to not give DF any financial security?

[TheDetective]

Long story short. I am 26. DF is 21. I have a 9 year old DS. I bought this house in 2008, and it is just me on the mortgage (was with DS dad at the time, but bought it solely by myself). This is my home, and DS's home. I will never ever get a joint mortgage with DF, and will not tangle any finances with him.

I don't want to follow in my mothers footsteps. She has been divorced twice, and both times lost a lot of money due to property - she lost the family home when she divorced my dad when I was 9 years old!

As a result I feel the need to be independent of any man. I am the main wage earner, and he doesn't earn enough to contribute towards household expenditure - he pays for his own things, I pay for my home, and me/DS. I like it this way - it means I am in control for my future, my DS's future, and any children I may have down the line. If we have children, I don't see much changing, other than him contributing towards childcare costs, and the costs for the child/ren.

The upshot for DF is that he will never own his own home while we are together, and should anything happen between us, he will find himself starting from zero so to speak.

I worry because I don't want to do this to him, I want him to have financial security, but I am making this impossible for him really. I won't compromise my childs home by allowing anyone a chance to take it away from him/us.

Am I being unreasonable? Probably - but its out of fear...

If you live together for a long enough time doesn't he have a claim anyway?

No- he doesn't, unless he's paying rent in which case he has rights as a tenant

Sorry to those on the other thread who will now hear me repeating myself but common law/ cohabiting relationships have zero recognition in English law (not sure about Scotland)

Perhaps later on, if this relationship works out, you could sell this house and put the profit in some kind of trust or savings account in your name only. Then you could 'start again' with your partner, buy a house together and share your lives on a more equal footing. Then, if things did go wrong, he would have a share in your joint home, but you would still have the financial security of your savings.

I've not read the whole thread but I completely understand where OP is coming from.

I'm wary of marrying again because my divorce cost so much and the lowlife xh even tried to put in a claim for a share of what I will inherit in future.

Rightly or wrongly I am protecting my assets because it's what my family and I have worked for and for my children to benefit from when the time comes, not for a partner/husband who has contributed nothing towards it to be able to claim a share.

That's not to say I would leave a partner with nothing, of course I would make some sort of provision for them but it wouldn't be the same amount as my children would get. There will be no future children but if there were then obviously I would have to rethink.

Maybe I'm too cynical.

"SardineQueen Sun 25-Sep-11 09:03:24

I completely understand your concerns.

I think you need to not get married. Keep things as they are.

Review the situation every 5 years say. And if you have any children with him obviously things will change."

I agree. Very sensible advice SQ

I despise the undertone that shacking up and having a relationship should automatically equal financial recompense should relationship break down.

The only time a person should be entitled to their other half's money/property is :

a, They can prove they have contributed financially to mortgage.

b, Married-sorry, but the married have 'made their bed' from a financial viewpoint and if they didn't want to split assets they shouldn't have made the contract of marriage.

I f well despise the notion that 'emotional support' and sex should equal compensation of the financial kind. It's as good as saying that men and women are prostitutes.

YANBU. Definitely not. But get a contract sorted out so that he can't touch your money. And, don't whatever you, do get married as this alters the financial landscape entirely!!

Scrap point 'a' . No cohabitee should ever be entitled to their former partner's money or property. I meant only if the house was jointly owned and recorded legally as such. As should be any officially jointly-owned assets.

I think you are leading this poor sod on. He asked you to marry him, you said yes, yet you have no intention of doing so? You allow him to be part of your life, but seem to call the shots? You remind us that you earn three times more than him - irrelevant: a look back over MN should show most of us think when you share your life with someone that includes your finances.

You, understandaby, put your DC first, which I wholeheartedly agree with, but you seem to be failing to see the three of you as a family unit: this is not conducive to a happy family. Age is irrelevant, you obviously love him, tough I fail to see what he is gong to acheive by sharing his life with you.

I agree with you (I think) Wamster. :)

Marriage serves a purpose, and it protects a person to a certain degree.

It is so easy for someone to walk away from their responsibilities when just living together.. not so easy when there is that piece of paper that legally binds you together financially.

If he really wants to join the property market he could buy a buy to let and pay the mortgage on that. That would also give him a bolthole if your relationship goes tits up at some stage. I can totally see why you are doing it, but unless he is proactive he risks being in the same position as your DM should you ever separate.

I think the other suggestion, that OP let out her current property, and start from scratch with the fiance, even if in a rented property, where they split the rent and the bills, would put things on an even keel.