone for that though tbh.

I think he’d be taking quite a different position if it was his inheritance and savings…

Joint finances when you’re married and have your own kids. Separate finances when you’re unmarried and one person has children. Husband and I have completely joint finances but we are married so I’m (as lower earner) more protected and everything is for our children anyway. Very different if it’s a cohabiting relationship and one person has dependents and the other doesn’t.

That’s quite a drip feed, that your partner has a brain injury which reduces his earning capacity and that his wife also has health issues. Yes, I agree that you are subsidising them all - but it’s not as clear cut as ‘they saw you coming’.

If your earning power was reversed, what do you think your partner would do? Would he willingly share his inheritance with you? And his higher income? I’m not saying don’t protect yourself and your inheritance (I would probably do what you propose as well) but I guess the key question is: are you a family and what does that mean in your (complicated) situation?

Maybe explain it to him this way. Surely he'd want to leave his share to his daughters in his will. So thia way he gets to enaure his daughters get his share of the house and it doesn't get eaten away by your care home fees as an example.

Eta: just read your update OP. Sounds like you are having the right conversations. Well done

You are a cash cow to him. You earn more. You pay stuff for his kids like pocket money £160 a month -

you are putting in a large deposit

ring fence it. My friend didn’t and even tho married when they divorced a few years later , she lost her £40k hard earnt deposit

makes you wonder why he’s pushing so much but glad he’s agreed reading tho thread

who will gain when you die

Glad he agreed @PersephoneMidnight . I understand he feels like he has no agency etc but hopefully he does acknowledge* that you do* subsidise him, his children and ex wife. There is no harm in him acknowledging this occasionally.
I wonder what his life would look like without you in it.

OP do you have to move? I’d be tempted in your position to purchase a rental property as an investment with your deposit/ mortgage contribution abilities to ensure you are on the housing ladder and just keep finances absolutely separate.
I understand your attitude to your situation as viewing it as a ‘family’, but it is all in one direction to such an extent it is concerning. And he then has the nerve to feel badly treated? It doesn’t feel right. He should show fulsome appreciation of what you are doing, not criticise you.

If he is insisting on 50/50 joint tenants then you only put the same deposit in as him. Keep your inheritance separate. He's already benefitting from a lower mortgage and help with his children whichever way you own the house, isn't that enough of a bonus?

Give lots of thought to wills, who your respective shares would be left to and how it might work in reality.

If you insist on buying with him this is the way. But please don't buy with him, seriously.

In your situation I would buy the property in my own name. No need for it to be jointly owned or tenants in common. Given the huge difference in your finances I could not see it working any other way. I have seen an almost identical scenario go horribly wrong for a family member.