Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

What is reasonable and fair? To buy 'in' or not to buy 'in'?

129 replies

BlueAnchor · 26/05/2018 18:41

Really impartial advice needed hence the impartial bullet points below.

So...Two adults have lived together (not married) for the last 6 years.

  • Adult 1 - owns the house, following divorce, pays small mortgage & running costs of house. Equity in the house of £230,000. Has lived in the house for 15 years. Has 2 adult DC's, who lived in the house as children, now at uni.
  • Adult 2 - pays food costs and 'treats'; tv packages, holidays, trips out, weekends away. Has 4 adult DC's.

The house is being renovated.
*Adult 1 wants to remortgage in one name, to do the refurb.
*Adult 2 wants to pay for the refurb and be legally entitled to a share of the house (proportionate to contribution)

  • The value of the house will increase once refurb is complete.

*Adult 1 is concerned about security and independence; horrible divorce (a long time ago) not sure of jointly owning the house even in small proportions
*Adult 2 wants to feel the house is shared, with joint decisions taken. Adult 2 wants this to be a family house for all DC's and GC's.

  • Adult 1 is unsure of adult 2's DC's and their attitudes to money.

Adult 1 and 2 love each other very much and are very happy!

Wow! Happy to answer any questions in return for your thoughts on resolving this.

OP posts:
Floralnomad · 27/05/2018 02:00

Adult 1 should keep the house in their name solely , I actually agree with adult As dc that adult 2 is on a good thing if all they have to spend is for food / treats . Adult 2 needs to invest their money just in case it all goes tits up and they need somewhere to live at a later date .

Scrumptiousbears · 27/05/2018 02:28

This could be me and my parter. I have let him in on the remortgage and got a declaration of trust and he now owns 8% I own the rest

steff13 · 27/05/2018 02:49

I'm on Adult 1's side.

bakerstreet101 · 27/05/2018 05:30

Adult no. 2 is cheeky. If I were Adult no. 1 I'd not bother with the refurb if it meant Adult No. 2 gets a share and carry on with it in my own name. Adult No. 2 needs to look after his/her own finances and inheritance for his/her children and not expect Adult No. 1 to subsidise that. There would be no way on Earth I would if I were Adult No. 1.

^ this

I am getting divorced, and there is no doubt in my mind that I will never be financially entangled with another person again. I am sure ex, who is furious, feels the same. He feels he has lost what was “his” only (Hmm).

As far as I am concerned, after years of being in a marriage where ex made all the large financial decisions without consulting me, and refused to put my name on the deeds to any property (he owned more than one), there is no way that I will be giving away some of my new independence / autonomy to a new partner. And my house will unequivocally be for my 3 dc when I die.

LotsToThinkOf · 27/05/2018 05:59

Keep it separate, that's way adult 1 has an asset for support in later life and adult 2 has money. You'd both be foolish to mix things together at this point.

Money isn't romantic, and any decisions don't have to affect the quality of the relationship but things will get messy should you combine it. Stay as things are.

InfiniteSheldon · 27/05/2018 06:12

I was adult 1 in this scenario and I'm afraid adult 2 had to sign a cohabitation agreement and buy own property to let out. My mortgage was 18 months away from being cleared when we met i may be in love with my now dh but I'm not stupid.

whiteroseredrose · 27/05/2018 07:57

Adult 1 keeps the house in his or her name and pays for renovation. His or her will is clear that adult 2 can live in house but then it goes to Adult 1's DC.

Adult 2 acts like an adult and gets own property to leave to the 4 DC.

Things can go horribly wrong without things being set out clearly.

Sugarpiehoneyeye · 27/05/2018 09:11

Message for Adult 1, do not consider giving anyone a stake in your home, you may well live to regret it. You have already endured that fiasco already, and it wasn't pleasant.
Encourage Adult 2, to invest their money elsewhere, for their own security.

VelvetSpoon · 27/05/2018 09:44

This is part of the reason my bf and I don't live together - he won't live in 'my' house. Which is understandable because it does get messy. Our plan is that in the next few years we'll rent somewhere together. And then provided we don't end up murdering each other (possible, I am not an easy person to live with) I will then look to sell my house, use some of the money to set DS1 and 2 up with homes, or if they are not ready I'll get a BTL, and then we'll get a property together that we each put an equal deposit into and mortgage the rest. Or at least that's the plan!

AvoidingDM · 27/05/2018 10:01

Adult 2 is in a very vulnerable position. They need to make sure they invest their cash wisely. 2nd property (BTL) may or may not be the right answer. They need proper financial advice.

As Adult1 wants to keep sole ownership they need to fund that 100%. While accepting Adult 2 has seperate investments.

All other bills, utility, food, holidays need to be split 50/50. Or Adult 2 is funding Adult1s house indirectly.

What happens if A1 dies who gets the house? Does A2 automatically become homeless?

GreenTulips · 27/05/2018 10:03

All other bills, utility, food, holidays need to be split 50/50. Or Adult 2 is funding Adult1s house indirectly

You would need to include a portion of rent - that would even put your 50:50 split.

DelphiniumBlue · 27/05/2018 10:07

Adult 1 wants to be in control. Adult 1 gets a return on the money they contribute ( putting it into property) where's Adult 2's contribution does not have a long-term return.
If Adult 1 wants to retain control over the property, and to get all the long term benefit, then they also need to contribute to the other expenses.
Adult 2 should make arrangements for their own financial security.

AvoidingDM · 27/05/2018 10:08

Well do you need to include rent?

If you see the mortgage / house purely as an investment. It's not actually costing A1 anything to have A2 living there (providing all other bills are split).

If A1 wants A2 to contribute to the house costs they need to let A2 buy into it. A1 can't have it both ways.

3333hh44 · 27/05/2018 10:13

Adult one is very sensible to protect themselves and it doesn't reflect on how much they care for adult 2.

Adult two should invest in a property of their own and rent it out.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 27/05/2018 10:14

forget the kids. They have their own lives and you can't be forever living to feed them.

As adults you need to sit down and discuss this. Surely the sensible solution is to work out an equitable % share of the house and allow Adult 2 to buy in a little. If Adult 1 is so worried they can set aside an amount equivalent to that which Adult 2 is putting in and will be better able to buy them put should the need arise. Have that legalised and then live happy lives.

Furano · 27/05/2018 10:17

No fucking chance.

Adult 1 needs to keep the house as their house only. Six adult DCs is a recipe for disaster.

Adult 2 doesn’t own any other property so won’t be stung on additional stamp duty and can buy a BTL. Might not be the ‘best investment’ but a much cleaner solution than buying in to adult 1’s house.

susej · 27/05/2018 10:18

If I was adult 2 I would want what they want.

If I was adult 1 in no way shape or form would I give up MY house. NO WAY.

So I’ve obviously just learned something about myself, apparently I’m quite selfish Grin

VladmirsPoutine · 27/05/2018 10:23

Don't give up a share of your house.

Each rightly want things to work in their favour but there we go.

It'd be a cold day in hell before I let someone have even a 0.005% share of my property.

Thehop · 27/05/2018 10:42

Adult 1 should absolutely NOT give freeloading adult 2 and their dc /dgc their house!

If adult 2 wants long term security they should buy a house for their dc and dgc

PaintedHorizons · 27/05/2018 10:49

A1 - with the house. Do not give any of it away or allow any input. If you split you may end up having to sell to repay equity to A2.

A2 may be carrying risk but it also living cheap and has cash to invest

Ask A2 to invest elsewhere.

ginghamstarfish · 27/05/2018 10:59

Seems a bit odd to me .. but if I were Adult 2 I would either just simply pay share of bills/food/some rent and invest my own surplus money elsewhere, or want this house in joint names and have joint account into which both pay for bills/renovations/holidays etc. As it is, if A1 decides to chuck out A2, then A2 has nothing (as in share of property) for those years together. Ideally a house move would be in order, purchased jointly in equal shares, then joint account as above, so the house 'belongs' to none of the DCs. Not really their business as they are all adults.

TwitterQueen1 · 27/05/2018 11:53

"Adult 2 wants this to be a family house for all DC's and GC's."

Never going to happen. Since A1 has been in the house for 15 years and the DCs lived there as children it will always be 'their' house, not your blended family one. The only way to get round this is a new, joint property.

Mumoftwinsandanother · 27/05/2018 12:02

If you (as adult 1) love him and want to ensure he has some security in the house I would allow him to invest in a way that protects your investment in the house and that would not result in (a) you having to sell the house if you split up, and (b) you being kicked out if he dies and his children inherit his share.

He invests 12% of the value of the house. You change the ownership of the house to be tenants in common where you own 88% and he owns 12%. All upkeep and outgoing bills are split in that proportion going forward (including the small current mortgage on the property)

Going forward you agree that if you split you will take out mortgage to repay his 12% share of the property. This should be affordable for you given that you were planning to take out an equivalent size mortgage in order to complete the refurb.

In his will he leaves his 12% share of the house to his DCs but grants you a life interest to stay in the property until you die. When the property is finally sold after your death the proceeds are split 88/12 between your DC (or your DC should have the right to but his DC out of the family home if they wish to keep it). You should allow him a similar life interest in the property so he is not chucked out on the streets if you die (even though the equity will stay with your DC).

IHT is a bit of a red herring here given the amounts involved. The threshold is £325,000 and £450,000 if passing on property. If it becomes relevant it is only likely to be relevant to your 88% share of the property so could impact upon him possibly in the future forcing a sale of the house if you die (I would think given how little he is entitled to in the house that is a risk he should take in order to get a share).

I think the above apportionment is fair and just and allows safety for adult 1 and a bit of a chance to invest/get some security for adult 2.

GreenTulips · 27/05/2018 12:12

It's not actually costing A1 anything to have A2 living there (providing all other bills are split)

What about wear and tear?

This is not how renting works - you rent and you pay your bills.

A2 is effectively renting (currently living rent free)

Rent should be paid and bills divided in proportion if DCs are living there.

Holidays the same

A2 is effectively living relatively cheaply in what must be a great house - without the cost of repairs or maintenance.

AnnabelleLecter · 27/05/2018 12:19

I'm with adult 1. Including the not getting married.
Adult 2 is being a cf and needs to sort themselves out financially/ property wise.
I wouldn't fall for it.
Adult 1 needs to protect themselves and their children against being in another mess in the future.

Swipe left for the next trending thread