AIBU to ask new husband to contribute to child related costs for children that are not his?

[Clockworkteacup]

Just that really. Married last year. Four children now aged 8, 9, 11, 13 from first marriage. Ex husband pays too little maintenance - £100 per month as is self employed.

For context, we both earn good money, although he earns very good money at 50% more than me. I was able to support the children without him before with no tax credits etc but it was a struggle as was paying out a lot of childcare and big mortgage. But I was fortunate to be able to own our own home, pay the bills etc, even though not much left over. This isn't about being 'poor' and I recognise how lucky I am to be able to rely just on my own income.

AIBU to expect him to pay any of the child related costs? What do you think is a fair way to split the bills?

At the moment I am paying for half of what 'we' cost and all of what the children cost. So I pay around two thirds of our house related outgoings e.g. mortgage etc as need a house for five. I also then pay for all childcare (at £800 a month), all their clothes uniform, their lunches, trips, birthday presents and so on. He does split big costs like holidays and meals out 50-50.

This means I am ending up watching the pennies at the end of the month whilst he has around £2500 more than me after house stuff is paid. He drives a new car whilst I drive one that is 12 years old. I was triggered to write this by him complaining about not being able to afford something very expensive (and nice but certainly not a necessary cost) whilst I am worrying this month about the bills.

But they are not his children.

And their father evades paying much for them.

And we both saved about a similar amount by him moving in, in terms of housing costs (mortgage, utilities, council tax).

Backstory - I have major money issues through paying for everything for cocklodger ex husband and have a father who didn't work, and a brother who seems to live off high earning women so am skewed (and anxious) around men and money.

If you are married and living as a family then yes you should be splitting costs. Quite shocking the set up you have got. If he didn’t want to contribute to the children (and he knew you do not get much in maintenance) then he shouldn’t have got married. Not sure why you did tbh. Surely you could have drawn up wills without being married.

DP has 2 DC and they are with us 3 nights a week. We split all household stuff 50/50 including holidays, presents and clothes. The only thing that isn't even is the mortgage as I own 60% of the house so contributions are 60/40. The maintanance he pays to he ExW is his responsibility.

We have 1 joint account for bills/shopping and our own accounts too but if either of us needs extra money one month, the other one always offers. I hate it if I had lots of extra money and DP didnt.

Oh sorry, the house is in your name? Then no, he shouldn’t pay half the mortgage, but the equivalent rent for a 1 bed in your area.

The state would certainly see you as a family unit. For instance if you lost your job I think maybe you would just get Job Seekers Allowance for a year and that's it? No other help, because they would consider that your partner earns too much. What would you do then?

I think you need to rethink your whole way of looking at this. When he married you he also took on your children, to a certain extent.

Do you realise that in a few years if your kids go to uni your household income will be what is taken into account for their student finance?

You need to sit down together and work out if it's financially viable for you and your children for you to be married to him. That sounds brutal, but at the end of the day food, clothes and the likes are essential.

The disparity between you is massive.

So it's your house, that you've paid for, but he now has the right to live in it until death (so potentially for decades after you've died, in which time the property or money from its sale could benefit your children)? And he has saved 50 percent of his housing costs by moving in with you, but contributes nothing to the wider household? I'd say you've exchanged one cocklodger for another.

but the equivalent rent for a 1 bed in your area.

Surely the equivalent to a shared room (and bed). Not sure what the going rate for that would be though.

You said it was your house before you married, so he is saving 50% by living with you, got a lovely house with a mortgage by marrying you, and you do all the child related things because you're the parent and he's just married to you. Are you sure this has been thought through?

I’m shocked that this wasn’t discussed before you married him.

I can see both sides, they are not his children but he married you knowing you have 4 children and they are a part of his life (family unit). Does he have and dc’s from a previous marriage? Not that it matters.

I can understand where he is coming from but he really shouldn’t have married you if he wasn’t willing to take on some responsibility for your children (a reason I will never get married whilst my children are still living at home). It’s ok to be in a relationship with someone and keep finances separate but once you move in together and get married this changes.

Did you say anything to him whilst having the conversation that triggered the tread?

I think I would have said something along the lines of how upset I was that he was miserable for not being able to afford x despite all his surplus cash when I am struggling to make it to the end of the month to provide food for my kids.

If he has £2500 per month surplus cash to spend thats £30k pa!!!! what does he spend it on?

But why ask someone with four DCs to marry you if you have no interest in supporting those DCs?

But having read your latest post, if he is never going to realise any equity from the house he is paying towards, I can kind of see why he wouldn't want to put money towards it. It's never going to be his really is it? He'll only ever be a tenant.

Is his name on the deeds? Do you own it jointly or as tenants in common or is it in your name outright?

That does sort of change things slightly.

Just to add there’s simply no way I’d swam around with £2.5k spare each month whilst my husband struggled to make ends meet (unless he was pissing his up the wall in some way which you obviously aren’t OP)

I am also on the fence. For some reason I feel it is not unreasonable at all to expect to pool all resources and expenses where there is one (or two) step children - but four does seem like a completely different dynamic, where quantity turns into quality.
Is there any way you can chase the children's father for extra payments? He pays less than a pound a day for each child. Despicable.

I have the same family situation as you with respect to freeloading father and brother, so 100% understand how you feel with respect to your financial independence.

So it's your house, that you've paid for, but he now has the right to live in it until death (so potentially for decades after you've died, in which time the property or money from its sale could benefit your children)? And he has saved 50 percent of his housing costs by moving in with you, but contributes nothing to the wider household? I'd say you've exchanged one cocklodger for another.

Yes, when you look at it this way, it seems like he only married you to be able to stay in your house.

Why not move and buy something together? Sounds like you can afford it. He'd have to pony up half then.

What would happen if you got too sick to work?
Would he happily step up and pay all?

My husband is the main earner and our money is divided in exactly the same way as it would be if all our 3 children were from our marriage.

He pays out more in maintenance for his 1child (who lives with her mum most of the time) than I get for my two. It sucks but he never complains, one of many reasons I love him!

I think it's a tricky one.

He has married you knowing the baggage you came with but if I was in your shoes I would NEVER expect him to pay towards the upkeep of children that weren't his. If he did of course I would accept and be delighted.

Personally i think if he offers and does it willingly then he has fully accepted your children and wants be be a big part in their lives. If he doesn't contribute towards then well then I think you have a big issue in that he will always stay a step removed from them.

LovingLola that’s a reasonable to expect part of marriage - uniting resources.

I don’t know why he’s not paying half the mortgage? Of course he should contribute, I don’t know any step families where the step parent doesn’t equally contribute, if not contribute more. How did you get married without discussing this?

I think that if you are at the point of living together and marrying, then all money should be pooled (except personal savings). For me, at that point all money becomes family money. I wouldn't marry someone who didn't enter in to it all as a proper family.

To be fair to him - he is an equal partner in terms of house work (probably does more than me).

Mortgage is in my name only. He gets to live here if I die and also gets a nice lump sum. So he would gain being mortgage free (as mortgage would be paid off). Kids also get to stay here as he says he'd want them to stay here too. The lump sum would let him buy somewhere small if he wanted to sell house and give it to kids and move off somewhere else.

So house technically 'mine' but we are married so he has a stake.

I know I need to talk to him but the thought of asking a man for money makes me feel sick. Yes I realise I have deeply ingrained issues here, which I'm working through. The voices in my head tell me I would be awful to ask him for anything (and should be grateful he is contributing at all), so hearing responses that I might not be totally unreasonable really helps. Thank you.

but the equivalent rent for a 1 bed in your area.

Surely the equivalent to a shared room (and bed). Not sure what the going rate for that would be though.

You guys have a very strange view of marriage

I think this is exactly the reason why if you have several children, you need to think REALLY carefully about cohabiting again.
If you werent with him, you might well be entitled to certain benefits that as a couple, you wouldnt be, so you lose out by living with him.

If he "takes you on" as a family, he needs to understand that it is also a financial commitment, and a big one at that.
Its the poverty trap.

My advice would have been to live seperatly because its clear he is only ok with paying for himself, whilst you pay for 5. You basically have all the downsides to a relationship, and none of the help or security.

I dont think hes wrong to not want to pay for your kids, but he should have thought of that before getting involved

Well until you accept that the house is partially his, and therefore some of it should go to his family upon the death of the later of you to die, he shouldn't have to pay towards the mortgage at all.
Other household bills should probably be split 50/50 but bills specifically for the children (childcare, toys, clothes etc) are your responsibility.

Actually on the house thing: if he shows no commitment to your children now, what would happen if you got hit by a bus next week? He's unlikely to want to look after them (presumably their father would do that) but he can stay living in their house for the rest of his life. He could marry again and raise a whole new family there, with the mortgage presumably paid off by your life insurance.

And anyway, what kind of partner would watch you struggle for money when they have plenty? It doesn't scream "I love you" does it?

Is he a step father or not???

I feel for your kids. What a meanie.

Whilst technically I suppose this might be right, it does not feel like much of a marriage.