Am I being tight or is he?

[Flymeaway4]

My fiancé and I are expecting our first child. We live in my fiancé’s house and I pay him rent of £300/month.

He also rents out 2 rooms of the house to a friend for £515, but because the baby is coming we’ve decided it’s best for him to move out. So, my question is about what my rent should be now.

I suggested he work out the cost of his mortgage and all bills and split it down the middle, which would come to £390. He thinks it should be more......

Together we have purchased a derelict farmhouse, which we intend to refurbish into our forever home - we paid in cash and the refurb should start in about 6-9 months. We’re both fairly well off, earn about the same salary, but he has other houses that he rents out, so he has more cash savings than me. When we purchased the farmhouse, he put in a larger proportion of cash than I did (I’ve so far provided just over 25%) and the intention is that it’ll even out when I pay off the mortgage that we’ll need for the refurb.

I’ll add here that I was a first time buyer and had he been as well we’d have had no stamp duty to pay. But because he owns more than 1 house it put it up to just over £8k. To keep the peace I just paid half.

Since then, he has managed to save all the cash he needs to provide towards the refurb, c. £100k. But he is saying, instead of keeping it as cash and earning nothing from it, he could use it to pay off the mortgage on one of his rental houses now. If he doesn’t do this, we can use the cash for the refurb first, then I could delay getting the refurb mortgage that I need, thereby saving me money (it’s more expensive than a normal mortgage). It would be delayed by about 4 months, but this would mean I can get one with a 1yr term instead of 2 yrs, before remortgaging. So, to compensate for him not paying off his rental property mortgage now, he thinks I should pay half of it as additional rent (an extra £160/month). But, I argued that if he were to pay off his rental mortgage now, then he would also need an expensive refurb mortgage too, so keeping the cash is saving him money as well, not just me.

As an aside, I am not allowed to do my regular job whilst pregnant (not corona related, it’s just how it is) and am working from home, but my take home pay is reduced by about £500/month. So I’m also losing about £4K in total each time I’m pregnant with our child.

Complicated I know, which is why I can’t tell who is being tight/unreasonable.

Get married. If you are committed enough to have a child together you should be sharing all finances.

It's a weird setup. Granted we only own one house. My DH pays 95% of a hefty mortgage. He also contributes 60% of the monthly joint account incidentals because he earns more and I do most of the childcare. I pay the child care when DD is at nursery. We work it out and all of it is ours. You need to figure it out before baby arrives as it may become complicated if you are expected to carry on putting a very specific amount in and it becomes potentially less affordable for you. My earning potential reduced for me after our child. I earned more than him before baby. Good luck

I also think he sounds a selfish arse.

@SimonJT yes paying towards the father’s mortgage when pregnant should stop. When pregnant you no longer have the earning power and are going into a period of financial instability - for the father to keep the asset in his name and demand rent is just not getting what partnership and having kids means.

[quote IceCreamSummer20]@SimonJT yes paying towards the father’s mortgage when pregnant should stop. When pregnant you no longer have the earning power and are going into a period of financial instability - for the father to keep the asset in his name and demand rent is just not getting what partnership and having kids means.[/quote]
Being a sponger and not paying your way is in no way a partnership.

To be fair, you would need to increase the rent you pay him to cover the fact that only 2 of you live there now (which is exactly what would happen if 3 people were renting and 1 person moved out). So basically covering half the lost income from the lodger, and he would have to suck up the loss from the other half

@violetbunny the op and lodger were currently paying for everything. So 50% of total costs seems fair. Not 50% of lost income from lodger.

@SimonJT ha ha! Tell me how if you and your GF got pregnant and she had to stop work, and you still demanded rent, tell me which part exactly would make that woman a sponger?!

Or should the OPs partner give up work and carry the baby instead?

Am I understanding this correctly?

You plan to both pay £390 per month to cover mortgage costs and bills. Yet DP is named on the mortgage and you are not?

And previously mortgage costs and bills were covered by the lodger and you. DP contributed nothing? And profited from you?

His bills are £790 a month, he had a lodger paying £515 a month and when you moved in he charged you £300? So he made £25 a month profit from you moving in?

Is he fair on your other costs like food and meals out or do you end up carrying more of them as well?

I think being a parent is going to be one hell of a shock for you both. And I went back to work at 13 weeks pp.

OP it really is a massive red flag. I’d be very wary about this relationship and I’d get this promise of marriage locked down. You need security as you are now very vulnerable.

I had he exact same situation. Partner’s house, I was happy to pay rent. Not sure why as I wasn’t a lodger but you know, just thought I was being fair. We planned a child, my full time job was contract only so I wasn’t renewed. I kept paying rent on his mortgage, whilst I had no job as I was looking after the baby. We were due to get married. Then child had SN and I could no longer have the choice to go back to work. Partner then decided marriage wasn’t on, and treated me what I now realize was in a financially abusive manner. He got a free childminder enabling him to keep his job.

It is real warning sign.

If you were not pregnant this would be different. However you are, and it is a partnership. Imagine if you handed the baby over to him and went back to work instead. And asked him for rent. He’d have no house, you’d take over the mortgage and he’d be penniless.

[quote IceCreamSummer20]@SimonJT ha ha! Tell me how if you and your GF got pregnant and she had to stop work, and you still demanded rent, tell me which part exactly would make that woman a sponger?!

Or should the OPs partner give up work and carry the baby instead?[/quote]
Well my boyfriends not pregnant, so no worries there.

The OP hasn’t stopped working, she has a reduction in her earnings due to her role changing which should mean the proportion she pays changes. Just as when she is on maternity leave her proportion should change to reflect the change in her wages.

I read your post and lost the will to live with all the ins and outs of your finances. You're engaged and going to have a baby together. What's with the shared finances and the I pay him rent, how shall we split this, etc.

Joint account. Job done.

She’s taking the financial hit by having the child. Her partner is not putting her name on the mortgage. If he was, then it might be fair she paid a smaller contribution to her house too. However by keeping the house he is making her extremely financially vulnerable as he could kick her out at any time and he is taking advantage of the fact that he has the mortgage, when she is taking a huge leap of faith by having his child whilst not married.

It is not something that a partnership does - in any sense - one holds all the power and makes the other dependent.

@SimonJT it is HUGELY offensive to call any pregnant woman a sponger.

it is HUGELY offensive to call any pregnant woman a sponger.

It really isn’t, all adults have financial obligations, you can’t opt out of them because you are pregnant, just as you can’t if you’re disabled, male, female, old etc.

@GeorgiaGirl52 are you another one who relies entirely on someone else in order to live then? Just because I'm pregnant doesn't mean I want to sit on my arse and let someone else pay my way!

@MrsGrindah what security exactly? I wouldn't be left desolate if he left me (or worse!), it'd still have half the farmhouse a very good job. The same goes for him if the worst happened to me, we could both make it work and provide well for our family, albeit not as well as a couple. That may not be the case for you, but for us it is, so our priority is the house over the marriage. It makes sense for us.

@rvby is it though? So a man could beat you to within an inch of your life, but if he buys you something afterwards it's ok?! My point is that there are things a lot worse than being careful with money and actually I'm quite proud that he was able to bring himself up from nothing to owning 5 houses before turning 30! That said, he is quite tight and from the majority of comments it seems I'm right that's he's being tight in this case too and maybe I need to get him to rethink. You make a very good point about me expecting him to change though. I do feel a bit sorry for you though. You've clearly had a bad experience to make you think this way about people. I've known him 20 years and I'm confident he is not like this.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland I had considered and it may still be an option. But it would require a chunk of my savings to 'buy in' (savings I could use for the refurb instead) and I'd still be paying £390/month towards living here (I might have to call it something other than rent then too!). I might take you up on that bet though, we'd get married tomorrow if we didn't want the cost of that for the refurb instead, so with a million quid that issue is solved!

@chatterbugmegastar why would he? If we both go part time both our salaries are reduced. However, we both get more time to spend together as a family. I'm not sure what yu mean by young, that's relative surely? But I can assure you, I'm not stupid, if that's actually what you meant!

@roarfeckingroarr yes, I'm beginning to see that! Almost sorry I posted, but I have had some useful advice, so thank you!

@shartsi I will check that, but others in the same job have done it with no issues.

@IceCreamSummer20 so do you think I should live for free?!

@Supersimkin2 I'm sorry that happened to your friend, but that doesn't mean it'll happen to me. Even if that happened I won't have nothing, I'd still have half the farmhouse. He wouldn't have invested in that with me if he was planning to run off!

@Hardbackwriter I guess there are different ways to calculate a 'fair' proportion. At the time £300 was reasonable to us both. Well the baby won't get there alone and if I'm abroad and he wants to go to work he'll have no choice!

@modge other pilots have made it work and if it doesn't I can change our shared parental leave at 8 weeks notice and go back on maternity. That's exactly what we're doing and why I'm posting. I needed an outside opinion.

This is all bonkers.
Not least your expectation that you will bounce back completely physically unscathed by giving birth and won't feel in the slightest bit emotional about leaving your baby for days at a time at a very young age.
OP in the kindest way, you have no idea what is about to hit you. All these plans you've put in place (which don't take any emotions or physical recovery into consideration) could very easily go out the window when the baby is here; so what happens to the finances then?
You fiancé sounds really tight and you are barking to use savings to keep up payment plans that benefit him , not you.

If your partner is tight he should be able to work out that pooled money is more efficient than you having your money and he having his!

My husband and I have always pooled all of our money, and in balance its all pretty equal. At some stages I've earnt more, at others he has. I can't imagine one of us charging the other rent!

This set up is stopping you both from being as tax efficient as possible if nothing else, and as for mortgage decisions this way of thinking will potentially cost you dearly. Unless your partner has an unusual deal, or has not declared his propertiea as btl, he will be paying far higher interest on his mortgage than a domestic mortgage. But this mine and his is preventing you both from working together for the good of your family.

So you're having his child, will lose out on pay whilst on maternity and he wants to increase your rent?!
Not a good sign if I've understood this correctly.

So the lodger got two rooms for £515, but you got (I assume half a room, if you were sharing with him) for £300. I think the lodger got the better deal!

Seriously, though I know lots of people do have shared finances, but I can never get my head around why people don't want to share everything with their spouse. Has he acknowledged your loss of earnings from pregnancy? If he wants to charge you rent he should pay half of your loss of earnings.

I think your suggestion to pay half us fair and sensible. I personally couldn't be with someone as tight as this.

There are different ways to calculate what's fair but 'one person actively profits off the other' is a very unusual definition of fair indeed. Again, it just really worries me that you didn't say 'what the fuck are you on about, obviously I'm not going to pay for you to live in your house for free and then give you £25 as a little bonus?!' at that point. I also, by the way, think that given you describe the lodger as a friend it's pretty horrible how much he profited off them, too - it's not great to have your friend live in your house and then charge them considerably over half the mortgage and bills and I don't think it points to a nice, generous-spirited person.

I don’t think OP that you are quite grasping what people are trying to say. It’s not actually about the amount being paid or not paid but rather that you are creating a family with this man. So really you should both be all in, everything is now your families for the future you are creating, nobody is saying you shouldn’t contribute to bills but rather that you should just have one pot that everything goes in and out of, there will be times someone will be paying less (and most likely you as the woman carrying a child, having maternity leave, having to work part time in order to facilitate child care etc) but will be contributing in other ways - emotionally, mentally, caring for child, house work etc etc. If you can’t be all in with each other financially then you shouldn’t really be having a baby in my view!!

I couldn't follow that. But it sounds very transactional if you're engaged and expediting a baby.

*It is HUGELY offensive to call any pregnant woman a sponger.

It really isn’t, all adults have financial obligations, you can’t opt out of them because you are pregnant, just as you can’t if you’re disabled, male, female, old etc.*

Yup. Contributions should be adjusted according to income. If that changes; it changes. Pregnant ladies don't get a free pass automatically - they can still go to work. I did. And after the babies were born too.

If you think you can get upduffed as a passport to not paying, no questions asked ... well ...

OP please listen to the advice on this thread, there are women on here who have learned from bitter experience. This financial situation has red flags popping up everywhere. In my opinion you shouldn't be contributing rent/half the mortgage unless you are named on the property. Please get married before the baby arrives, you are in a precarious situation particularly taking into account your job.