To ask more money from my new partner?

[diva26]

Hi mumsnetters,

please help me with a trickly money issue, I need opinions!!

I am divorced (amicably) with two schoolage boys. I work full time in a demanding job that I love, but I don't earn an excessive salary. I inherited my house, and have a low mortgage. I have a new partner and he is living with us. My mum is living with me and is effectively running the household for us all. Sounds all great, I know.

My new partner is paying half the monthly costs of running our household (excluding the mortgage), and contributes with a bit of DIY and cooks one meal Sunday evening (he is not a natural talent for either tasks I have to say). I pay the other half, my mum pays nothing which is more than fair because she is runnning the place. I am not a money oriented person, and I have never argued about money not even with my ex-husband, but I keep wondering whether this arrangement is fair.

Here an incoherent list of facts and points to consider:

• my new partner earns about double as much as me
• because his monthly costs are so low, he can save money. I cannot.
• he has a flat to maintain for his children from his first marriage, and has to travel home regularly to see them
• if he rented somewhere, his costs would be at least double of what he pays now, and for a much smaller place
• he thinks that partners and friends should not charge rent from each other, and I agree with him on that one
• he pays more often than me for going out, concerts, etc
• I fear this is a bad deal for my mum, because she is effectively cooking and washing laundry for him.
• he is often away travelling for work

Should he pay more than half the monthly running costs?? I truly do not know the answer, and would really like to hear your opinions.

xxx

Do people object to 'paying towards the mortgage' when living in a rented house? Why would he be paying towards the mortgage and not paying rent? I don't think anyone is entitled to free accommodation when their partner is paying for it.

Simple solution would be to pay for 5th of the bills and then a fifth of the mortgage.

But that wouldn't have the same kerching value would it?

When you pay rent you have rights. This man has no rights to the house, can be kicked out at any time and is subsidising a grown woman and his girlfriend's children.

Frankly I think he's a fool.

I can't see what grounds you have for getting him to pay more except that you think he can afford it, really, he should pay towards your mortgage too. Can't see how you aren't already a lot better off with him than without him if you say your mortgage is low and your mum does a lot of 'free' childcare.

I'd keep shtum op. He's probably already pissed off with the situation but loves you and is willing to put up with it for you. He pays more than his fair share in my opinion.

He wouldn't be paying the mortgage though - he would be paying rent. But he doesn't think partners should pay each other rent!! Bet he doesn't). So he pays for half the bills, but no rent.

OP the set up you have sounds pretty fair to me. And I think the deal you have with your Mum sounds mutually lovely and agreeable. Very at all those saying it's not.

If you split it to charging him rent and reducing the bills to say 1/3, and he did his own washing and cleaning etc etc...would that make it better knowing that he could have a small claim on the house and you'd have to buy him out at the end. If it ends badly of course.

Charge him a 3rd of the mortgage and a 5th of the bills then. I don't see why he should have to pay half of everything to subsidise 3 other people who aren't related to him.

Can I ask, how does your mum survive money wise? Must be hard for her (at times) having to live with her daughter and grandkids as essentially a live in housekeeper/nanny.

I do think it would be reasonable for him to pay rent in addition to bills, but if we are going to get out the calculators then there possibly need to be other adjustments as well which would go in his favour.

If we're going to calculate a bill for him, then we need to do so for everyone else, including the mother, on the same basis. (As the "landlord" the OP can if she wishes choose not to collect her mother's share, i.e. to subsidise her.)

I'd bet he thinks his benefits from the mother's work are financially insignificant. Allow maybe half-an-hour a day at minimum wage, add that to his bill and subtract it from the mothers. (I'm assuming he's not so much part of the family that OP's children are his responsibility, otherwise mothers childcare contribution would change this a lot.) Similarly, the OP's benefit from mother's work should be added to OP bill and subtracted from mother's.

He should only be paying a third of the household bills, in fact less as OP should pay the children's share. (If he were considered equally responsible for the children then he and OP would pay the children's share and mother would have a lower charge for bills than the two of them.)

When it comes to setting rent, the size of the mortgage is irrelevent, the correct starting point would be the rental value of the property. His share should be based on room occupancy, so if he shares a room with OP, mother has her own room and children share a room, he would pay something like half of a third (i.e. one sixth) of the property rental value to OP.

I suspect when the sums are done he won't be liable for much more, if anything, so it might be best not to risk creating bad feeling by raising the issue of rent.

Your mother would still be running the household if he moved out. The house would still need cleaning if he moved out.

He is paying half the living costs of 3 adults and two children. Your mother is cooking whether he eats or not. He is one extra adult to feed.

He is one fifth of a household, and I cannot imagine that he uses more than half of electricity, water, gas, and eats for half the budget, nor creates more than half the mess/dirt in the house.

Your mother is just doing what you (or you and him) would be doing if she wasnt there, and she pays nothing towards the bills, so she is in fact the spare part, not him.

Yabu.

The idea that this would be a bad idea for the Mum though, really is laughable.

For total rent/bill free living she has to bung the off extra load on the washing machine and put an extra hand full of pasta in the pan etc.

Why are there so many women on here who see men as a meal ticket?

Good luck with that one OP.

Agree completely with fraidycat.

I would never break it down in such a calculated manner for myself but as you are concerned about who is getting the best deal, if you did fraidycat s reasonable calculations bet you would find he is already marginally overpaying (based on 6th of rent value, 5the of living expenses and paying your mother for about an hour a day even at more than minimum wage).

I wouldn't ask for more of I were you.

You are already getting a good deal op. Without him you would be paying everything yourself, rather than just half of the expenses. Is him living there, when not away with work or visiting his children, really costing you that much extra?

If you charge him "rent", it makes him a lodger, not a dp.

Also, he needs to be able to save, if he were to move out, he would need to get a deposit together for another rental, or if he ever wanted to buy something for himself he is already quite disadvantaged. You are paying down on your home, he is not making such an investment.

And I agree with Fraidycat the correct calculation is His share should be based on room occupancy, so if he shares a room with OP, mother has her own room and children share a room, he would pay something like half of a third (i.e. one sixth) of the property rental value to OP

Plus 1/6 of bills. The OPs desire for more is based on the DP earning more than her, not on need, usage or anything other than greed on her part this.

I suspect he is already paying too much.

I like how the OP has turned the live in mother (no-one's idea of a dream scenario) into an "asset" who "runs the household" - because no-one else can do that on their own, as part of their day to day life. I wonder whether this man, if given the choice, would prefer his household to be run for him or not to live with his girlfriends mother?

As I say, good luck with this one, OP.

abs didn't you know, it's actually all adult men's dream to live with their girlfriends Mummy oh and to financially support her

Leave it as it is. Sounds like you are better off now than if you want to share things equally.

Think you get a better deal than him.

yes it definitely seems like you see this chap as a cash cow. must be hard for him. must feel like the lodger. I would be grateful and not rock the boat.

I am married and have three children, so there are five people living in my house. If someone, say my brother, moved in with us and I were to expect him to pay a portion of the housing costs, I would ask him to pay 1/6 of all the bills. That would be what I would consider his fair share of the expenses. Especially considering a single man doesn't use as much water, electricity, etc., as a family of five, it's not really fair to expect him to pay half those bills.

I think it sounds about right. Assuming he also looks after your children/drives them around sometimes for free?

Why is your mum living with you?

Were you joking when you said it sounds great??

Sounds AWFUL! Your poor DP!

I think you are getting a bloody good deal as it is and you sound a bit greedy the way you have worded your OP.
Again, if you cannot save now, when you are receiving a contribution to the household how did you manage to pay your bills before (and a larger supermarket bill now surely does not use up all the money you used to put aside for rates/gas/electric etc etc.)

Another one here who thinks you are getting a good deal and shouldn't ask him for more money. If I was divorced, I would view it as mine and my exh responsibility to financially support our dc, not my new partners.

And I would hate to share a house with a partner's mother, so you are doing well to sell that idea to him as an asset.

I actually agree with him about people in relationships not chsrging each other rent - you are not in a business arrangement here. Sharing living costs seems a much more fair and less coldly calculating arrangement.