Should I ask for contribution to cost - WWYD?

[bigdecisionstomake]

Our boiler has died and needs to be replaced. Cost is around £4000 as have decided to change from system boiler to combi.

DP and I live together in my house which I now own outright. I have two young adult DCs, one at Uni who is home for around 4 months of the year and the other who left school last year and is in his first job and currently living at home full time.

DC at Uni obviously doesn’t contribute financially to household while he is at home, working DC does contribute a small amount but I am putting that in a savings account for him as he is saving really hard for a house deposit and I want to be able to give him that money back towards costs/furniture etc...That is obviously my choice.

DP and I earn about the same, his salary is slightly higher but I take home a little more (maybe £250-£300 per month) as I choose to work quite a bit of overtime. I have a small pot of rainy day savings but not enough for the whole amount of the boiler so some will end up on a credit card until I can clear it. DP has similar savings possibly a little more.

I am quite independent financially and don’t like relying on anyone else for money but am aware that sometimes I end up out of pocket because of this. When DP moved in with me around 8 years ago he was originally only contributing a bit towards the food bill. Gradually over time his contribution has increased to 25% of all household costs such as fuel, council tax, water etc... plus a contribution towards food.

I am happy with this although it does sometimes cause problems because he essentially has more disposable income with me and would like more expensive holidays etc... than I can afford. If it is relevant, DP has his own home which he rents out. The rent covers his mortgage so he essentially has no running costs for that house but he has to save a little for repairs and new appliances etc....when needed.

So....to the main question. As it is my house should I pay the whole cost of the new boiler, or as we live together and will both be getting the benefit do I treat it as a running cost and ask DP for a 25% contribution.

YABU - pay for it yourself
YANBU - ask for a contribution

[Mmn654123]

@dontdisturbmenow

He hoodwinked her
Very nice if you to assume OP is weak and stupid. Or maybe this arrangement has suited her for 8 years,because she wanted to make sure he had no right to her house, but now wants him to pay when it is costing her.

What happens when the roof goes, will he be expected to pay half of that too? Where does it end?

You misunderstand.

I don’t think he should pay half the boiler. Or half the roof. So there is no line to cross.

He should simply give her half the additional income he generated into his own bank account as a result of living with her.

The phrasing of the opening post makes
clear Op thought the arrangement was fair. If that isn’t being hoodwinked I don’t know what is. He has let her struggle with the cost of holidays. And worry about boiler repairs.

She wasn’t stopping him claiming her assets for goodness sake. She was hoodwinked. Well and truly. Thank goodness she posted here.

If their relationship is good there won’t be a problem as they will likely marry or buy together so it’s all 50:50. If however he looks at this thread and doesn’t immediately apologise and make reparations she will know she’s living with a total chancer.

[Mmn654123]

@dontdisturbmenow

He hoodwinked her
Very nice if you to assume OP is weak and stupid. Or maybe this arrangement has suited her for 8 years,because she wanted to make sure he had no right to her house, but now wants him to pay when it is costing her.

What happens when the roof goes, will he be expected to pay half of that too? Where does it end?

You seem very determined to defend him. Have you done something similar??!

[dontdisturbmenow]

If their relationship is good there won’t be a problem as they will likely marry or buy together so it’s all 50:50
Who says that it's not OP who doesn't want to consider marriage because she doesn't want to risk losing half her property, which might be much bigger than his?

You seem very determined to defend him. Have you done something similar??!
I've been in a similar position yes. Moved with my then partner, but paid towards his mortgage, but that was under the clear expectation that we would be getting married shortly afterwards.

If my OH had told me that he expected me to pay rent to live in his property for the next 8 years because he didn't want me to ever make a claim on it, I certainly would have laughed at his face if asked to contribute towards his boiler.

Thankfully, he totally agreed with me and we were married the year after. Happily married for 11 years, still separate accounts, but we are sharing costs on things. He 'lost out' financially, but considers he's more than gained in other ways, and when we retire, it will be the other way around.

[Bibidy]

Tenants pay rent. Not just a share of the bills. Formalise it, put it in writing, do whatever, but please, this idea that a man paying a bit of rent to his partner means that he's then going to be able to take the house is ridiculous. Sign a tenancy agreement if that's the concern.

I'd love if this were true but in cases WITHOUT a tenancy agreement it is actually very possible that an ex-partner can claim a share on the property, even though they are not on the mortgage or the deeds.

I know of a case in my own circle where a woman bought a flat and lived in it with her partner and their child. He made 5 or 6 regular transfers of about £200 to her as rent before they split up. Granted the pair had a child in this case, but last year she was forced to sell her flat in order to pay the ex back £9k (I think it was around that figure) as he had hired legal representation and won in court. He claimed that she had bought the flat to be a shared home, despite him paying the bare minimum towards it and it all being in her name, and a judge ruled that she had to reimburse him for his initial contribution AND 'his share' of the appreciation of the property.

Now obviously I know most people wouldn't be dickish enough to do that to somebody, but it can happen.

So yeah, agree on getting something written up but people don't always think of that, and it can be awkward with a partner.

[PostcodeJack]

The OP is paying an agreed upon share of the outgoings (presumably to factor in that her children also live there (albeit part-time in one instance). This doesn't seem unreasonable and I would suggest that it would be unreasonable to expect the OP's partner to pay towards their "share". It's not unreasonable to possibly reassess the contribution as circumstances have changed in the intervening years with fewer in the household fulltime (but noting the addition of the adult child who is earning) but similarly, in this situation why is the adult child living at home not contributing more? (the OP is obviously free to keep that money for him towards a deposit, but the OP's partner should not need to subsidise that)

The OP's partner will be leaving his house to his brother. The OP will be leaving her house to her children. I'm not sure why there should be any expectation that the OP inherit her partner's house when he does not inherit hers. Similarly the suggestion that the OP is added to the deeds of her partner's property when she is unlikely to wish to add him to the deeds of hers seems a tad unfair (just to note, a lot of lenders won't have an additional person on the deeds but not on the mortgage so being added to the partner's deeds may also necessitate her being added to the mortgage which would make her much more financially vulnerable as well as linking her financially to her partner).

My OH and I live together. I own the house outright. My OH does not own a separate property. They contribute much, much less than I do to outgoings (utilities etc) not least because their income is considerably less than mine.

Any maintenance on my house (our home) is for me to bear. That includes the boiler that I recently replaced (for much less than the OP has been quoted!) . Similarly, I have the final decision as to said boiler or other works.

Any building or other works to the property are also paid for by me.

I do this to ensure that there is no way that OH can claim that they have contributed to the property. They will not inherit the house when I die and will lose their home. Similarly I could tell them to leave this evening and they would have no recourse and would need to leave.

I would resent the suggestion that I was hoodwinked into doing this or that I am weak and stupid because I maintain what is, and will remain, my asset

[rwalker]

Another one for more bit more of the bills off him . You have your house he has his nice and simple . The only extra cost for yourself is the bills which you need to get more off if
TBH for me the security of my own home is worth more then a few hundred pound rent

[buckeejit]

Get a new place & share it jointly would work but I'd tot up how much you could have gained from a lodger paying a fair amount all this time & show it to him. I doubt he'd be happy to hand over the many thousands he has saved from it.

Always protect your finances before his

[comingintomyown]

Yep agree totally unfair, in x years time he ends up with a house all paid for meanwhile you either won’t have or will have gone short over the years to pay off your mortgage. How has this not struck you in 8 years ?

[Mmn654123]

@dontdisturbmenow

If their relationship is good there won’t be a problem as they will likely marry or buy together so it’s all 50:50
Who says that it's not OP who doesn't want to consider marriage because she doesn't want to risk losing half her property, which might be much bigger than his?

You seem very determined to defend him. Have you done something similar??!
I've been in a similar position yes. Moved with my then partner, but paid towards his mortgage, but that was under the clear expectation that we would be getting married shortly afterwards.

If my OH had told me that he expected me to pay rent to live in his property for the next 8 years because he didn't want me to ever make a claim on it, I certainly would have laughed at his face if asked to contribute towards his boiler.

Thankfully, he totally agreed with me and we were married the year after. Happily married for 11 years, still separate accounts, but we are sharing costs on things. He 'lost out' financially, but considers he's more than gained in other ways, and when we retire, it will be the other way around.

So not a remotely similar situation. You didn’t have a property to rent out. Ops partner did.

[Mmn654123]

@PostcodeJack

The OP is paying an agreed upon share of the outgoings (presumably to factor in that her children also live there (albeit part-time in one instance). This doesn't seem unreasonable and I would suggest that it would be unreasonable to expect the OP's partner to pay towards their "share". It's not unreasonable to possibly reassess the contribution as circumstances have changed in the intervening years with fewer in the household fulltime (but noting the addition of the adult child who is earning) but similarly, in this situation why is the adult child living at home not contributing more? (the OP is obviously free to keep that money for him towards a deposit, but the OP's partner should not need to subsidise that)

The OP's partner will be leaving his house to his brother. The OP will be leaving her house to her children. I'm not sure why there should be any expectation that the OP inherit her partner's house when he does not inherit hers. Similarly the suggestion that the OP is added to the deeds of her partner's property when she is unlikely to wish to add him to the deeds of hers seems a tad unfair (just to note, a lot of lenders won't have an additional person on the deeds but not on the mortgage so being added to the partner's deeds may also necessitate her being added to the mortgage which would make her much more financially vulnerable as well as linking her financially to her partner).

My OH and I live together. I own the house outright. My OH does not own a separate property. They contribute much, much less than I do to outgoings (utilities etc) not least because their income is considerably less than mine.

Any maintenance on my house (our home) is for me to bear. That includes the boiler that I recently replaced (for much less than the OP has been quoted!) . Similarly, I have the final decision as to said boiler or other works.

Any building or other works to the property are also paid for by me.

I do this to ensure that there is no way that OH can claim that they have contributed to the property. They will not inherit the house when I die and will lose their home. Similarly I could tell them to leave this evening and they would have no recourse and would need to leave.

I would resent the suggestion that I was hoodwinked into doing this or that I am weak and stupid because I maintain what is, and will remain, my asset

It’s a different situation. You partner isn’t profiting from the income of his or her own property while living rent free in yours.

It’s not an issue to choose not to charge rent. It’s an issue for partner to not offer to share extra income as a result of letting their own property out.

[19lottie82]

To everyone that says he should be paying 50% of the bills, why should he be subsidising the OPs adult child? There are 3 FT workers living in the house, so a 3 way split is fair. If the OP wants to pay for her child, that’s up to her.

[Bibidy]

I am so surprised at these replies! The amount of times I've read on here that someone shouldn't be paying rent towards their partner's mortgage and yet most of these responses are the total opposite.

[Newmumatlast]

Personally I think your house, your boiler, you pay. Obviously he should pay 'rent' but I wouldn't expect as a live in partner to pay a share to everything like this unless I was also going to get a beneficial interest in the property. Either we share or we dont. If we share, I would want a beneficial interest too if that makes sense. As the home owner I would want a partner to contribute fairly in rent but for it to be clear they have no right to my home if we split so I probably wouldn't ask for contributions towards this sort of thing so they couldn't try and argue one later

[HerNameWasEliza]

I actually don't think he should contribute but then if he needs to replace the boiler in the house he is renting out, you should not contribute. However, he needs to up his general contribution to the household. 25% is not enough. He should really pay half of bills I think and should be paying 1/3 of the food when it is just the 3 of you there.

[SimonJT]

I would say while he has no legal stake to the property he shouldn’t be paying for upkeep.

[PostcodeJack]

Mmn654123 you could argue my partner is gaining more than the OP's since he has no mortgage to pay and no rent (here or anywhere else). Other than a small contribution to bills, his income is his to spend as he sees fit.

In terms of "extra income" (I believe the OP said that the rent covers the mortgage - not that there is excess profit) if that were to be the case that the OP should benefit from the "additional income" (and I don't see it as that) would she also be expected to stump up towards the mortgage when his house is empty (because surely that should work both ways)?

[Mmn654123]

@Bibidy

I am so surprised at these replies! The amount of times I've read on here that someone shouldn't be paying rent towards their partner's mortgage and yet most of these responses are the total opposite.

If they had no other property then yes that’s right.

But taking rent from a lodger while not sharing it and also living rent free is taking the xxxx

[Mmn654123]

@PostcodeJack

Mmn654123 you could argue my partner is gaining more than the OP's since he has no mortgage to pay and no rent (here or anywhere else). Other than a small contribution to bills, his income is his to spend as he sees fit.

In terms of "extra income" (I believe the OP said that the rent covers the mortgage - not that there is excess profit) if that were to be the case that the OP should benefit from the "additional income" (and I don't see it as that) would she also be expected to stump up towards the mortgage when his house is empty (because surely that should work both ways)?

Your partner isn’t building an asset at your expense. He is in a precarious position long term but that’s between you. If he’s sensible he is investing in something (shares, bonds, pension fund) if not property.

The ops partner was paying a mortgage and is still paying a mortgage. Living with her hasn’t changed that. He is investing in property. His salary funds that investment.

However he is also generating additional income in rent. That is not paying the mortgage. His salary is doing that just as it did before he moved in with op.

So the rental income less tax and agents fees is new income. That is the income he should be splitting with the op.

Otherwise he is profiting from living with her.

Fairness dictates he should share that.

Your partner, if a decent sort, will be making sure you benefit financially by at least half what he is saving in rent. Either by investing it in your name or by treating you to holidays or replacement appliances or whatever works for you. Surely any decent person does that?!

If the ops partners tenant moves out and there is a gap in income then he wouldn’t pay op that month.

[Pemba]

You have been together for 8 years which is quite a long time, I would have expected there to be more sharing and blending of finances by now.

You say that you arrived at 25% for him to pay towards bills and food, based on there being 'four adults' but they weren't adults then were they? If your younger DC only left school a year ago, they must be about 19? So they would have been only 11 when your DP moved in.

So this guy moves in with a single mother, gets to live rent free, and yet can't even stump up 50% of bills and food? His tenants are paying off his mortgage for him on his own property. He knows you struggle to afford things like holidays and he can't even treat you once in while? What a prince.

I know some will jump in and say 'why should he pay for her kids' food, they're not his kids' but that's bullshit IMO. It takes a special kind of meanmindedness for a person with good wages and their own assets to begrudge paying for some food etc for the DCs of his partner whom he supposedly loves. Especially when he is getting such a sweet deal by living rent free. Has he ever acted in a fatherly way towards them at all, OP?

I am very sorry but I think he has taken advantage of you and your family.

[londonscalling]

If you were to split up (sorry) would he be entitled to half the house? If so, let him pay for half the boiler!

[wombat1a]

You need to formalise a rental agreement with him, one which covers whatever house expenses you think are reasonable, factor in food, soap, shampoo washing powder, future replacement of white goods such as washing machine, oven at a rate of perhaps one every 2 yrs.

If you split up and and he has paid for 1/2 of the your new boiler it could be problematic if he decided to be a t**t and want his half later. Just trying it on would be hassle enough. With a rental agreement you should all know where you stand if it goes all wrong later.

[dontdisturbmenow]

So not a remotely similar situation. You didn’t have a property to rent out. Ops partner did
I did have a property to rent out, still is.

So the rental income less tax and agents fees is new income. That is the income he should be splitting with the op
This would be reasonable, but taking every cost into account. Rental properties are more costly in terms of refurbishment and decoration. In all likelihood, assuming he is eating a decent salary, by the time he has paid his mortgage, including capital, and all fees, he is unlikely to have much less to share. This is because rental properties are now taxed much higher, so unless not working or in very low income, the monty income made from one property is minimal if at all. He could even be in the negative each month.

You need to formalise a rental agreement with him
You can't have a legal rental agreement with a partner you share your life with.

The lack of knowledge of the business of renting a property on this thread is quite astonishing.

It takes a special kind of meanmindedness for a person with good wages and their own assets to begrudge paying for some food etc for the DCs of his partner whom he supposedly loves
It takes quite a self centered person who after 8 years of cohabitation doesn't want to share assets from the person they supposedly love.

[Mmn654123]

@dontdisturbmenow

So not a remotely similar situation. You didn’t have a property to rent out. Ops partner did
I did have a property to rent out, still is.

So the rental income less tax and agents fees is new income. That is the income he should be splitting with the op
This would be reasonable, but taking every cost into account. Rental properties are more costly in terms of refurbishment and decoration. In all likelihood, assuming he is eating a decent salary, by the time he has paid his mortgage, including capital, and all fees, he is unlikely to have much less to share. This is because rental properties are now taxed much higher, so unless not working or in very low income, the monty income made from one property is minimal if at all. He could even be in the negative each month.

You need to formalise a rental agreement with him
You can't have a legal rental agreement with a partner you share your life with.

The lack of knowledge of the business of renting a property on this thread is quite astonishing.

It takes a special kind of meanmindedness for a person with good wages and their own assets to begrudge paying for some food etc for the DCs of his partner whom he supposedly loves
It takes quite a self centered person who after 8 years of cohabitation doesn't want to share assets from the person they supposedly love.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

You moved in with your partner on a clear trajectory to marry and then you married. He owns half your house. You own half his. That’s what marriage does. So again, not remotely similar. You also had children, limiting your earning potential. And as I have said over and over and over again - the mortgage payment on the rental property doesn’t come into the equation because ops partner was paying that from his salary and not from the rental income before they met. It may have increased a bit but he has a large excess income because of the rental income. Because now he has his salary plus his rental income coming in and he is still just paying out one mortgage.

Your partner was planning to marry you so of course he didn’t care - as soon as you married you co-own both properties.

[S00LA]

@Pemba

You have been together for 8 years which is quite a long time, I would have expected there to be more sharing and blending of finances by now.

You say that you arrived at 25% for him to pay towards bills and food, based on there being 'four adults' but they weren't adults then were they? If your younger DC only left school a year ago, they must be about 19? So they would have been only 11 when your DP moved in.

So this guy moves in with a single mother, gets to live rent free, and yet can't even stump up 50% of bills and food? His tenants are paying off his mortgage for him on his own property. He knows you struggle to afford things like holidays and he can't even treat you once in while? What a prince.

I know some will jump in and say 'why should he pay for her kids' food, they're not his kids' but that's bullshit IMO. It takes a special kind of meanmindedness for a person with good wages and their own assets to begrudge paying for some food etc for the DCs of his partner whom he supposedly loves. Especially when he is getting such a sweet deal by living rent free. Has he ever acted in a fatherly way towards them at all, OP?

I am very sorry but I think he has taken advantage of you and your family.

Excellent post

[Shedbuilder]

Yup, Pemba is absolutely right. Does he talk about your future together, OP? About what you'll do when the children have flown? About cashing in on your properties and buying together and formalising your relationship? Or is it all a bit vague?

Is he by any chance one of those men who are planning to retire at 50 or 55 and has found a way to make that possible? There's a bit of a movement around living very cheaply, saving a lot and being able to step out of work and the system as early as possible.

It strikes me that he's done very well to find an independent woman with her own income who doesn't expect him to pay towards family life. He doesn't pay an allowance for rent, just the minimum for council tax, utilities and food, so he's managed to cut his basic costs to the bone. Think how much more he'd be paying each month if he was renting a room in a shared house. So he has minimal outgoings but he works and receives rent from his tenant, enabling him to pay off his mortgage a bit quicker and stash plenty away investments and his pension fund. Meanwhile you are struggling, despite no mortgage, to find £4,000 for a boiler. That's not what a good relationship looks like.