Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Partner seems to think he's my landlord AIBU?

681 replies

user1476961324 · 20/10/2016 12:15

TLDR: My boyfriend wants me to move into his house, and is asking for me to contribute what he would consider ‘market rent’ if he rented the room out.

He owns the house outright, and the associated costs (bills etc) are paid by a family trust. I.e. he has no living costs to be there. He’s an adult, FYI, we are in our thirties.

He has recently asked me various questions about how much people rent rooms for, what bills cost etc. I thought he was just interested, as he has never had to pay these costs.

He told me today that he thinks that I should pay £850 per month to live in his flat as that would be the market rate if he let a room out.

I had volunteered to pay half of bills… but £850? It’s only a two bed flat, with no mortgage. I’ve told him where he can stick it.

Am I being unreasonable, or is he?

OP posts:
Original poster
user1476961324 · 20/10/2016 16:58

PersianCatLady

I see your point, but I just don’t think he would be looking for the best way to wash his hands of me. He usually uses his heart rather than his head – hence this being a bit of a strange development!

OP posts:
dowhatnow · 20/10/2016 16:59

No but it's not fair if she gets to pay no more than 50% of the bills. She benefits by saving all her current outgoings and his situation doesn't change at all. The savings should benefit them both.

And I generally believe in a joint account and sharing money, but this is a new relationship and should be on an equal footing, especially to begin with. Going 50/50 or putting the £850 - £1000 she is saving into a joint savings pot benefits them both equally.

TempusEedjit · 20/10/2016 16:59

Why are some arguing the case as if the OP and her DP have no romantic involvment/emotional investment in each other? According to the OP he wants her to move in. If she was the female equivalent of a cocklodger then she'd be expecting to move in and eat his food, use his utilities, do minimal or no housework etc without contributing anything at all. As it is she would be covering her share of additional costs i.e half the bills and no doubt sharing chores etc. He will be financially no worse off if she lives there and covers her bills/extra expenses, and he gets to benefit from her company. She will be a little worse off in that she won't be living in her own home but at least she'll have reduced costs (that wont have cost the boyfriend a penny piece extra).

You can't judge this case as though they were not boyfriend/girlfriend because them being so is integral to the situation. It would be like saying that OP shouldn't be allowed to share her DP's bed because a tenant wouldn't be allowed to.

RepentAtLeisure · 20/10/2016 17:00

But it's not market rate for a room. You wouldn't even get that (presumably), you'd be in his room. How much is market rate rent for sharing the bed of the landlord? I'd imagine that for various reasons it would be very inexpensive actually...

I would avoid making any kind of commitment with this guy. He sounds way too entitled and controlling. In two years time you could be asking us how to make maternity benefits stretch as far as possible because the baby's DF doesn't see why he should pay for x and y for whatever reason. Really, pampered little princes are best left for the pampered little princesses...

AcrossthePond55 · 20/10/2016 17:01

Trying to look at this another way. Is it at all possible that the person/people having control over the paying of his living expenses (parents/trustees) is holding this over his head, threatening to reduce what is paid or stop paying altogether? Do you know if he's had any other people (esp girlfriends) move in before and what the arrangement was then?

dowhatnow · 20/10/2016 17:01

But they should both equally benefit financially from her moving in.

OldBootNewBoots · 20/10/2016 17:02

yes they've been together 2 years and they're in their 30s, it'd hardly be shockingly fast if they were already married based on the speed a lot of my friends met and married pp in their 30s.

PersianCatLady · 20/10/2016 17:03

TBH the more I think about this the more complicated it becomes.

I think ideally the best thing to do would be to either rent or buy somewhere together jointly completely 50/50 and then he can rent out his flat and put it towards the new place.

Honestly any situation that involves his flat and his current attitude isn't going to work.

Aeroflotgirl · 20/10/2016 17:03

I am astounded that he cannot see why you have said no, and that you are upset. He will be living off you, and with no mortgage, will use op money to pay the bills, op poorer off, him much better off. If he cannot see the unfairness in this, than sorry off you go!

TempusEedjit · 20/10/2016 17:04

dowhatnow so she saves some of her current outgoings but loses a place to call her own. If they don't have DC he could change the locks at any time. How would that be fair if she still pays more expenses than he does but he has all the security??

Sunshineonacloudyday · 20/10/2016 17:04

I don't think she will benefit financially or otherwise he would have sold it better to her rather than acting like a rat about it. Any other normal couple would have a joint account or share money between them to pay bills etc. This is a unique situation the op is in.

venusinscorpio · 20/10/2016 17:05

If you want a romantic partner to move in you can't treat it like your own house. It's OPs home too, otherwise it's a shit unequal relationship.

PurpleVauxhall · 20/10/2016 17:06

Maybe he is just a bit crazy.

No, poor people are crazy. He's eccentric.

scaryclown · 20/10/2016 17:07

god hes an arse he's saying 'i have worked out that you have spare money in you budget..i'll have that
.and then lecture you for making bad money choices. .this is one!.

His asset will rise in value anyway so you lose wealth and liquid assets..he gains both?!?! .

Glad you said no. Where is his contribution to your assets from the fact he has no housing outgoings?

the thought experiment is the rel. moves to shared asset..the freeing of his asset to let out is a benefit by the rel.to him and should be compensated to the relationship, and your personal share of any gains from the relationships investments can be used to increase your assets.. or something!

Original poster
user1476961324 · 20/10/2016 17:07

dowhatnow

He currently has no outgoings (bar food).

I currently have higher outgoings, due to having to pay own rent/bills. I have no issue with paying for my rent, bills etc. However, he is not a landlord using the property as a pure investment, he lives there!

Does the only benefit to living together have to be financial? I am not moving in with him for financial reasons – I just wanted us to be together. A lot of posts on here make it sound like we are casual acquaintances and I have seen an advert for the room in the newspaper.

If I pay half of the bills, this seems pretty reasonable to me. Maybe even £50 a month for a ‘household maintenance fund’. But I don’t think he should be making money out of me, per se.

He has lived with girlfriends before yes, and I am not sure what arrangement there was there. I am going to investigate though. And no, we aren’t married!

OP posts:
scaryclown · 20/10/2016 17:10

also if you rent a room from him, bloody well get a lock...and sublet it Grin

Original poster
user1476961324 · 20/10/2016 17:12

I agree, it is very complicated.

I suspect it will always be complicated, financially.

I earn more than him; a way of him levelling the playing field maybe?

I am tempted to go along with it just to do something childish, like you suggest, scaryclown!

OP posts:
dowhatnow · 20/10/2016 17:15

Fine but his situation doesn't change and you have £700 - £850ish per month in your pocket extra (assuming you pay already bills now of £150 and want to pay about £300 to him). You benefit and he doesn't.
That hardly seems fair either.

50/50 now with a view to pooling everything once children come along or something.

I think it would be nice of him to want you to invest in your own propery or something but you keeping all the savings is as unfair as him wanting you to pay it all to him. Win/win is splitting the spare cash 50/50.

SuperFlyHigh · 20/10/2016 17:16

I've just seen he lectures you on your saving!

OK - if you do agree then do so only on the assumption that you go a solicitor and get a Trust Deed or something drawn up so you have a stake in the property. if your loving boyfriend protests ask him why you, at your age should be throwing money after old rope (wrong phrase i think) when you could be buying a property at your age and should be and you feel insecure not owning a share in a property (you can think of correct words). bet he will run for the wind or the trust fund he's part of prohibits this.

dontcallmethatyoucunt · 20/10/2016 17:16

If he lives in a property owned by a trust, he does not own it, it is not for him to charge rent.

I have clients with children who live in Trust homes and it is usual for the Trustees to be consulted as THEY own the property. I have advised on such matters before and I pointed out that as a tenet forever, it is wise to hold a property purchase away from the Trust property. Even on marriage the property will not become a marital asset and the new spouse will be disadvantaged. The couple I advised went on to JOINTLY purchase a separate property while continuing to live in a substantially bigger home.

OP I think if he loves you and wanted simply to share his life with you he wouldn't have pound sign rolling in his head.

SuperFlyHigh · 20/10/2016 17:18

dowhatnow but the OP's partner has NO outgoings. Obviously he thinks OP can afford this outgoing but doesn't want to marry (presumably so his Trust isn't affected nor his owning of the property).

So he wants all the benefits - eg sex, sharing a property but to leave the OP short financially. If he then decides after a year things won't go further and they break up, OP will be on the back foot financially and she could have been saving for a deposit for a place of her own (to buy).

Its hardly like they're in their 20s.

dowhatnow · 20/10/2016 17:19

So you earn more than him and still want the £850ish on top so you have even more disposible income? Even more unfair.

The only way to make it fair if you just pay him half of bills is to go the whole hog of pooling all money and you put both your salaries into the joint pot. But you won't want that will you op?

SuperFlyHigh · 20/10/2016 17:19

dontcallmethat very interesting!

can a property be transferred on marriage? i know a couple married, man is a trust fund kid

SuperFlyHigh · 20/10/2016 17:20

dowhat - I assume OP may want to save for herself or to buy her own property.

ZuleikaDobson · 20/10/2016 17:21

He actually thought he was giving me quite a good deal, as room + bills would more usually be £1k around here (I know, I know. London…!)

The obvious issue there is that you would not be paying £1000 a month for a room if you had to share the room with the landlord, look after him when he's unwell, and presumably do at least some shopping, cooking, washing and cleaning for him.

No but it's not fair if she gets to pay no more than 50% of the bills. She benefits by saving all her current outgoings and his situation doesn't change at all. The savings should benefit them both.

But it would benefit him. Lighting and heating costs, water rates, internet rental etc will all cost more or less the same whether one person or two use them, so he would be saving money.

People suggesting that OP would be subsidised by her partner are not factoring the value of everything OP would bring to this, if it has to be looked at in cold financial terms. If her partner had to pay someone as a companion/escort plus pay for, say, half of said household services, it might well cost a lot more than £850 a month.