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

This is one of those moments, that when someone shows you who they really are you should pay attention.

He's being very selfish, as if nothing else in his scenario you will be worse off where as he will be a lot better off (both financially and in living in a much nicer place).

You are only 30, you're in a good position financially and career wise etc. I honestly think you should end the relationship and find someone who's on a similar footing to you, as the argument youre having now will only get worse as the years go by and you become more financially entwined. You'll both end up resentful.

I have huge sympathy for him having ASD but unfortunately this means he's always likely to struggle with seeing your perspective and you'll always have to make allowances for him.

If you want to continue the relationship my advice would be to not move in and keep your finances completely separate, and if you want to increase your income by getting another lodger then do so.

He's happy with you being worse off financially whilst he is better off financially?

This isn't right.

Don't put yourself in a position where you are living in your boyfriends house

it doesn't mean be a CF either.

The OP is talking about £400 a month for accommodation and bills... Not taking 50%+ of his salary to pay her own mortgage....

The boyfriend can take take the money he is saving by moving in, and put it into a saving account in his name...

He is in a much better financial position, and financially secure by saving money and living with her. Calculate how much £1900 minus £400 is....

Lodger rate, he’s the one who doesn’t want one in your house. For me it would be simple, either he replaces that income or you continue to have a lodger or he doesn’t move in. Up to him.

outrageous suggestion by him. of course he should contribute to your mortgage - he is living in the house! def a cocklodger in the. making.

@justincasecakehappens it's just such a Mumsnet thing to say. He wants to pay practically nothing towards running the house and your suggestion is that he shouldn't have to any housework either.

You know that'd be his next argument "why should I have to wash my plate up when I pay a cleaner?"
You and I both know that's absurd, but look at how he views the world.

Well this seems a simple one (and it's all compltely black and white so he should have no problem at all understanding it...)

The option you've offered is for him to be better off by £400, and you aren't financially compromised;

What he wants is to be better off by much more by essentially living rent-free and costing you £225 a month.

You can't afford to do that so it looks like he isn't going to be moving in.

The fact that he thinks his suggestion is fairer tells you everything you need to know about his attitude. Fuck 'being very black and white' - it IS black and white: he'd save loads by moving in with you and it's no more 'paying towards someone else's mortgage' than any other rental or lodging situation. If he thinks it should be different somehow because you're in a relationship - how? That you should be 'kinder' to him and give him a free ride? How does that square with him making you £225 a month worse off and that money going straight in his pocket? Is that him being 'kinder'?

The fact that he's tried to raise this straw man argument and muddy the waters tells me that he's very well able to think creatively and see nuances... when they make a good story for him, of course

Don't move in with him.

If he wants it in black and white: you say - looks like it's better for both of us then for you to find your own place, or even do that help to buy, and I'll get another £400 lodger which will mean more money coming in (potentially) for both of us.'

He can't argue with that.

But yes, he's very much a potential cocklodger and the fact he's trying to persuade you to be £225 a month worse off for having the pleasure of him getting a better housing deal simply says it all. In nice plain black and white.

*His way would mean him better off by £625 a month and you would be worse off by £225! How is that fair?

Your way you are no worse or better off and he's better off by £450.*

^ this.

He wants to pay practically nothing towards running the house and your suggestion is that he shouldn't have to any housework either.

My reasoning was more that it sounds ...possible (I don't know the guy) that he won't do much - doing a favour to the OP by moving in and all, so a cleaner would avoid petty arguments.

It wasn't my opinion @JustInCaseCakeHappens but there was plenty of support for not contributing towards a boyfriends mortgage on that thread.

Personally I'd meet somewhere in the middle, I wouldn't expect a contribution from a partner/boyfriend/girlfriend to be the same amount as a lodger would pay as that is a commercial arrangement.

I don't disagree about protecting yourself, but it's more thinking "don't stop buying your own place, or saving for your own" because your BF house is just a rental as any other in that sense. It doesn't become your "home" just because you live in it, you are a lodger.

not "don't contribute anything at all."

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?

Because that doesn't seem to be his argument in any way? Why would we not ignore a 'fact' that doesn't seem to bear any relevance to his decision?

If he thinks that legal protection is worth £400 then he stays where he is and pays that. Whether he pays 'towards the mortgage' or not, then he still has no legal protection in this new situation.

You have all the power if you go with his suggestion as you can boot him out anytime.As a lodger with a tenancy agreement he has some security and you get money for wear and tear,repairs,maintinance.
He is threatened by your independence,it is worrying that he thinks that you should loose that in a partnership.
And he would be using more of the house than you if you loose an entire room to store his furniture.
I would not be in a hurry to give notice to your current lodger.

I think it would be foolish of you to allow yourself to be financially worse off because of him moving in, more so when it would mean he would be financially better off.

He's basically acting as if you're already married, i.e. have joint money, when you aren't even living together yet. A very bad sign.

If he truly needs things to be 'black and white', he'd see that he is just paying the money that his choice (you don't have a lodger), is losing you.

I'd be wary.

He should pay going lodger rate imo.

What’s is the going rate for a lodger who has to sleep in their landlord’s bed with them and has no rights as a tenant though? Certainly not £400!

My way of working bills, which I think is usually fair would be pay to joint bills (including food etc, but excluding mortgage) proportionate to income. So if I’m working it out correctly his income (once you both have your raises) is 42% of the household income so he’d pay 42% or household bills.

I was going to say that if you would lose money by him moving in, then he should make up the difference, but from the figures you’ve given it looks like you’d not actually be down any money?

£1450 net now and £2050 if he moved in and paid you the £400 lodger costs.

So if he just paid half of joint costs you’d be £1650 net so still better off?

I think YABU to expect £400 a month lodger fees for someone who isn’t actually a lodger but a partner.

YWNBU to say you’re going to keep having lodgers rather than stopping when he moves in though.

I would only agree to his offer of £175 (plus 50/50 towards bills) if the lodger remained. He can't have it both ways.

My ex was exactly like this and guilt-tripped me into believing that I was being mean expecting him to pay anything towards the housing costs as 'it was my investment' - his words! He ended up being a complete cocklodger and extremely mean. He agreed to pay half of the bills (as long as they weren't related to the upkeep of the house) and a fixed contribution towards the food bill. He then started adding all sorts of additional items to the online shop - toiletries, food for his lunch while at work - and still paid the same minimal amount each week. We ended up arguing a lot about money and he always manipulated me into believing that I was the mean one.

I can't describe how much happier I am since I ended the relationship!

*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.*

And he is perfectly entitled to take that advise and continue to pay twice as much rent to live elsewhere, while the OP keeps her lodger.

Personally I'd meet somewhere in the middle

I feel that below market value rent (which the OP says the current lodger is paying) that provides the OP with no profit (just replacement of the lodgers rent) is meeting in the middle.

It's not like she's asking for the BF to pay the same rent as lodger, while keeping the lodger.

Sorry but he sounds like a cocklodger.
As PP have said, he will end up way better off, while you will end up worse off. That's not fair at all.

(Plus I would put the splitting of food in half, under review. I lived with a bf and he ate WAY more than me, so we adjusted food split so that he contributed a bit more than me.)

On another thread, I was against profiting from a boyfriend. However, that was without losing a lodger.

I think he should replace the lodger income, until you’re ready for the commitment of buying together. It would be acceptable for that to be at the market rate of £450. However, my personal view is if you would accept £400 to help out a mate, it’s a bit odd not to help out a lower earning boyfriend who you love, when you’re still making a profit. So I would say £400.

I think that as you are providing the property for you both to live in that he should be paying the full cost of utilities for you both.

My way of working bills, which I think is usually fair would be pay to joint bills (including food etc, but excluding mortgage) proportionate to income.

why should the OP pay the biggest expense of all, which is the property? Would it be fair not to contribute to rent? Of course not, so what's the difference?

I think your BF needs a reality check and a few lessons about paying your way.

I certainly wouldn't be letting him move in at the moment - maybe he needs to buy his own place first and live there for a year or two to understand the harsh realities of being a homeowner before coming to live with you.

And as for kicking out the lodger so he can have you all to himself before him moves in, for reasons I can't explain that doesn't sit right with me and it's not because I disapprove of shagging on the kitchen table if that's your thing

Owning a house isn’t just about paying a mortgage. Theres always maintenance and upkeep, general wear and tear. Appliances, boiler upkeep, gutters, roof, decorating, service/break down contracts etc. He isn’t paying your mortgage, he’s paying towards all those things too.