Joint finance query - sorry, long!

[confusedaboutjointfinance]

I've namechanged for this one, as my boyfriend uses mumsnet!
I have a query, and genuinely want to know if I'm BU.
I have been with my boyfriend for around a year, and we are planning to get engaged. I'm in my late 30's and work as a teacher, so I have a decent income (around £50,000). However, being a northerner until recently but now living in the south, I don't have a great deal in the way of a house deposit (around £30,000). My boyfriend is 13 years older than me and has paid off his mortgage through a combination of his own hard work (he's a senior teacher too and earns roughly the same as me), but also family money and being in the south when prices rocketed.

Neither of us have any children. We might have them after marriage, but maybe not - I know that we are both getting on in age.

As someone who was brought up in poverty, I have a real "thing" about wanting to own the house where I live. However, obviously it would be totally unfair of me to expect him to sign half of his house over to me. Therefore, I suggested that he sells his house and puts into the joint deposit pot whatever he is willing to put in. He could match my £30,000 or put a bit more in, whatever he wants to do. We would then take out a mortgage for the rest of the house and the marital home would be in joint names, and we would be equals. He could then keep the rest of the money from the sale of the house as an investment for himself as it was a pre-marital asset. I would be happy with this, as we would own our house equally and both have an equal say. We both earn roughly equal and will both still be working full-time.

When I spoke to him about it, he didn't seem to understand my emotional feelings about wanting to own half of my home. He said that my view didn't make sense, and we should buy a bigger house with him putting in the full proceeds of the same of his house (around £600,000) and me putting in my £30,000, but that he would want it to be written in law that he owns a far higher proportion of the house.

I don't want the money he has earned before marriage, but what I do want is to feel like an equal partner, rather than someone moving in to someone else's house. AIBU?

You won’t be moving into his house, you will be moving into your house together. It’s not your fault you didn’t have the same opportunities and if you do have children you may need a bigger place. You will still have your money into the house and have your name on it. If you sell it for whatever reason he just gets more back. Probably good to get it off your chest but it’s not a bad situation to be in, in the grand scheme of things, so let the house hunting commence and enjoy being with someone who is so trusting with you he would put that much into a house with you. Best wishes for the future x

YANBU

I would absolutely want to own equal amounts. My husband paid the full deposit on our first flat before we were even engaged and it was only his name on the mortgage, so I didn't pay a penny towards the mortgage but paid half of other bills. We then used the equity from the flat to use as a deposit for our current home. I am down as owning 50% even though I haven't put a penny towards it. But now my name is on the mortgage I do pay towards it.

Once you got married anything he had would be half yours anyway unless you signed it away after marriage

Once your married the money is as much his as yours

Yanbu I understand what your saying...But if I was in your situation and future dh was saying pull our assets and buy a bigger family home together I'd be going down that route!

I completely understand this. I feel the same. However, looking from his point... He will have to live in a smaller house or pay a higher mortgage to support you decision. Neither of which are fair.

My partner earns a lot more than me and the house we are in is about as much as I can afford but he could afford much bigger. I feel like I am holding him back but also refuse to own less than 50 per cent of the house. If the situation came up, to be honest... I think I would swallow my pride.

That bit about him owning more of the house than you is a moot point surely because on marriage it doesn't matter it's seen as a joint equal asset... He realises that doesn't he?

When DH and I bought our first flat I had no capital at all and his parents gave us £30k as a deposit. I was very clear we should own in such a way that the £30k plus the increase in value over time was his so we were tenants in common with differing shares.

Over the 5 years we owned the flat we got married, had a baby and when we upsized at that point the £30k equity had become £135k.

We are now joint tenants and own everything 50/50 as enough time has passed and the relationship is sufficiently serious.

If I were you I'd want my money protected including any increase in value but wouldn't object to being tenants in common initially, but after marriage and kids I'd want it all to be 50/50.

I suspect someone more knowledgeable will be able to advise as well if being married automatically means you are entitled to 50% but I don't know if that's the case.

I kind of get where you’re coming from but IMHO it would be crazy to pay potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds in interest to a bank when you don’t need to... I’m guessing that is part of your BF’s objection? Flip side of the same argument I guess but it doesn’t make sense to me to start at the bottom of the housing ladder again for the sake of principles.

It's not true that assets automatically become joint on marriage. It's on divorce that the law enforces sharing.

If marriage wasn't happening you could simply have an agreement that you both own x amount but he stands to lose a lot if the marriage goes pear shaped as his legal document won't be worth much.

I'd want 50/50 too like you.

You aren't equal. He has 600K and you have 30K. You need to live together, and it isn't reasonable to ask him to limit himself to a lifestyle you can afford.

If you're really determined about this, perhaps you can own half-shares in the house, he puts in 300K cash for his half, you put in 30K of you own money plus 270K you borrow from him, and you make "mortgage" payments to him for the rest of your working life.

I think possible he needs a prenup rather than disproportionate ownership of the house, to protect what he's bringing in to the marriage. Not sure how effective it will be (assuming England) but it's better than nothing. In his position there is no chance I would get married.

This myth comes up over and over again here... you cannot 'sign over' half or any proportion of a mortgaged property to someone else. You'd need to remortgage joint. He cannot 'sign over' part of his existing home to you even if he wanted to!

But you won't be an equal partner if he is putting in the best part of £600K and you are putting in £30K. I think he is being sensible to protect his money. If the marriage doesn't last why should you be entitled to walk away with half his money.

Vivienne, I don't think you read my OP. I don't WANT his money!! My point is that we put in equal amounts for a house that we buy together, and he can KEEP the rest of his money - he could for example pay it into his pension pot, or invest in a buy to let in his name only. That doesn't bother me, its the marital home that bothers me. I have always been very clear in my mind that all pre-marital assets should go to the person who had them in the first place.

Firesuit, why do you think it isn't fair that he would have to limit himself to a lifestyle that we could both afford? In other situations where people do things together, the budget is usually set by the amount the person who is hardest up can afford, not by the wealthiest person? I do like your idea about making "mortgage payments" to him though, as it would be like buying myself in to an equal share over time.

I'm glad that most of you can see the conflict - I've never been married before and have always worked full-time and paid my own way. The thought of losing my independence by living in a house owned mainly by someone else (yes, even my husband!) is really troubling me. I'm trying to see a way where I can protect my feeling of being equal and not being like a lodger, but also where he can protect his assets as I believe it is right that he does.

But he can’t “KEEP the rest of his money” because it’s no longer his!

I wouldn't have a problem with him having bigger equity in the house as long as it's agreed you each get your own money back and split any increase in value.

Does he seem the type to call it his house instead of ours then u need to think if you want to live with him.

Married to me is joining together not making a 50:50 split. As years go on one of you may need to take time off work and the other will need to financially support them.

I'm really shit with money so feel free to disregard but just an idea - couldnt you carry on living in his house and you buy a house of your own with your own deposit and mortgage, and rent it out?

Depends if you you then go onto have dc. He may get his money back but let's say he leaves you for someone else what price can be put on those years with him? It's not equal.

Merry old goats and your dh dp happy with that now, your joint ownership?

I have it the other way round. I owned property before my husband and I got married. We ringfenced the property before marriage with other assets post marriage completely jointly owned as we have built them up - so in divorce that would be 50/50. I love my husband desperately, and I would never see him struggle per se as he would always be their father and they would need to be looked after if in his care, but I don’t see why he should get an equal share of equity of something that had jack all to do with him as it happened long before he arrived. I view it as protecting my DS and DD. After all, if he remarried and had more kids it’s not likely to come back to them even though i believe it would be rightfully theirs.

I am down as owning 50% even though I haven't put a penny towards it. But now my name is on the mortgage I do pay towards it.
Are you sure you own 50% of your house, as that's not normal for a married couple, unless you've specifically set it up like that (or 40/60, or 30/70 etc). The usual method of buying a property when you are married is to jointly own 100% of it together

I can see that from his point of view your idea is ridiculous. He has managed to get to the situation where he owns a £600k house outright with no mortgage. Why on earth would he want to move house and get a mortgage for £570,000 more than he needs to???

That would cost over 25 years about £250k of interest alone.

Plus the mortgage rate would be much worse with a deposit of only 10%....and that would be to buy a house which costs the same as the one he has. If you wanted a bigger house the deposit wouldn’t even be enough at 60k.....and all those extra costs while he had £570;000 sitting around.

Yes, he could invest it, but a house is a pretty good investment!

Your plan makes no sense at all for him.

@Newyearnewyew - yes - very.

Before we upsized we checked with his parents that they didn't want their money back and they were clear it was a gift so DH had no issue. As I said, by that time we were married and had 1 DC.

We are a family now - the house and the assets are to benefit us as a whole.

My DP is a very generous person though (not just with money) and is very fierce about us being equal and doesn't equate money/earnings with value in the relationship.