Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Aibu? - should I pay from savings

108 replies

Spaghettihead1 · 20/10/2017 11:02

Really need help to see if iabu - prepared to be told that I am.
I'm currently on 12months mat leave and coming up to the last 3 months where I will not have any income whatsoever.
Baby was planned and so started saving before prengnancy for 12 months of mortgage payments, Christmas presents, general bits and pieces and around £15 a week pocket money for me.

Both me and DP agreed that he would take on my share of the household bills only (minus mortgage and things needed for our 2dc) for these last 3 months of mat leave.
It has now come about, that because I have these savings, he's no longer willing to foot my half of the bills.
We keep our finances separate as I like to be financially independent and I've never come to him for money except for this circumstance.
Who's being unreasonable? Him or me?

OP posts:
NoCryLilSoftSoft · 20/10/2017 12:47

Not sure what you’re doing, arguing? Are you wanting to argue? I’m not, I’m stating I disagree. I wasn’t asking for help to change that.

OnionShite · 20/10/2017 12:50

I'm wanting to make it clear that you saying having a child with someone is a bigger commitment than marrying them is you having your own facts rather than your own opinions nocry. You're allowed to be wrong, but hopefully my setting out the legal position will be useful to someone reading.

If you still want to ignore the information, you have every right to do so. I'm not asking you to stop doing that.

NoCryLilSoftSoft · 20/10/2017 12:53

You don’t need to make clear anything about my opinion or how I reached it Grin FYI you’re allowed to be wrong too.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 20/10/2017 12:59

Independent finances doesn't mean taking on all the costs involved in having a child.

Children and having children costs money. Some of that cost is obvious and immediate and the op's partner (I use that term loosely as that implies some sort of equality) needs to stump up his share of the mutually incurred costs of having a child. That includes the cost of lost income while the op looks after that child on maternity leave. He is benefitting from her doing that so he needs to take on a share of the costs too.

Some of the cost is longer term and less easily quantifiable. He should also be stumping up to cover some of that as the decent thing to do.

OnionShite · 20/10/2017 13:01

It appears we disagree on that too, then. Someone might read your post and think it was accurate. We already know there's a big problem with people not understanding the legal ramifications of marriage as opposed to cohabitation, so it's vital that those of us with the knowledge to tackle that do so.

SWBCRTMWSC · 20/10/2017 13:01

How about you add up all the hours of childcare you have provided, and he pays for this amount of childcare once you return to work?

Mummyoflittledragon · 20/10/2017 13:02

He’s living in your house rent free and quibbling about paying 3 months worth of bills. Is that correct?

What a man child. Perhaps he’d rather go and support himself. Y’know, actually pay rent somewhere and still have to pay the bills and support your baby. I’d be fuming.

NoCryLilSoftSoft · 20/10/2017 13:07

Cool so just so everyone is clear, we disagree Grin

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 20/10/2017 13:09

To ram home the point that independent and separate finances doesn't mean one party gets a free ride on mutually incurred costs:

I and a friend mutually decide to go to a concert. We have separate finances (obviously). We agree I will pay for the tickets and she will pay me back. She then decides at the concert that she doesn't really see why she should pay me back because I get the benefit of seeing the concert and I've got savings that can cover the shortfall.

You wouldn't tolerate that and this situation is the same: mutually agreed expense (having a baby); an agreement the father will cover the last three months of bills while mother is on maternity leave looking after their baby; he reneges on the deal leaving the op to pick up the cost.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 20/10/2017 13:09

...pay me back her ticket cost.

Motherbear26 · 20/10/2017 13:17

While I do struggle to understand separate finances with young dc, you clearly have your reasons and you have both discussed your finances extensively to come to an arrangement you are both happy with. You have also planned ahead together and put in place solid plans for your mat leave in advance.

Your dp is being extremely unreasonable in this instance. You both agreed on this before you had your baby. It is very unfair of him to renege on that now just because you have been sensible. I have no doubt that even only with mortgage and things for dc your savings won’t go as far as he thinks. It is only proper that he make some sort of financial sacrifices for this child (as you have). If he won’t see sense, ask him to swap and take the final 3 months as paternity leave and you can pay his share of the bills while he covers the mortgage and dc. After all, he’s had full earnings the entire time you’ve been off. Or perhaps say that if he won’t contribute you’ll be forced to return to work early and will need his share of the childcare.

I think either way he needs to take a long hard look at himself. You decided to have this child together. What has he contributed?

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 20/10/2017 13:32

You earn a similar amount but you're paying the mortgage (and any work needed on the house), and just splitting bills? And yet you are still able to save more than he does? WTF does he do with his money?

happygirly1 · 20/10/2017 13:44

I was ready to say he was BU as you've got a child and so should work as a partnership with all money being considered family money when a child comes into the equation.

However with your subsequent updates it seems like it is you who has kept it separate and prevented your relationship working like a partnership (financially) by ensuring finanaces are separate and the house is seen as yours (him getting nothing if you split).

In those circumstances, where it is clear the house is not his responsibility as it is in no part his, I can understand why he would be reluctant to pay for your share of the bills when you have the cash available to do so.

Not a criticism by the way; just that I can see where he is coming from. Whilst I personally think it's a strange way to organise finances when you live together with a child, I appreciate it works for you and that's great! But you are BU in my opinion to expect something different from him when you're maintaining financial rigidity on your end.

Firesuit · 20/10/2017 13:59

Actually, since you have separate finances, I think he is right not to take on your share of the bills, and never should have offered to.

On the other hand, you should be charging him rent and half the savings in childcare that come from maternity leave.

Also, if you've had any unavoidable loss of earnings as a result of taking time off work, i.e. a loss that would still have happened if you took the absolute minimum time off, then he should refund you half of that. You incurred that loss for a baby he (presumably) also wanted.

MrsOverTheRoad · 20/10/2017 14:00

Happy I agree.

If OP were in her partner's situation, everyone would be shouting at her to get married or get her name on the deeds.

Firesuit · 20/10/2017 14:01

Draft up a bill for all the things he should be paying but hasn't previously agreed to. If he agrees to pay it, that should more than cover your share of utilities etc.

If he says you can't change the goalposts and charge him for past services, tell him that then same applies to him changing arrangements for the last three months.

Chocolaterainbows · 20/10/2017 14:13

Why do you have to have joint bank accounts if you are married? You can still split overall bills evenly and have independence. I have seen too many threads on here where partners spend way more and I'd hate the thought of having to ask someone's permission to buy certain items.

AndrewJames · 20/10/2017 14:20

You don't have to have joint bank accounts, you just need to both fairly split costs, taking into account reduced earning capacity due to children.
Where do you get the idea though that you need someones permission to buy things because you have a joint account?

thefutureisours · 20/10/2017 14:21

I paid half of the bills (at my insistence) when I was on maternity leave. My situation is a little different though as the house is dp’s so he pays the mortgage, we split the rest of the bills.

AndrewJames · 20/10/2017 14:21

If OP were in her partner's situation, everyone would be shouting at her to get married or get her name on the deeds

No they wouldn't. If OP were living for free in someones house while they paid for everything AND took care of the baby and couldn't earn because if it, everybody would be telling her she was freeloader with no rights to the house.

Chocolaterainbows · 20/10/2017 14:32

AndrewJames
Sorry, confusing two separate issues Confused

Brittbugs80 · 20/10/2017 14:54

If you have a joint account, any signatory can clear it out completely

One reason why DH and I have our own bank accounts and separate savings, as well as a joint account. My savings is my fund should I ever need to leave. If I don't then it goes towards my retirement. When I turn 50, I'm using a small portion of it to pay for my funeral.

OP, can you ask work for your holiday entitlement accrued during maternity to be paid for one of the months?

whoopwhoop21 · 20/10/2017 15:37

I don't have a joint account largely due to laziness. I'm currently on mat leave and using some savings I accumulated prior to that. However DH pays mortgage, bills, childcare (for eldest) & food and has done since eldest came along & I didnt return to my career.

If he wants you to use your savings I think he needs to contribute more.

OnionShite · 20/10/2017 15:55

In those circumstances, where it is clear the house is not his responsibility as it is in no part his, I can understand why he would be reluctant to pay for your share of the bills when you have the cash available to do so.

I can see why he'd be reluctant, given that OP has made no legal commitment to him and has taken pains to keep things financially separate. Nothing wrong in that if it's what both parties want. But he did agree to it. I'd want to know if it's him or OP moving the goalposts here.

mummmy2017 · 20/10/2017 16:06

I think you should work out the rent of a similar house in your area, tell your partner you want him to pay this into an account each month, and that all other bills wll be split between you 50/50.
Out of this money you can then pay the bills.
If he doesn't like it remind him if you didn't own the house then he would have to pay 100% of this rental.
Also tell him you need the money for the food for xmas..
Also tell him since YOU are the childcare at the moment he is saving on that, does he want you to charge him the going rate for 18 hours per day....

Swipe left for the next trending thread