Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To want my name on the house papers ...

100 replies

Kione · 09/04/2013 22:04

if I contribute to paying the mortgage?
This hasn't been an argument as such, but wonder what everyone else thinks.
So when DP bought the house we live in we had been together for a while, I was pregnant and made redundant. So for the first 2++ years of DD life I used my redundancy money to live and pay for DD stuff and DP paid mortgage and some bills. I own the phone rental not to have arguments about using it too much.
Now I have a good job and could start paying mortgage too, but I want my name to be in the house papers. DP for some reason feel.uneasy about it so hasnt asked me for payments. He told me he has sorted the insurance so if he dies the house will be paid off and will pass to me. Before this it was going to pass direct to DD...
I have a feeling that he doesnt want to put my name on it in case we split up which makes me a bit sad...
I just dont know where to go from here, I have brought up the subject and he says yes, but then nothing its done about it.
What do people do?

OP posts:
LessMissAbs · 09/04/2013 23:21

Rose that's a bit sexist. Or do you also think that a woman, who has bought her own house, paid all the mortgage and the deposit herself, along with most of the bills except the telephone, should grant her DP a half share in it, simply because he has fathered her child?

Nice work if you can get it!

OP, I don't understand why you are so keen to get on the title deeds of your DP's house. You would have to get the mortgage lender to agree (unless, like a similar poster on here not so long ago, your DP had bought outright). Whereas if you bought your own property (since you now have a good job you are presumably intending to keep), you would have security from that and benefit from two separate CGT allowances should you both decide to sell both properties and buy one together one day.

Even if you did get on the title deeds, you should surely not be looking at a 50:50 split, because you have not contributed to the deposit or any mortgage payments yet - if you were married and got divorced, any divorce settlement would take account of your lack of contributions, so I don't see how you can justify getting round your lack of financial contribution outwith a marriage.

CloudsAndTrees · 09/04/2013 23:25

Yes, their contributions cold be very equal for that time, but paying bills doesn't leave a physical asset either. And nor would paying for the roof over their heads if the DP hadn't saved for the deposit for the house in the first place. If they had been renting, neither of them would have anything to show for that period of time when they had a small baby and the OP was out of work. I don't see why, in the event of a split, the DP should be penalised because he tried to do a positive thing by buying a property.

BruthasTortoise · 09/04/2013 23:25

LessMissAbs I'm fairly certain that if the OP were married they would consider the fact that she has been a SAHM to their DD as a contribution to the household.

CloudsAndTrees · 09/04/2013 23:26

But they're not married, so there is a very significant difference.

LessMissAbs · 09/04/2013 23:30

I very much doubt that it would be a 50:50 split Bruthas.

BruthasTortoise · 09/04/2013 23:34

But the deposit could be protected if that's the DPs main concern. The fact that the OP has been contributing to the household, all be it in terms of raising and paying for their child, but will be left with nothing should they split is worrying. Personally, and I'm not trying to be horrible OP, I think your DP is setting the stage for, in the event of a split, he retains both the house and custody of your child. Courts do favour children remaining in the family home, your only support network is his family and your financial situation is precarious. Save your money, put a deposit on your own house and move yourself and your child into it until you're married.

MyDarlingClementine · 09/04/2013 23:35

Not very romantic is it?

Op, there should be lots of options open to you and what you can do. Different ways of making sure your work in the home is accounted for properly. Why don't you visit a solicitor to find out your rights.

I think its really important for women at home with young DC especially to know their rights and be covered, and also for large deposits, in puts to be covered, from them or the partner.

Clouds, lots of other European countries don't buy properties, to be honest, if it comes between couples like this and ruins romance, maybe people like the op should insist on renting and being equal - ish.

I just think if you have a child with someone usually that person is pretty irreplaceable special too you. Of course things change sadly but at that time, I would like to think the house could be replaced but not the person?

BruthasTortoise · 09/04/2013 23:39

I agree cloudsandtrees the fact that they're not married is why the OP is in such a precarious position. LessMissAbs I doubt it would be 50/50 after only 2 years of paying the mortgage but I believe they would consider her caring for their child as a "contribution" and would seek to offer a settlement which would reflect the financial equivalent of this contribution.

CloudsAndTrees · 09/04/2013 23:40

Of course the deposit would be protected, but would his house be if he put OP on the deeds and let her start paying the mortgage? Probably not. He could end up losing his home. OP could end up losing her home too, but then it's not her property.

This is why I agree that she needs to save her own money and ideally get her own property.

They are still an unmarried couple, and until they make a commitment through marriage, there is no incentive for the DP to put OP on the house deeds or mortgage. He's being sensible, and if he were my son, I'd be advising him to do exactly what he is doing.

Ouchmyhead · 09/04/2013 23:44

Get your name on that mortgage! I moved into my DP's house (he bought it before he met me) and we've said that when I have a job (currently studying for my PGCE in primary special needs) we will put my name on the mortgage because then ill be contributing, and we don't even have a child (yet)! I see no reason for you not to be on the mortgage, and I think it's really important for your own self esteem as well! No one wants to live in a house that their name isn't on indefinitely, because their partner doesn't trust them! I can imagine that would be very destructive in the log run.

BruthasTortoise · 09/04/2013 23:45

I can see where your coming from cloudsandtrees but I believe that what your saying only applies if the DP had a mortgage and been paying it prior to the relationship and their child being born. He paid the deposit, so it should be a protected asset for him but since the very first mortgage payment was made the OP has been contributing by maintaining and caring for their child.

BruthasTortoise · 09/04/2013 23:47

*you're Blush

herethereandeverywhere · 09/04/2013 23:53

I think a bit of CAB advice is in order. I can't remember my old property law stuff now but remember vaguely when we bought our flat before I was married we could hold as joint tenants or tenants in common. I think we chose the latter because DH (as he is now) has contributed the deposit and I didn't want to get any more than my share of the flat back if anything went wrong.

I also have some anecdotal infromation from an unpleasant piece of work qualified as a property lawyer. He advised his "mate" that he should not let his newly moved in girlfriend make any contribution to the mortgage to avoid any rights she'd have to the property.

I would be feeling uneasy at your DP's reluctance TBH. Why doesn't he want you to contribute and be protected in this way?

CloudsAndTrees · 09/04/2013 23:56

I see what you're saying too, but I think they quite possibly made an equal contribution while OP was looking after their child.

She did the childcare and paid for the phone and baby stuff, he paid for their housing and all their bills. So while the DP has something to show for his mortgage payments (although probably relatively little) OP had the pleasure of not working while she got to be a SAHM. That's a luxury that she may not have had for 2++ years if her DP hadn't paid the mortgage.

A mortgage is more than just a loan repayment because it pays for your housing. The OP has already benefitted from that.

MsBella · 09/04/2013 23:59

Yanbu
He should want your name on it, married or not

BruthasTortoise · 10/04/2013 00:10

The DP is doubly benefiting from it, though, he's not only getting a roof over his head but also an asset at the end of it. Two things he may not have had if the OP hadn't made the sacrifice of being a SAHM in order to care for their child. Smile

I get worried about things like this because, to me, it harks back to the days when wives of 40 years who had been SAHMs could be tossed out on the street with nothing if the husband felt like it.

Honestly OP if he's not willing to let you have a financial stake in the property and you're not getting married anytime soon then get your own house ASAP.

Redbindy · 10/04/2013 00:15

Marriage would make all of this go away. If you don't want that, talk to a solicitor. Internet forums are not great places to get legal advice, especially after the pubs shut.

CloudsAndTrees · 10/04/2013 00:20

Smile I worry about things like this too, and I know I'm unlikely to be popular or saying it, but as the mother of sons it does worry me that my dc could get themselves set up with a home and a mortgage only to lose it by default because they can't give birth.

There are so many situations where this has happened, I think it's a reasonable worry to have.

At the same time, I wouldn't expect my daughter to put a partners name on the deeds of her house if she had paid for it. All this changes in my mind when a couple get married though.

I agree with you that OP should think about getting her own property.

MrsTerryPratchett · 10/04/2013 02:50

It wouldn't worry me normally but coupled with the fact that he doesn't want you to make decisions about where you and DD live after he is dead I'd feel like he didn't trust me to make decisions at all. Why does he think it's OK to dictate your living situation after he is dead? I live in DH's country and it is not even a discussion. Of course I would go home if he died.

Original poster
Kione · 10/04/2013 07:49

I dont want 50%. What I say is; imagine I start paying noe £300 a month towards the morgage. We split up 10 months down the line, I would like mlthe £3000 I have paid.
He wants me to help paying towards the mortgage because that will leave him £300 better off.
He is worried about him family not seeing DD if I leave. But that is kind of sorted as the house will be paid off if he dies and the agreement is that I wont sell it as it will be for DD so even if u go to my home country for a period of time we will still have a base here.
I will speak to him again when we come back from holidays.
I wasnt seeking legal advice, I was asking if it was reasonable or not to want this. Wasnt expecting such a long debate.

OP posts:
Original poster
Kione · 10/04/2013 07:54

I am a bit weary about buying a property becausevof the state of work, what if I loose my job, no. I rather have savings and if the worst happens I can always rent. I have seen very messy situations in my home country where people are being removed from their homes because they have lidt their jobs and cant afford to pay the mortgage.

OP posts:
Original poster
Kione · 10/04/2013 08:02

Clouds, I had the luxury of being a SAHM, yes no doubt. And DP had the luxury of a clean house, dinner ready every night. He was very pleased with this as we where all far happier that before where I was doing a job I didnt like. This also allowed me time to concentrate in finding a job I liked, which is the case now, and he knows DD had the best start in life being in a relaxed environment at home.
He always tell me how happy he is that we where able to do this. He always says its to my credit that DD is nice and polite (I disagree but still is lovely that he thinks that).
All this was pissible because u used my redundancy money to live. It wiuld have been a titally different scenario if I hadnt.
I am saying all this for those who portrait me ad a golddigger or something like that.

OP posts:
ScarlettInSpace · 10/04/2013 08:12

You could sell this house and buy a new one in both your names, he could still protect his capital and you would be on the paperwork, you could make a fresh start in a home you both own?

meditrina · 10/04/2013 08:13

Contribution to the household doesn't count for anything because you are not married

You have given him your redundancy money no-strings (just as it would be if you were a lodger without a sexual relationship to the property owner).

The question now is how to regain a financial position with which you are content, both now and for the future. I tend to agree with those who say have independent savings unless/until the house is in joint names in shares you are happy with. For reducing his mortgage on his property isn't building a future that provides security for you both

shellbu · 10/04/2013 08:39

i wouldnt say a sahm was a luxury myself ,its a full time job and should be seen as that when a split occurs and things are divided up by what everyone has put in ,i was sitting on the fence with this one , but now i can see why you feel insecure ,your in a different country with no family and a partner who doesnt make you feel like an equal , scarlettinspace has made the best suggestion so far in my opinion .