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

You can't have a beneficial interest as you have been given impression that your financial contribution would give you a stake in the property, nor have you made a contribution to the initial purchase price, nor are you contributing to the 'cost' of the home by sacrificing something else ie giving up a job to care for children so your DP can earn money to pay the mortgage.

You have a place to live in and should pay reasonable rent and utilities to the property owner for that. How the property owner chooses to spend that i.e by paying off the mortgage is their choice. It is you that wishes to have your cake and eat it.

You are not married

Your partner is protecting her assets

I would not pay half her mortgage

Paying half bills and doing housework should be sufficient

Where do you see this relationship going in the future ?

Currently you have no security for future

If no contribution is paid, the non payer could acquire certain rights over the property as a dependent, particularly where the non payer has children. It is no surprise that OP's partner has protected her property from OP and is requesting a contribution.

It depends on your life stage. At mine and having paid my ex husband a fortune on our divorce no way is any new man ever having a penny of my assets - they are all going to the children. If he wants a property he could keep his own and rent it out. That woudl enable him to have financial protection if I were to die. I am not sure I would move someone in anyway - it's easier not doing so (and you dont' have to endure snoring either and yet another person's mess).

I had approx. 40% left to pay on my mortgage when I met DH 5 years ago. He'd never had a mortgage and had always lived in rented accommodation. When he moved in with me 18 months into the relationship there was never any question that he would contribute 50% the food and bills and 50% of my mortgage. This was approx the same amount as he was paying in rent yet not once did he expect to have a stake in my house because he saw his contribution as rent, nothing more. Now we're married and still his name is not on the deeds - if god forbid we did split up legally I suppose he would be entitled to something but he is adamant he would not want a penny of it. He earns more than I do and would easily be able to start again, whereas I wouldn't - my home is my security and I'm the one who has paid for all the home improvements - new boiler, bathroom, etc. We're hopefully looking to buy a bigger place together in the future and then of course ownership would be split according to how much we had put in. However, we're rock solid and there's no way I would have asked him to cohabit with me in the first place if we didn't see the relationship going the distance. It sounds as if perhaps your relationship isn't at that stage yet, in which case, I question why you agreed to move in?

You're right you don't have any long term security. I think in your position I would also buy a property and rent it out. Then you've both got a property - plus you've got somewhere to live if it doesn't work out.

Read carefully (quick google)
www.savvywoman.co.uk/878/living-together-does-your-partner-have-any-rights-to-your-property-once-you-live-together/

In this case you've already given up any rights (she's not stupid), but for the sake of people asking about contributions in general. You may have more rights, or be more at danger, than you realised.

Basically it's up to her. And it's up to you.

She wants the arrangement to be rent. Not freeloading or a contribution to the mortgage. That's her right.

And you can accept this, or not.

You could make an alternative investment elsewhere?

I guess if you don't accept the arrangement and choose to pay your rent/mortgage elsewhere, she would have to accept this decision just like you have to accept hers. That's life!

I don't think gender is relevant. I read this as a sensible person (her) thinking carefully about her future security.

I think that the only way to solve this is for you to start again together. So either she sells the house and saves the profits to be bequeathed as she sees fit, or she keeps the house, rents it out and passes that on.

Then the house you buy together will be 50/50.

If she wont consider that then you have an issue.

I can see that she doesnt want you to take her house from her, but as PP have said, you have less rights than a tenant, less rights than a spouse and zero security. Have you put it to her like that?

I wouldnt be able to live knowing that I could be turfed out at a moments notice and there was nothing I could do about it.

The legal agreement is a red herring, it will be a requirement of the mortgage company to protect their investment.

I can see both sides of this but, if I wanted the relationship to work, would go for a compromise:

No stake in house
No paying for maintenance or improvements
Half of all utility bills, council tax etc.
Peppercorn rent to contribute to the mortgage

With the low rent she gets help but the OP is also better off than he would be if he paid half the mortgage. Then you use that saving to put money by so that if it goes belly up, you at least have the security of savings.

Ooof who charges their partner rent? I reckon you should be splitting bills and living expensres but I'd be unhappy paying off a partner's mortgage (and can't dream of telling a partner of mine to pay mine).

You should be paying the equivalent of local market rent for living in that area - i.e. what you'd have to pay to rent a one bed flat, which may be less than half her mortgage, but is fair. I would find your resistance to paying your way pretty galling i think. Sorry.

I have not read the whole thread, so please ignore me if i have missed something.

My initial thought was that she was right and financially you sound like you've got a very good deal. Why not save using the spare income you have and get a cheapie buy to let for some personal security?

However and it's a big however, it does sound a little "sensible" if not downright cold that you have been in a relationship with her for that long and you are not mentioned in her will.

I would also be concerned about this:
My kids are 13 and 8. My partner gets on fine with them but takes no active role at all in their upbringing. They stay with us 2 days in 10

Your children live with you 20% of the time and she is not involved with them!?

If that works for you then fine, but it sounds a little strange to me. How do your children feel about her?

If she put you on the mortgage, would that make everything okay? Or is this a bigger issue?

You would be paying rent if you lived somewhere else, so you need to pay towards the mortgage as if you are paying rent.

Question: what happens when the mortgage is paid off in 5 years? Will you still be expected to pay her rent for living there?

Question: why are you with someone who would see you out half her mortgage amount every month AND happy to leave you homeless if she were to die? The fact you'll have to move and start over in the event of her untimely demise should be factored in to how much you are paying towards the rent/mortgage, since that will be expensive and difficult, AND you should be saving towards that possibility. Maybe less rent with the understanding you're putting some extra money aside in case that happens?

If you are committed partners, it seems deeply unfair that you should end up with vastly different disposable incomes. However, she is making it abundantly clear that is not how she feels.

I think you need to move out and gain some self respect.

This is impossible. Fairness is hard to achieve without trust. My oh and I were/are in a similar context. Both had worked some way to paying off a mortgage on our seperate homes. Oh lived with me and we both benefited from the rental income made on his house and he paid toward my mortgage with the agreement that it was an investment should we seperate. I sold mine and used the equity for a down payment on a joint property. This year he will sell his and an equal amount will be put into this mortgage and the rest invested and we will both benefit from that. Everything that we're doing is an act of trust, well we do have wills but you see what I mean.

i think i would keep the finances as they are, BUT, i would ask for an amendment to her will giving you the right to stay in the house in the event of her death... kind of a protected tenancy, if thats the right term?

I wouldn't like the fact you're life partners, but if she dies, you have no security or assurance you won't get kicked out of the house if it passes to her sister and nephew.

As for when the mortgage comes to an end, at that point, surely you'd reassess the household outgoings and adjust your contribution to 50% of whatever it becomes. I certainly wouldn't agree to paying her rent!

I think I agree with her too. She was very clear about where she stands and you agreed to her terms. You didn't have to. You could move out, pay a market rate for rent and have a less comfortable life elsewhere. Or you could invest in your own place and rent it out - things might be tight financially but you would have an asset. You don't really want to do that though - you essentially want her to give up the contribution you make, so that you will have more money to do this. She has been very clear in that she sees you as financially separate and it isn't her fault that you want something else.

Lots of private renters pay a stack of money in rent and have no long term security - at least you are paying less than market rent. Trying to claim a stake in her house makes you sound like a cocklodger.

I do think that once her mortgage is paid, you shouldn't pay rent. At the moment you both live there so you both pay. Once the mortgage ends I think it would be wrong for her to profit from you living there.

"You would be paying rent if you lived somewhere else, so you need to pay towards the mortgage as if you are paying rent."

You see that is a bald statement of fact which isn't strictly true. Op could in theory be paying off his (am assuming his) own mortgage if he lived somewhere else.

I should also say that before my now DH moved in, I always had a lodger in the spare room as mortgage repayments would not have been manageable on my own. When DH moved in with me, he wanted us to get rid of the lodger so that we had more privacy, so why on earth shouldn't he cover contribution that the lodger had been making? He's not a freeloader and it showed that he had respect for me and the sacrifices I'd made to buy my own home.

You're both right. The complicating factor is that she is paying towards a mortgage, not rent, and that you have moved into her house/security net.

She is right to protect herself. You are right to want to pay into something long term/ invest (given you can afford to).

The only solution is for you to buy her out of a share of her home, or for you to buy a new place together. You both have to give and take some.

Having said that, the fact that you've been living together for 4 years and are grown ups and would let this matter of money split you up..... sensible people would talk it through and come up with a compromise. Not ultimatums.

The alternative to his current situation is not only to pay rent elsewhere.

Summarising OP's actual options in alternative to what his partner proposes:

• He rents elsewhere single occupancy
• he rents elsewhere shared house/takes in lodger
• he buys elsewhere and lives there (possibly with lodger or not)
• he buys jointly with a different partner who actually gives a shit about him and his children.

Lots of private renters pay a stack of money in rent and have no long term security

Well yes, but they do have protection from being kicked out with no notice and no protection. They are also not expected to contribute to maintenance on the property.

And I agree that this is costing the OP in terms of building equity in his own place.

As I said above, the only way that this could be fair is if they move into a new place together and she invests her equity for her sister and nephew. If she wont do that then I would advise the OP to get a place of his own, because she sounds like she wants it all her own way with no thought of the impact that any of this is having on him.

As for him not featuring at all in her will, well that says to me that she doesnt actually view him as a life partner at all, but a lodger who she has sex with! Frankly I dont think much of this woman at all.