To ask that the house be in both our names 50/50

[fibrecruncher]

Just want to ask what other people and done.

Partner and I are buying our first house together - a wonderful, exciting, fraught and stressful experience so far!!

DP earns considerably more than me right now, actually probably always will. I work part-time in the evenings and am home with 17 month old pfb during the day.

As I am self-employed - we are considering putting the mortgage in just his name as we might get a better rate (I suppose I am considered a higher risk to banks), but i will contribute to the mortgage. I feel the house should be in both our names 50/50. The mortgage reflects our current situation and when ds goes to nursery & school, I will work more hours and therefore contribute more.

I am just curious to find out what others have done?

Thanks

I don't think that's possible here. The way it is with us is that the house and mortgage are both in my name. If I died, DH would inherit the house (well, the equity in it) and I have a sizeable life insurance policy which would pay off the mortgage so he'd then be able to own it outright.

He had to sign a document (possibly a consent to mortgage, might be called something different here - Scotland) which basically waives his rights to residence if the mortgage company needed to repossess.

The borrowing element varies by bank, but Halifax/BOS/Lloyds would reduce the borrowing for having a named adult on it with no income (in our case at least) - their calculator shows this too.. 1 adult with 40k income, result £192k possible borrowing. Add in a second adult earning nothing and it drops to £152k.

My Dsis has just completed - on the deeds but not the mortgage. In England. I don't know which lender though.

Please get some proper legal advice. Jacking in FT work to go PT or be a SAHP when you are not married and do not have your own means of financial provision for yourself makes you very vulnerable.

Very much agree with expat!

Thanks for all your replies. I will speak with our solicitor and we have a meeting booked with a broker so I will get more understanding of what is possible as it seems very confusing as to whether I can be on the deeds but not the mortgage.

The question of me being on the mortgage was do with whether it would affect our borrowing amount and our interest rate as I am self-employed with fluctuating income. DP seemed to have received advice from his bank that it was best take the mortgage in just his name.

As for the deeds, there was never a question from him about whether I should be on the deeds, that was always a given it was more the amount of my share. I must admit when I approached him with my idea that we should be beneficial tenants I.e. 50/50 and the other partner cannot sell their share with agreement from the other I presented it more as an ultimatum so I think he might have been being a bit defensive. I think it was lingering in his mind that we should split it 60/40 or 70/30 which is what we have done with expenses in the past but he did not explicitly say it. Unfortunately we've been having this conversation in a very disjointed manner between meetings as he is overseas this week and I work a few evenings a week.

I have been working part time for the past 5 years, before having my son I had gone back to uni to do an undergraduate degree.

We have been together for close to 5 years and yes ds is his, we have no plans to get married.

Oh and the not being married is a mutual decision we both feel happily committed but have always agreed if we needed to for work I.e. travel visas we could marry.

Everything is 50/50 here in terms of ownership (never occurred that it should be otherwise when we both work FT and I would be the beneficiary of any income based split).

You have children together though, which I think adds even greater weight to the case for a 50/50 split since it affects your career decisions and earning capacity.

But why would you split it 60/40 or 70/30? Why noy be joint tenants where you both own it 100%? That way if one dies the other still owns the whole house.

It may be helpful to explain to him that whilst expenses are split 70/30 to reflect your respective income that doesn't automatically translate into 70/30 ownership . Firstly because his income is dependent on the childcare you do so you are due more 'ownership' on that account so that your in-kind contribution is reflected , and secondly that what you are both now buying is a roof over your child's head so your child's interest needs to be reflected and protected against all future possibilities.
Also you may well earn significant amounts in the future: your contribution then needs to be able to be in the solid investment of property.

Buying a house together does entail a shift in the way you view partnership , security and the long term and sounds as if it is best not negotiated and explored in snatched transatlantic calls and based on vague advice from HIS bank. Go and see a financial advisor together, ditto a solicitor.

Thanks blu. Yes I completely agree. We have an appointment with a broker on friday so I shall raise it there.

And yes its difficult to put an offer on a place the day one of you goes on a 6 day business trip. I think its added to the stress.

'Oh and the not being married is a mutual decision we both feel happily committed but have always agreed if we needed to for work I.e. travel visas we could marry.'

Then you need to speak to a solicitor to put in place coverage for you both in the event either of you should die, become disabled or you split.

Marriage confers legal status well beyond being a necessity for travel visas and the like.

You need a joint tenants agreement that explicitly states your share of the property
From the banks perspective, if there is only one applicant, it's nice and tidy - there's less paperwork to do and it's less messy for them if you split up. He can't sell the property or remortage without your signature. Unless your employment is of a high risk nature [tree surgeon] or the amount you wish to borrow is based on both earnings [and your income is variable] I would insist that you are on the mortgage. Inform yourself.

Point of principle to consider. You would be working full-time if you were not at home looking after both your child? You would also be contributing to the cost of the house/bills? Possibly not to the same % but contributing nonetheless. If you split up, you would potentially have to return to work FT and put your child into FT childcare, the cost of which would be split between you?

Now imagine you put your child/children in FT childcare [circa £35k per annum for 50 hrs a week] and distribute the bill in a similar manner to the split in the mortgage......

I bought with my now husband when we were unmarried. As part of our joint tenants agreement [now superceded by marriage] we protected our very unequal deposits and the rest would be split 50:50 if we sold the house.

If you are being pushed into or feel that you should accept an unequal split in ownership then I would not accept anything less than the position I would be in if I were working FT and contributing what I could afford. I would certainly argue that I was bringing an invisible £35k per annum contribution to the table on top of my PT earnings.

You need a deed of trust. And a living together agreement. Google them and look on advice now.org.uk. And get your name on the deeds woman!