Advice on financial situation...

[Midnightspecial]

A & B are a couple, together 7 years and living together.

Person A earns £25k a year and has approximately £10k in savings.

Person B earns £76k a year and has £94k in savings, plus a further £18k inheritance just recieved.

Couple need to put money towards something this will cost roughly £18-20k and is to be split 50/50 so each person pays £9-10k each towards it.

Person A has piped up now the inheritance has come through and said that they feel it isn’t ‘fair’ that they have to wipe out their life savings completely and that they want to pay less than half. When asked why, they have just said it doesn’t feel right that one person is left with nothing and the other left with a lot.

Person B thinks that it isn’t fair that they pay more. That it was agreed half and, really, that’s that.

Thoughts?

Honestly don't know how married (or nearly-married) couples live with separate finances. For me and my partner we would just say "we have £122k in savings and will spend 20k on the wedding". The end. Simple really.

I think it would be fair to put in a percentage of one's salary. That way both A and B are both making a contribution that's equally fair relative to their respective incomes.

Personally I wouldn't want to marry somebody like person B as it feels as if they are more interested in taking care of themselves rather than in marriage as a true partnership. I would see this sort of reaction/insistence on splitting it exactly 50/50 as a bad sign when it came to their character and attitude to sharing finances in the relationship. I wouldn't be keen to have children with somebody who felt this way, or be financially dependent on them in any way, as they think it is "their money" rather than mutually shared family money.

If A &B aren't happy to pool all their savings & earnings together at the outset, then I don't think they should get married. It's only sustainable for separate finances in marriage if both parties earn the same wage & both do equal childcare. Quite rare IME. Otherwise it's a recipe for disaster for A.

They should pay in % relative to pay. A pays 21% and B pays 79%.

They need to be on the same page about money before they marry though. This will drive them apart otherwise. B can’t expect to cover 50% in the house once they’re wed. It needs to be proportionate.

Probably easier to merge money and see it all as ours. Can’t have one foot out of the door if you want it to work.

Sorry, thought B earned £94k. So 24% and 76% respectively.

Everything CardsforKittens said.

All resources should be pooled, including the inheritance. No more your money, my money nonsense.

My DH was the sole earner when I was a SAHM.
When I worked, our incomes were broadly similar.
When he retired and I carried on working, my income was the larger.

It made no difference to how we spent it.

B really needs to get their head around this or years of resentment are ahead of them.

This is nuts.

If you are a committed couple what is the person who has all the savings ever going to spend it on that wont benefit the other person?

It should be "We have x, how much shall we spend on the wedding".

How do A and B plan to do day to day expenses? Both should tip up, but in proportion to earnings.

Person A is right. Person B sounds very mean.

Presumably the 50:50 split on the wedding was agreed before the inheritance came into play.

A knew therefore that they'd have to spend a stupid amount of money and use all their savings, even though B would still have plenty of savings left afterwards. They agreed to this.

They cannot now say it isn't fair because B's savings are suddenly higher.

If A's objection is that A can't afford it / doesn't want to use all their savings, they should scale back the wedding. Halve the cost. £10k would get you a very nice wedding.

I also agree that once married, it would usually be assumed that all assets are pooled, including savings. So in theory it's all one in the end.

Once we were living together we considered everything joint money really. I wouldn’t have lived together otherwise, for me it’s a huge commitment.
I wouldn’t / couldn’t be with someone that made me split everything down the middle. For some of our relationship I have earned more and so paid for most things and in the last few years it’s been the other way round.

If A didn't have any savings at all would B make that person save up before they could book the wedding or would no wedding happen at all?

Seems totally wrong and backwards to be getting married when B is so money orientated

Recipe for disaster

Also - for B to have an inheritance come through and by definition an inheritance is something no one knows for sure they will get, it is therefore purely a nice to have bonus. An extra.

If person B was worth being in a relationship with let alone marrying they would say to put that all on the wedding so they can keep their respective savings.

The fact B already has plenty means they are just tight to not see how unfair it is

I say this as the person who bought £60k to our relationship and DH didn't bring anything.
We got married, we bought a house, we had a baby.
He contributes in so many ways, it would feel weird to be sat there without a house and without a wedding because only I could afford it and he couldn't

This couple need to get together and seriously talk over their finances and their expectations. Can there not be a compromise, maybe 75-25 split or something? It seems unfair that B would have to foot entire bill but as they are clearly so much better off, it seems silly to leave your future spouse with no savings. Going forward B needs to understand that if everything is 50/50, they will need to cut their cloth according to their spouse's cloth rather than the joint one ie brand new car costs £16,000. B can easily cover their half but A cannot as she only has 2k so in such a situation what will happen then?

Bloody hell this couple are proposing to spend the rest of their life together and already squabbling about money when they have more savings than most people can dream off!
Sure now it should be WE have this in savings, what shall WE spend on a wedding.

If I was A I would run for the hills.

If the original plan was 50/50 they should stick to that

The big question is who wanted to spend that much on a wedding. If A wants a big wedding and is trying to pressure B into paying for it, A is in the wrong and should pay half as agreed, if B wants a big wedding and is knowingly taking all of A's savings that is wrong too.

Either way, both should have had a clear discussion at the start about how much each was prepared to pay and planned the wedding accordingly.

I wouldn’t wipe out my life savings on a wedding either. A house deposit maybe, because it’s an investment. I would say that A and B need to rethink their options as wiping out your life savings on a big party is bonkers. It’s not an investment and it would put me off to be A as I would worry about what happens to me in the future if B refuses to share savings whilst married and as A I am on a lower salary. Would A be expected to pay 50% of everything, forever even though B earns so much more

In B’s shoes I would genuinely proportion it 25% from A and 75% from myself as this would be fair. But it was a silly agreement to make knowing A doesn’t have anywhere near as much money

Please listen to my words as a woman who after 18 y of marriage is going to lose of half of my hard work earnings & inheritance because didn’t sign a prenup

And if I were B I'd be wondering if they wanted me for me or my money given they were not willing to be an equal.

A partnership needs to be fair. That doesn’t mean it needs to be equal.

If the original plan was 50/50 they should stick to that

That was before there was an inheritance. Perhaps if that had been in play, the original plan would have been to use that.

@ssaba1

Please listen to my words as a woman who after 18 y of marriage is going to lose of half of my hard work earnings & inheritance because didn’t sign a prenup

Really helpful advice 2 years later 😂

Wonder if the marriage survived?

Depends what item is and whether they are likely to stay together.

Registrar Wedding ...

way less aggro