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

Not to contribute to mortgage?

150 replies

StopItAndTidyUpNow · 04/09/2018 10:44

My sister has been with her boyfriend for about 4 years, they live separately, he has one DC from a previous marriage..

They want to buy their own place together but in order to do that she is going to sell hers, move in with him into his house and then once a suitable house comes on the market they will only have one house to sell rather than 2.
They agreed to sell hers because his DC is settled in the house and it wouldn't be fair to move him once to hers, then again to another place, plus his DC can walk to school from where he lives now and can't from my sisters place.

Anyway, we were talking about it on the weekend and she plans to move in but not to contribute to the mortgage by paying rent, the reason being is that all her disposable income will go straight into savings and be used to put into the new house. She doesn't want to contribute to the mortgage because she won't be named on it so if anything were to happen to her DP she would need to leave and ultimately she has reduced someone else's debt with no benefit to her. Similarly if they were to split up she will have reduced her DP's mortgage debt and be entitled to nothing.

Her and her DP have spoken about this and whilst he agrees that this is the most sensible thing to do he keeps giving her the occasional dig, i don't think hes serious, but a lot of serious things are said in jest! saying things like "well you could swan off after a year of free rent with your savings" - obviously she wouldn't do this, unless the relationship broke down but she's concerned that it will start to become an issue the longer she is there.

She has asked me if its the right thing to do and I am biased because she's my sister and because this happened to me - I moved in with an ex, paid rent which reduced his mortgage so that when we bought our next house we would have had more of a deposit, but the relationship broke down and he ended up with approximately 20k reduced off his mortgage just from my contribution and I walked away with nothing.

So has anyone been in this situation? What did you do?

OP posts:
Ignoramusgiganticus · 04/09/2018 10:47

Can't they put the savings in joint names?

Emma765 · 04/09/2018 10:48

Assuming they do stay together, it's six and two threes isn't it.

If they break up, he is in the same position and she walks away with a lot more savings after living rent free for however long. That doesn't seem fair either.

My husband moved in with me a couple of years before we got married. It was different as there were no short term plans to sell. He paid rent, but it was a lot lot less than what he had been paying so we both felt like it was fair.

Pickleypickles · 04/09/2018 10:48

But people who rent pay to live there and have no rights over the property. I think it's cheeky to think you can live somewhere for free just because you won't have any rights to the property.

BasicUsername · 04/09/2018 10:49

Well, she can't just expect to live rent free. I don't think she should have to pay half of the mortgage, but she does need to contribute something. Are they going to split bills / food?

UpstartCrow · 04/09/2018 10:50

I can see why she's doing it, and the digs are a concern. I wouldn't move in with him, he has issues and they need to be sorted.

Flyme21 · 04/09/2018 10:50

They need to see a solicitor.

MrsStrowman · 04/09/2018 10:52

Will she be putting the saved money in a joint account? If so that's fine, if not her DP is right she could walk away after a year of free rent with the equity from her property and the money saved from only paying for half of the bills, as opposed to now when she's paying for everything at her home. Her DP would be no better off, she would be considerably better off.

Original poster
StopItAndTidyUpNow · 04/09/2018 10:54

Yes she is contributing to all the bills as far as i know but it's just the mortgage that she won't be contributing towards.

I can see it from both sides to be honest but obviously as she is my sister I lean more towards her.

I think if I were in that situation and it was the other way around and DP would be moving in with me I don't think I would want him to contribute but that's just my personal preference and doesn't make it "right"

What would a solicitor do Flyme?

OP posts:
PinkHeart5914 · 04/09/2018 10:54

To me that isn’t being in a couple. She’s essentially sponging but not contributing to the mortgage and of course it will become an issue within the relationship.

If the plan is to buy together anyway why not start being fair from now?

DioneTheDiabolist · 04/09/2018 10:56

I think they need to have a serious, grown up conversation about each of their financial responsibilities wrt this plan. How does your sister think the costs should be managed while she is living at his?

PrimalLass · 04/09/2018 10:59

Can't they put the savings in joint names?

NOOOO. She should definitely not do that.

Firesuit · 04/09/2018 10:59

Assuming finances are separate and everyone is meant to be paying their own way, for the time being...

If the "rent" you/she paid is a fair proportion of the going rate for the house, then the fact that he may have used it to pay down a mortgage is neither here nor there. That is the the fair amount to pay.

If you don't pay "rent" at all you are being subsidised while you live there, by the amount of rent you are not paying.

Having said that, I would not want to be forced to be out of the housing market by the requirements of the relationship, unless it was definitely for a short time. Getting agreement that I live rent-free in this supposedly short period might be a way to make sure I get compensation if I end a stuck in situation I didn't sign up for.

UpstartCrow · 04/09/2018 11:01

The 'rent' is being put to one side to be used towards the new home.

If he isnt happy with the arrangement he should say and sort it out, not make digs.

GreenFingersWouldBeHandy · 04/09/2018 11:07

Can she compromise and pay reduce rate of rent but still save some?

Seems a bit cheeky to live rent free while amassing her savings.

Agree though that his passive-aggressive 'digs' are worrying. He needs to sort it out, not just take verbal swipes every now and then.

Tofffeee · 04/09/2018 11:07

She's taking a massive risk to be the one to sell her house first, especially as they have never lived together.

No way should she contribute to his mortgage. Bills and food etc, sure. Mortgage that is in his name only and she has no claim to? Hell NO. OP has already personally lived the possible outcome of that, as have many other women. Can me a CF or a sponger, but I wouldn't pay my partner's sole mortgage. I actually think it'd be quite cheeky of him to expect this.

Notquitegrownup2 · 04/09/2018 11:09

This does not sound a hopeful start to a relationship. I should advise her to slow down so that they can talk and agree on the details before selling her house. It's supposed to be a happy time planning to live together but this is storing up resentments and problems before they even move in!

She needs to stay put in her house until they find their joint property, or to rent it out, so that she gets an income from it which she can use to fund her rental payments on her partners house. This gives her the security of her own home, should things not work out, but it also makes it quite clear, when they buy, how much equity they are each putting into the new property.

I can see his case, but can also see that once she has sold her home, to provide money for the new house, any rent she pays out of her savings is less money from her and more money for him to put towards their joint home. I think that if they split in future, this would leave her feeling like you, having subsidised your ex-p to the tune of £20k.

Or she could decide that it is worth £20k from her (that's a lot of rent for a year or so!) to enjoy living together.

Tessellated · 04/09/2018 11:10

I think that's fair enough on her part although I think she should contribute to bills.

If she sells her house and moves in with him, and they break up at the end of the year, the options are:
A. she has paid no rent. She swans off with a year of savings in the bank (that she would have recouped in equity in her own house, had she kept it). He is in the same financial situation as at the start.
B. She pays him rent. She has less savings, less equity from her house that she sold, and he is quids in having had a contribution to his mortgage the whole year.

Personally if I was her I wouldn't pay towards his mortgage, nor would I expect him to contribute towards hers if the situation was reversed.
But I would probably rent out my house rather than sell, until we were buying a house together. If she sells her house, she is taking on all the risk of them moving in together, as he could kick her out at any time.

Original poster
StopItAndTidyUpNow · 04/09/2018 11:12

I agree she's taking a huge risk selling her house but she doesn't want to rent it out - not that I can blame her for that, being a landlord sounds more hassle than it's worth so ultimately something has to give - they can't financially keep 2 houses.

Toffifee this was my exact first thoughts! But as a i said I'm biased as I've already been through this and it did not end well! I just didn't know what the general consensus was with regards to this. I think she's concerned she's going to end up looking like a CF/sponger which she absolutely is not, she just wants to safeguard herself and i do not blame her for this.

OP posts:
2015newstart · 04/09/2018 11:15

I've been in both situations - living with someone and walked away with nothing to show for it and my now not so new DP. He didn't want me to pay towards his mortgage but all my savings went towards our joint mortgage when we moved.

That's the fairest way - she's not moving from rented yo rented, she's already taken a gamble by selling and taking herself out of the property market (whilst prices increase) assuming they will stay together and buy. If she pays him rent he will be better off and she worse off, if she pays nothing she'll still need to buy a house afterwards - why can't she put the amount she would have paid to her mortgage into savings and then towards a joint deposit? If she pays nothing apart from her half of the bills he'll still have saved money in the interim.

And digs aren't on- for that reason alone I'd want her to protect her money. If he's the kind of guy to make digs rather than having an honest conversation he's potentially not the right guy long term.

mrsm43s · 04/09/2018 11:15

Why can she not put the sum that she is saving from not having to pay a mortgage into a joint savings account (separate from any other savings, including her equity, which she MUST keep in her sole name). Then if they split up, then that amount is split 50:50 meaning they both benefit equally from the year or so when only one mortgage was being paid between them. If they stay together, then this account can be used towards the new house, which will presumably be being bought jointly.

sunshinesupermum · 04/09/2018 11:16

Tessalated has it spot on. Rent out the house rather than sell it now.

MrsStrowman · 04/09/2018 11:20

I think as long as she puts the money she is saving by not paying rent into a joint account it is fine, her equity should stay in her account. If at the end of the year they split and she's saved £1000 a month by living with him rent free, they split it fifty fifty, £6k each, he doesn't feel she's taken advantage of him by living there rent free (it equates to £500 a month she would've given him in rent) , she hadn't lost any equity from the sale of her house as she keeps all of that and she's saved £6k, unless she's living in London it's unlikely in the current climate her house would've increased in value much more than that anyway. So both walk away in an equitable position.

TheBlueDot · 04/09/2018 11:21

I don’t understand his digs - he is acting as though they will end up parting ways.

She is effectively giving up her home and security to move in with him. If the relationship works out, the money goes to the joint house. If the relationship doesn’t work out, the money she’s saved goes some way to compensate her for moving off the housing ladder and having lived with the insecurity of selling and not owning her own home.

He basically is in a low-risk position and actually financially better off as she’ll be contributing to half the bills (just not the mortgage).

And what happens if they can’t find a house they like quickly? They could end up living in husband home for two or more years - it would seem very unfair that she’d given up her own place and forgone any equity increases for all that time. Would he consider adding her to the house deeds if they ended up staying more than 6/12 months on his home and she was contributing to the mortgage/paid some of it off with her equity - I bet not. He isn’t seeing this as truly joint if he’s making digs and not having these sorts of conversations with her.

If he can’t see that she’s taking a risk here, and wanting her to be ok if things don’t work out, I’d be questioning if he is the right man for her.

MrsStrowman · 04/09/2018 11:21

@mrsm43s this is what I think, I posted similar earlier but think people read it that I meant her equity too, which I absolutely don't!

Tofffeee · 04/09/2018 11:22

"Then if they split up, then that amount is split 50:50 meaning they both benefit equally from the year or so when only one mortgage was being paid between them."

Because if they split up, she will have no house to live in, and have to buy a new one, with the associated extra costs like solicitor fees and stamp duty. While he'll just carry on.