DPs house and shared finances

[TheFatDuck]

I need some advice on what to do about my DP’s mortgage and how we share our finances.

DP and I have been together around 5 years. We have plans to marry and have DC etc.

Before we got together, DP bought a house with a sizeable deposit. When I moved in around 4 years ago, I was earning significantly less than DP. At that time, it was decided that we would pay equal proportions from our respective salaries to cover the mortgage and bills. It was decided DP would remain on the mortgage and I would not be added. As my proportion was so minimal, I was happy with this.

At that time, I said to DP that should I start paying significantly more towards the mortgage (say 50% plus if my salary were to increase) I would want something to show for it if we were to split up. I was concerned that should I pay 50% of the mortgage for a substantial period and we were to break up, I would have nothing to show for the money I put in and that I would essentially be paying off DPs mortgage. This did not go down well with DP at the time.

DP and I are now earning near enough identical salaries and I am wondering what is now fair in terms of finances and what we pay. I am of course happy to split bills 50:50 but would be uncomfortable splitting the mortgage 50:50 as I would not want us to break up and for me to end up with nothing.

I proposed that DPs deposit and mortgage contributions up to now could be ‘ring fenced’ some how with the remainder of the mortgage being split between us with me being put on the mortgage (although I am not sure how this would work in practice). DP thinks that I shouldn’t get the benefit of this however as I did not put in any money for a deposit in the first place so does not want to do this. I think DP thinks I am being a bit grabby. Am I?

Am I being unreasonable in wanting some sort of protection for myself? What is the fairest thing to do here for both parties?

Ultimately I am happy to pay some sort of ‘rent’ to DP if it is nominal but don’t want to pay a huge chunk (which DP would put towards the mortgage) if I end up with nothing if we break up.

Has anyone been in a similar situation and can offer any advice?

Thank you

I’d just refuse to pay for the mortgage, pay for bills instead while saving up a decent amount every month for your own mortgage? That way you could always have that safety net or use it to buy your own property then rent it out?

If you were not together you’d be renting alone I assume so I think it’s reasonable to take the view that you should pay him rent.

However after 5 years your conversations about marriage and children should be more concrete in my opinion.

The wider issue to me is his unwillingness to discuss the options. There are several possible solutions, one of which should be reasonable. For example in the even of a split you could get back your contributions plus a proportional increase of the value.

Do not even countenance children until marriage.

Tbh I’d push a bit to see if you agree regarding marriage timelines.

If you pay towards repairs/maintenance/council tax, you clean the place etc, you could surely get on the mortgage? If you get married, will he still refuse? Or is he refusing to marry because that entitles you to the house in part?

Coco can you point me to the part of my post that is nonsense? I've not said that couples shouldn't discuss money frankly. Particularly when they have DC from previous relationships to protect. But once you get into splitting finances to the nth degree, picking over what a landlord would charge for a room rental in the area and stressing that a person you are planning to marry and build a life with might gain something from you, it doesn't feel like love, more like business. To me anyway.

Peculiar op. I had owned a property for 10 years when dh and I got married. I met him two years before that. When got married we had a prenup. My equity at that point was ringfenced and he was entitled to a share of any capital gain after that point. He kept his own rented property until about a month before the wedding although spent 99.9% of his time at mine. That was his choice and he was clear he had no call on my capital.

Presumably your quality of life has been better over the last five years than otherwise?

@MrsHuntGeneNotJeremyObviously

Coco can you point me to the part of my post that is nonsense? I've not said that couples shouldn't discuss money frankly. Particularly when they have DC from previous relationships to protect. But once you get into splitting finances to the nth degree, picking over what a landlord would charge for a room rental in the area and stressing that a person you are planning to marry and build a life with might gain something from you, it doesn't feel like love, more like business. To me anyway.

That’s the bit that I think is nonsense though! @MrsHuntGeneNotJeremyObviously

I don’t see that looking at financial detail kills the love. How can you make good and fair decisions, without detail? Love to me includes treating your partner with respect, fairness and honesty. These financials discussions are part of that.

I pay half the bills but not the mortgage as don't have rights on the house (actually when my own house sells I will pay off the mortgage and we'll own 50/50 outright) he's unreasonable to expect you to pay towards his mortgage, ring fencing what he's paid so far then 50/50 from now on is the right this to do

Can you save up deposit and buy a property in your name? Pay less to his house until you have your own. Rent yours out and then go back to paying half for his property. If you get married or split then you both have assets regardless

Hmm in my opinion if your DP isn't willing to do the ring-fencing idea then don't pay anything towards the mortgage. Just pay your share of the bills. You aren't a lodger who is required to pay rent and you aren't being treated like an equal partner.

Put your "rent/mortage" money in a savings account and use it for a joint deposit in the future or to set you up on your own if the relationship doesn't progress.

I'm with your partner. He's subsidised you for years (he didn't have to) and now you want equity in his property.

If you now earn equal amounts of money, the fairest thing to do is probably to split all bills 50:50 including the interest element of his mortgage, but not the capital element.

Think about it - in an interest-only mortgage, you're effectively paying interest just to stay in the property, but you're not getting any equity in it. It's the closest equivalent to rent you can calculate in this situation.

Your 50% of the capital repayment that you're not paying can go into your own special savings account, for you to build up something while he builds up equity in his home.

On another note - he definitely wants to get married and have children? If it's been 5 years and he doesn't want you on his mortgage, it doesn't sound like he's in it for the long haul. Is getting married and having children a dealbreaker for you?

Hmm well if you were renting privately you’d have to pay more probably and you end up with nothing at the end of that anyway.. he put the deposit down - you’ve never had to save the deposit so you have it easy tbh

It worries me how many people are saying this - know your rights!!
When you rent a property, you enter into a legal contract, and that gives you rights and protections as a renter. Your landlord cannot throw you out on a whim. If OP pays their DP market rent, they do not have those protections, and could be kicked out whenever he wanted. Therefore, it is not worth market rent of any kind, unless he’s willing to give her a proper tenancy agreement, which I highly doubt he would.

OP, I’d suggest you pay half the bills, but nothing towards the mortgage. Instead, save that money for a deposit on your own place. And whatever you do, don’t have children with him before marriage (assuming you’re female).

@Naunet

Hmm well if you were renting privately you’d have to pay more probably and you end up with nothing at the end of that anyway.. he put the deposit down - you’ve never had to save the deposit so you have it easy tbh

It worries me how many people are saying this - know your rights!!
When you rent a property, you enter into a legal contract, and that gives you rights and protections as a renter. Your landlord cannot throw you out on a whim. If OP pays their DP market rent, they do not have those protections, and could be kicked out whenever he wanted. Therefore, it is not worth market rent of any kind, unless he’s willing to give her a proper tenancy agreement, which I highly doubt he would.

OP, I’d suggest you pay half the bills, but nothing towards the mortgage. Instead, save that money for a deposit on your own place. And whatever you do, don’t have children with him before marriage (assuming you’re female).

I was just thinking this. If the relationship ends OP is homeless

I don’t understand how it would be fair for OP to live entirely rent free as some posters are suggesting and only pay half of the bills. If OP is a functional adult with a decent salary, why shouldn’t she be expected to pay some rent?

Otherwise she is living entirely rent free while her partner pays for the roof over her head. I can see how some people think that situation would mean they were more equal partners. It does exactly the opposite of that!

Mrs hunt I agree.

With second marriages however I can understand more caution, children's inheritance involved, blended families etc.

But unfortunately, the cold business side of love doesn't take into account so many other human sides to things..

It's a conduit for living it should never be a barrier..

Mails, the flip side is ops partner has massive help with his living expenses and mortgage.. Whilst op doesn't really gain security.. She's funding his security and could leave the relationship with zero where as he will be considerably better off?

If you love someone don't you want them to have that security?

• naunet, spot on and it takes a hell of a time and very carful legal process to evict someone..

Op could suggest however if she pays him rent that they do sign a formal Tennant agreement so he is clear on her rights?

I don’t understand how it would be fair for OP to live entirely rent free as some posters are suggesting and only pay half of the bills. If OP is a functional adult with a decent salary, why shouldn’t she be expected to pay some rent?

Because it’s not rent. For rent you get legal protections, which he is not going to provide her with. I understand your point though, and I think a very small token payment would be ok, but not rent. OP needs that money to secure herself in case he decides to kick her out with no notice.

I would sit down with DP and properly discuss your future. When will you be getting married, when you plan to have children, when will you return to work, how will chores be split etc. DP sounds ungenerous and as someone said above, has the advantages of your contribution whilst leaving you with no security. I can imagine as your lives become more intertwined, these differences could leave in you in an even more vulnerable position.

For rent you get legal protections, which he is not going to provide her with. I understand your point though, and I think a very small token payment would be ok, but not rent. OP needs that money to secure herself in case he decides to kick her out with no notice.

Suppose it would cost you £1000 to "rent" with no protections, but for a higher amount, you could have those protections you talk about. How much extra would you pay? Would you be willing to pay £2000? Because if those protections aren't worth at least half, in your eyes, then your argument for paying virtually nothing doesn't stand up.

At a wild guess, I reckon those protections are worth maybe 5% to 10% of the rental value. To withhold 90% of the rent because of a 10% reduction in what you get seems excessive to me.

From a moral and ethical pov.. He has the best lodger ever.. He can kick her out whenever he chooses.. She has no rights but.. He gets billed paid and mortgage paid.

Is this ethically correct? He does have to pay these bills whether she is there or not? And I bet she contributed to usual chores..

Suppose it would cost you £1000 to "rent" with no protections, but for a higher amount, you could have those protections you talk about. How much extra would you pay? Would you be willing to pay £2000? Because if those protections aren't worth at least half, in your eyes, then your argument for paying virtually nothing doesn't stand up

At a wild guess, I reckon those protections are worth maybe 5% to 10% of the rental value. To withhold 90% of the rent because of a 10% reduction in what you get seems excessive to me

That’s not how it works though! There is no option to opt out of the law and pay a lesser rent, the law is there because it provides necessary protection to renters, protections that OP would not be getting, therefore, you can not even call it rent.

And even if you think full market rate is fair, then it should be at the rate of renting a room in a landlords house to reflect the situation, which wouldn’t be much anyway.

I think there needs to be a clear distinction, is he your landlord, or not? If yes, then you pay rent (equal to that of a shared house, or renting a room in the landlords house), he gives you a professional contract, you pay nothing towards replacements, repairs and decorating.

If not, then you pay no, or minimal “rent”, you do help towards the cost of replacement goods etc, and he keeps all his rights to the property.

What about general cleaning? When I was a lodger I did my own room and cleaner as I went but general cleaning was done by proper cleaner paid for by landlord.
I don't think op should be hoovering hallways or cleaning the bathroom?