Is it fair to be expected to pay half her Mortgage?

[Tophat72]

Hi there. I'm looking for some impartial comment on what has become a huge issue between my partner and me.

We are both divorcees but although with similar salaries, have very different financial commitments. I have two children I am financially responsible for while she is childless and comfortably well off. She has her own large home and only has 5 years left to pay on her mortgage. I lost my house in my financial settlement with my ex.

I live with my partner in her home. Before moving in with her, I had to sign a legal agreement acknowledging that I have no claim whatsoever on any percentage of the house in the event of our separation. The house is hers and hers alone. Furthermore, I am not catered for in any way in her will. Should she die, the house and her entire estate goes to her sister and nephew...

My partner believes that all the household expenses, including her mortgage payments, should be split 50-50 between us. I however am adamant that given the circumstances, I should not be contributing towards the purchase of her house and I am only prepared to pay for my share of the other household bills (utilities, council tax, groceries etc)

This has become a huge bone of contention between us and sadly things are looking terminal.

Her position is that paying half of her outstanding mortgage should be looked upon by me as paying a modest rent as if she were my landlady. She also quite rightly points out that I am still living very cheaply and if I were to get a place of my own my monthly outgoings would be well over twice what I currently pay her. She feels that I earn the same as her and live under the same roof so I should pay the same.

From my perspective, I have absolutely no objection to going 50-50, but only if she is prepared to afford me some kind of proportionate security or stake in the house in the event of our separation or her death. I don't see why I should contribute 50% towards the ongoing purchase of a capital investment that I have a 0% share in. I feel as though she wants to have her cake and eat it, keeping everything to herself while expecting me to pay for an equal share of, well nothing.

I've tried to write this as objectively as I can. Obviously her friends and family support her position and my friends and family mine. For my own peace of mind, I would be really keen to read the thoughts of a truly neutral observer. Cheers

OP signed an agreement when he moved in- he could have chosen to live elsewhere either as a tenant or bought a home. He didn't, and chose to move in with his partner in full knowledge of what the arrangement would be- so it can only be assumed OP was happy with this arrangement at the time. Quite possibly because it seemed a good deal and saved him some money (at the expense of greater security). I don't think he can suddenly decide not to abide by the agreement made.

It may seem a bit businesslike, but I am guessing she has had her fingers seriously burnt by the divorce. Going after her equity- and substantially more than he has paid into by the sounds of it- sounds pretty cut-throat to me too.

In any case, even should she agree to give some equity to OP, I wouldn't think he would be entitled to a 20% of the value of her house. That makes no sense. For a start, she will have paid a deposit- probably somewhere between 10 and 40%. So OP would not be entitled to any share of that. He will not have paid for 20% of the mortgage, and the house will likely to have appreciated in value over the full term. Why would he be entitled to benefit from that, given the mortgage which his rent is contributing to will be less than the value. All sounds very complicated.

OP, as you say you can afford to buy somewhere of your own my advice would be to do so- either to live their on your own or to rent out. That is probably better than going after your partner's assets.

"In that case her lifestyle won't be much more comfortable"

But it is "more Comfortable".

I am not sure as to whether he is already paying or not.

I think the relationship is doomed. The power balance is skewed totally in her favour. She has more income as a portion of his income will always have go to his children and she's got the house.
There is no rule to say you need to pay "rent" in a relationship. If she isn't happy to pool resources ( and frankly I'd not give a share of my house up) then she should carry on paying it herself as she always has.
She's not his landlady she's his partner. He should pay his share of bills and living expenses because he lives there but essentially he's a guest in her home. Paying rent wouldn't change that status it would just make her financially better off.

It's the OP's fault that he hasn't been putting any of the savings he's made by paying the 'very modest' share of his outgoings into his own property. It's not his partner's.

I have very few years left on my mortgage. There's no way I'd move a man in after reading this thread.

It seems most people think that the OP should benefit from his partner's prudence.

Paying rent with a agreement would give him certain rights like notice in the event of him leaving

Oh and I'd say the same if they are male or female. The reason many women on here get a different response is because they are looking after the couple's children.

What his girlfriend does with the money he pays in exchange for a place to live is her business

Well it could very well be the taxmans business.

The youngest being five was my mistake, I think. Apologies.

"It's quite possible to be fond of someone, enjoy his companionship/sex, wish him well etc. and still not want to erode one's wealth to make up for his past mistakes. It's not the woman's fault that the OP had a failed marriage, has kids to support and doesn't like his present financial circumstances. There's no rule that says you have to meld yourself financially and legally to one you love or your relationship is meaningless."

I agree Lea not every relationship has to be an 'everafter' kind.

"It seems most people think that the OP should benefit from his partner's prudence."

No, no, I completely disagree. I think most people feel the op is in a financially precarious position and his dp holds all the strings. And what can he do? I am looking forward to the promised update.

I agree Lea not every relationship has to be an 'everafter' kind.

That's fine if both parties are aware of the situation

Lynda you have no idea how prudent the op's partner has been. She didn't get a large five bed house on her own did she. I have a number of friends who had small starter homes, got married to people with larger incomes and ended up with considerably larger homes they could ever have got on their own after the divorce.

There's nothing wrong with keeping the whole house in your name. Just don't expect someone else to pay for it.

To be fair, we don't know if this relationship is an ever after kind. What if op comes back and says he is completely committed to his dp and hopes to be with her forever?

Reading back over the original post, there is no mention of emotion or feelings in it. It is purely about the payment arrangements. All of the subsequent posts about the emotional state of their relationship are just hypothesising. I took from the original post that they are just two mature people who find it convenient to live together. I don't think that OP is being take for an emotional ride, I just think he needs to sort his finances out independently.

What do you mean 'she didn't get a large five bedroom house on her own did she?' Why ever not?

I own a 4 bedroom detached house and I've never been married or got anything from anyone else. I've been lucky, sure, but I've also been prudent.

She may have got a decent divorce settlement (although as she has no children, it's unlikely) or she could have just been earning a decent income for many years.

None of us know.

Also, my mortgage is tiny. If someone paid half my mortgage, it would be substantially less than any kind of sensible rent/contribution to maintenance and overhead costs. And we don't know that either.

The OP seems to be quite mean with the amount of information he's providing

"Also, my mortgage is tiny. If someone paid half my mortgage, it would be substantially less than any kind of sensible rent/contribution to maintenance and overhead costs. And we don't know that either."

If he is paying over £354 per calendar month the tax man should know.

"The OP seems to be quite mean with the amount of information he's providing"

So that must mean that he is in the wrong?
It would be nice to know how much he pays his partner.
It would be nice to know what he pays for hid children.
It would be nice to know if he pays the mortgage on the house that he "lost".

What we do know is that if he is paying rent or money like rent he is not being afforded the rights of a tenant, and if he is paying towards the mortgage he still has no security (although a solicitor would say different)

gruntledone
When he said "I am only prepared to pay my portion of household bills."

Thank you for your continued interest in my situation. By means of an update as promised as to some context.

I have been with my partner for 7 years and co-habiting for 4. We first got together shortly after the collapse of my marriage, following the birth of my youngest. Her marriage ended some years previously. I should have made it clear that when we moved in together, it was actually to a new purchase. She sold her house and re-located close to me. She made a huge profit on her house and could have bought our current one outright. However she elected to keep on her mortgage and plough the profit on her sale into improvements to the new house. I had no capital to invest in the house, having also lost most of my savings in my settlement to my ex, which protected my work pension. However, with a decent salary, I was keen to bring what I could to the table, despite having no official status.

Essentially I give my partner a sum of money every month for my keep and she sorts everything else, the bills, groceries etc. There is no joint account or combined savings. Our respective finances are completely separate. For the first 18 months or so, I in fact paid her what I now know to be the equivalent of 70% of all monthly household expenditure (mortgage payments included) This proved unsustainable at my end and for the last couple of years it has settled at a 50-50 split. There was no formal arrangement as such. As we were getting on, I was happy to put what I could into the household and contribute to the things that were getting done. Very naive of me I know.

I love my partner dearly but she is a very difficult person to deal with. She is very driven and dogged in her ways. She views everything in simplistic black/white terms and has difficulty seeing things from other people's perspective. She is also fiercely independent and has difficulty in sharing, whether it be her resources or even her time.

We began to fall out over a lot of things, primarily to do with what I perceived as a lack of intimacy and quality time together. As my general dissatisfaction grew, I began to think about the financial set up and formed my own opinion that I was being pretty much shafted. The issue around the will was particularly hard to take.

I tried to negotiate a revised settlement with her but she was continually dragging her feet and there was never any movement, despite some vague promises. Eventually I took matters into my own hands and 4 months ago drastically reduced the money I give her each month. My rationale was that I would no longer effectively contribute to her mortgage and by lowering my payments even further, I would slowly begin to claw back some of what I perceived as my "over-payments" from the first 18 months. I am religiously saving the money I am no longer giving her and it will be available to her should she agree to giving me some kind of security. Other than that, it will go towards a property of my own, rented or bought if and when I am shown the door.

My partner went pretty mental when I told her what I was doing. She is still enraged by it but she's kind of buried it down deep. I suppose there is simmering resentment on both sides but we continue to plod along..

I have taken a lot from the opinions on both sides of this debate and I guess I have softened my own position slightly. It's not a simplistic case of good versus bad.

However, the reality is that I could be put out on the street tomorrow or ten years from now and I need to make financial contingencies because of the imbalanced domestic situation I find myself in. We all want to feel secure in whatever we call our home. That's all I want. I don't want half her house or even a quarter of the house. i just need a safety net reflecting the contribution I have made to our household...

Generally I find that people omit pertinent information if it paints them in a less than flattering light BBJ.

The OP is gaining financially from living in his partner's house - he has admitted that much. And because she owns it, some of you think that entitles to him to a share in the house. Does he pay anything if it needs decorating? Or a new roof? Or any of the other 1001 things that can go wrong in a house? If he does, then I think he may have a case.

If he just wants to pay his portion of bills, then he wants to be a cocklodger. As clam has pointed out

OP, what do you think to the suggestion of asking for a reassurance of a secure tenancy in the event of her death if this relationship stays the trials of the years ahead?

If you can get her to agree to that, would it make you feel more secure?

And i don't think its unreasonable to be clawing back the 20% over payment from those first 18mo either!

X-posted.

You were an idiot to move in on those terms to be honest. And you clearly don't like her.

Move out and get your own place

he is NOT a cocklodger.

a cock lodger is someone who makes absolutely NO financial contribution to the household, doesn't work and sits on his arse expecting his partner to do and pay for EVERYTHING.

Paying 50% of the household bills is NOT a cocklodger for fucks sake.

i think that saving and trying to buy your own place is a very sensible move. house prices will only go up and you'd be sensible to do this as soon as its feasible. My mother moved in with her partner and whilst i'm not sure she paid rent she did contribute towards bills. she sold a large 3 bed bungalow and invested the money, but had they broken up she could ony have afforded a flat - this was after some years and house prices had risen.

in your partners shoes i would be doing exactly as she is however.

if you have more security then you will always have the option to walk away, should the relationship not be what you want. this puts it on a more equal footing.

It's kind of irrelevant who is right or wrong here.

The key problem is that the two of you have wildly different perspectives about ownership, finances, and fairness- whatever either of you chooses to do will lead to resentment ( to be honest it sounds like it already has).

The only way forward is for you to live independently of her. Buy a house of your own, have lodgers if necessary.

I thought cocklodger (and whatever the female equivalent is) was someone who expected their partner to pay all the bills and pay for their every need whilst they provide sex/company.

The OP says he has always paid, she gets her bills halved for giving up a quarter of her home and in return he gets lower costs for giving up his lack of privacy and his own place.