What is fair financially?

[AmIbeingtoomean]

NC as going to give lots of detail. Long sorry.

My boyfriend and I have been discussing moving in together but had a chat yesterday where he thinks I am asking too much. I have been in a cocklodger situation previously so worried I am being too harsh. Neither of us have children.

My situation:
I own a nice 3 bed house in a less nice area of an expensive (not London) city. My income is £2000 salary per month shortly rising to £2,600 following promotion. I have always had lodgers and my current one pays £400 a month all inclusive - slightly below market rent. My mortgage is £600 a month and all my household bills (including mortgage, excluding car and groceries) comes to £950 a month.

BF has a salary of £1,800 per month shortly rising to £1,900. He pays rent of £625 and his household bills total £850 each month. He has some money saved in a help to buy ISA and could right now buy a tiny flat in a similar area to me.

He doesn't want to move in while I have a lodger so will wait until current one (a mate with financial troubles) can afford to move out. If he wasn't moving in, I would get another lodger and charge £450 a month. We will live in my house alone and once we know living together works, buy something together (tenants in common to protect my much higher equity).

I want him to pay £400 a month contribution essentially to replace the lost lodger income. This will cover all bills and then we will split food etc ad hoc (me probably paying more as I earn more). He saves an extra £450 a month compared to now which he can put toward his help to buy.

He feels it is unfair to ask him to pay toward my mortgage and should only pay half of the monthly utility bills (about £175) plus spilt food bills and housework etc. When we buy together, then he would contribute toward the mortgage. He doesn't want to feel like I am profiting off him or treating him like a lodger. Especially as I don't 'need' the money with my payrise and earn more than him.

YANBU - He should pay £400
YABU - he should pay less

YABU - you should charge him the going rate of £450 rather than £400.

Seriously, this doesn’t seem like a great start and is a flag, I’d be wary.

No, he would be using the spare room for nowt because it would be utter folly of you to move him in! WTAF? He wants to pay a pittance whilst you lose money. But your last post rings a bell to me, does he have hoarding tendencies?

You have a serious Saviour Complex, OP, and until you sort that out, you are destined to be taken advantage of and make poor choices when it comes to relationships.

@venusandmars all figures are net after tax so he pays £850 in total excluding food and has no car or commuting costs. So £950 a month left after bills. When moving in with me, he would have £1,500 left after rent/bills.

I have net income currently of £2,400 (salary and lodger) and £950 bills so £1,450 left. If he moves in I will have £3000 net income (payrise and his £400) and £950 bills so £2,050 left.

venusandmars

If his household bills are 850 then he is seriously wasting.monsy as he lives in a one bed flat. I took that to mean that his total was £850 of which £625 was rent. £850 for bills as a single man is ridiculous.

And if that is the case why should the op subsidise his bad decision making?

The op currently earns only £200 more than him and if she is currently left with more money, why should he be miffed? Surely that his own current money mismanagement.

Although I do think the op means £850 total bills.

I agree OP is in the right, but in many other threads where it's a woman moving in with a man who is a home-onwer, the idea that she has to pay for her accommodation is (wrongly) considered outrageous. It's considered outrageous if he has a mortgage, because then she is "paying towards a property she won't own", and it's also considered outrageous when he doesn't have a mortgage, because then he's profiteering. (Both these arguments are wrong.)

In any situation where you pay to live in a property you don't own, as long as what you are paying isn't more than your share of the market rent, you are not being taken advantage of. (Your share doesn't have to be 50%, you could be sharing bills pro-rata to earnings.)

And it really is irrelevant if the owner has a mortgage. If you move in with a home-owner, and the property as a whole would rent for £1000, then part of that £1000 is your responsibility, and whether the mortgage payment is £1000, £1500 or £0 should make no difference to what you contribute. (The mortgage payment is the owners personal bill, it is not the value of the housing that is being provided.)

So it just seems like you both need to reframe how you are looking at this.
It sounds like he might be a bit hurt that you are protecting yourself - maybe he does feel invested in you as a couple and he feels you are both already "there" in terms of commitment and sharing everything.
But until you are married or buy a house together, you can both still walk away.
He still needs to pay some rent somewhere, either to a landlord until he can raise a deposit, or to you while you co-habit.
When you talk about the arrangement, stick by what you have offered because that is fair, but try taking it a step further. When you then look to buy together, how will the equity/savings that you will both have then be shared. Will you both then pay equal towards a wedding, will you both then put an equal deposit into a house and pay half of everything towards the mortgage and bills. What do you want to do with your current equity - are you expecting to keep it all to yourself in the future scenario that you are married and perhaps having children, or do you see it as being shared by the two of you in the future?
Make sure you can both envisage the end-stage of the current proposition, and he might come round to understand that you are a couple with a long future and you protecting yourself right now will not be forever.
If he still can't come round then I would be worried.

OP if you do end up buying a house with him make sure it's on the basis that you own a higher percentage of the house to reflect your higher contribution to the deposit. Buy as tenants in common, this allows you to own certain percentages.

And don't marry him.

@RandomLondoner nail on head!

I've not personally seen such threads, except whens its a long term married with kids SAHM or ML situation and there are other financial/control issues going on as well, which I do think is different then a childless couple moving in together.

It's meant to be an exciting time moving in together . This sounds so incredibly stressful. Down to nitty gritty and money. Not a good sign at all for a future relationship

“I think I am bring practical whereas he is reacting more emotionally. He did say I had all the power and felt like I was very keen on being independent and maintaining control over my life as opposed to being a partnership.“

You’ll be listening to this for the rest of your life if you stay with him. Make sure you’re okay with that before you let him move in.

@LukeSkywalkingOnTheseHaters, as the law stands you can't count someone as a lodger who you are in a relationship with.

As a partner he can be asked to leave at any point, anyway, because she owns the house. He then would have to go through court if he felt that he deserved to be brought out, because he had paid towards the mortgage.

It's much more simpler to do an in between figure, which doesn't include the mortgage.

OPi don't think you are ready to live with someone yet. Stick with the lodger and on that basis, he can decide if he wants to move in, or just continue dating.

He should pay half the outgoing costs. Sorry Op but with his suggestion it looks like you are going to have another cocklodger sitch on your hands!

Wherever he lives he should be contributing to the cost of the home itself.
If he'd prefer to contribute to a landlord's mortgage instead or just continue as he is, that's fine let him jog on!

You are being far from unreasonable. And tbh if he wishes to be like this over that, I'd have serious concerns about how the future could pan out, it almost makes me think of labelled fridge items!

I am afraid if he doesn't concede I'd have to say that the relationship future needs reviewing. You're being sensible on all fronts and he seems to be being purposely obstructive, so perhaps subconsciously he's not ready for the next step?

And personally, I'd have gone a step further and said he pays exactly 50% of ALL costs!

As opposed to the £600 a month he's giving some random at the moment instead? confused

For fuck sake, why do people keep ignoring the fact that paying rent to a landlord gives him legal protection that he will not have from OP? It’s a big point here, he is giving up all of his security by moving in with her.

Do I think he’s a CF? Yes. But that doesn’t mean it’s ok to pretend there is no difference between him paying a landlord rent, and paying the OP rent.

Has he realised paying rent at his current place is still paying someone else's mortgage? And he won’t even get the perks of living with the landlord... talking about repairs getting done faster and a choice in maintenance not sleeping with said landlord.

You could tell him it’s either £400pm or £175pm and the lodger stays.. without the lodger (not sure if this is everywhere) but you’d be entitled to single persons council tax discount which is a decent chunk on its own, with him you can’t get that, you’d still be using as much gas/lecky/water as two adults possibly more. If he wants any additional shit too.. fibre broadband, sky packages etc who’s paying for that?

if it smells like a cocklodger it probably is.

If you didn't have or need a lodger I'd say split half bills and half the interest part of your mortgage (because that's basically rent to the bank) you pay the capital yourself because it's an asset you own. However he would still need to contribute to any household maintenance, eg replacement washing machine, painting and decorating etc if he isn't paying any rent because he would be contributing to wear and tear.

However BECAUSE you would financially be losing out because he insists you get rid of the lodger your arrangement sounds more than fair.

It sounds like he resents you earning more and having more than he does, and expects you to subsidize him to make up for that indignity. How much is male pride worth?

GiveHerHellFromUs

it's not about "need", it's just so much easier. ONE single adult can benefit from a cleaner too.... what's wrong with that?

From another recent thread

Dont pay anything towards a house you have no stake in.

Don't put yourself in a position where you are living in your boyfriends house, paying towards his mortgage, paying towards his bills and with no housing security for yourself. You would have more housing security renting from a private landlord. Just don't do it.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3824617-Boyfriends-on-much-more-money-than-me-and-its-making-me-worried-about-the-future

WHY should his money got into a saving account whilst the OP has to fork out pretty much all the bills and pay for the current accommodation?

It seems strange he's happy for you to be down £400 a month (the lodger money) because you're lucky enough to have him move in, how entitled! I'd stick to my guns and if he won't budge then keep living apart.

I don’t understand why people view it as paying towards the mortgage rather than contributing to the household

Agree. When I lived at home and paid 'keep' I didn't see it as paying towards the mortgage.

Could he agree to put the lodgers rent money in an account to save towards a deposit for the house you buy together?

I would charge at least £450 per month or get another lodger in