Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

"Maybe you should be grateful I let you live here for free"

293 replies

DefinitelyDone · 01/05/2021 00:34

A similar thread got me thinking about my situation with OH. After what he said to me the other day I was in no doubt that he was the one being unreasonable, and I think I’m ready to end things with him over it but some perspective would be good.

We were having a discussion/disagreement over getting our children a small pet, and then he said:

“Maybe you should be grateful that I let you live here for free”

This is long so TLDR: He said I ought to be grateful for living in his house for free. I’ve contributed £15k to ‘his house;’ despite that being most of my saving and me having a mostly low income. And have done 90% of the housework and childcare for 14 years. AIBU for thinking I shouldn’t be expected to pay him?

We aren't married but have been together for 14 years and have three children, 12, eight and three.
He bought our house a few years ago but we used to rent, the house is in his name only. I did contribute £10k towards an extension and have spent at least another 5K on things such as furniture and carpets Etc. I’ve also decorated 6 of the rooms alone if that counts for anything.

I have never paid him rent. We lived together for two years before having our first child and I never paid rent then either, though wasn’t working at the time. He’s never asked for money and I’ve always bought my own things/paid my own bills and never asked for money from him.

While being together my finances have ranged from having no income to receiving £40 CTC per month, up to receiving a higher amount of CTC when he went self employed, to me earning anywhere from £100 -£1000 per week over the past few years but this has now reduced back down again over the past few months and doesn’t look to be increasing again. I’m also very unlikely to be receiving CTC next year as his income has increased again.

My point is that my financial situation is changeable but other than the past few years I’ve had a pretty low income.

He always paid the rent before he bought the house, but there is no mortgage now, he pays for most of the food and household bills, but nothing that is just mine such as my phone bill Etc.

I pay for everything for the children and always have, even when I had hardly any money when our first was born, I bought all her clothes and baby things second hand.
I buy all of their clothes, their school uniforms, activities, pay for school trips and days out, every birthday and Christmas I have bought 90% of their gifts.
I do pretty much all of the housework and childcare. He is better with our three year old than he ever was with the other two and does tend to his evening (not middle of the night) awakenings which he never did with the others. Basically, he’s just being a father there, sort of, but this was pretty amazing when he started that as I was completely on my own with the very frequent evening and night awakenings with my first two.
He never, ever gets up early to help with the children. He never, ever lets me sleep in in the mornings. He rarely gets up for work before 10am and is usually home by 5pm, often earlier.
There was a period of about a month when our second was a baby and went through a period of wanting to sleep in when it was time to get up to get my first to nursery. After much nagging he started taking our first to nursery so I could sleep in a little and let the baby sleep in too but this didn’t last long and he hasn’t helped in the morning since. Eight years since.
He occasionally collects them from school but I do all the school related things- homework, spelling, reading Etc, I did all of the home learning, even during the first lock down when he had no work. I battled a very reluctant seven year old with a very demanding toddler while he hid in his ‘office’ playing games or whatever.
I have always done pretty much all of the housework, until our three year old was born I used to do his laundry too, now he sorts his own clothes out, I do pretty much all of the cooking, cleaning, tidying.

Things got very bad during lockdown and I pretty much stopped everything. He had no excuse of being
busy with work and witnessing how he watched me fall apart and didn’t step in to help really hit home how things were, so I did the minimal laundry and pretty much stopped cooking and cleaning. The rest of the day was home schooling. He started to occasionally wash towels and load/unload the dishwasher a few times. He’s even mopped the kitchen floor and cleaned a bathroom or two a couple of times. Amazing. I wish I wasn’t joking.

So bearing in mind all I do and have done, is it unreasonable of me to think that actually, I shouldn’t have to pay him a penny to live here? I shouldn’t be grateful for living here for free like it’s an amazing kindness from him, and that actually, he’s the unreasonable asshole here and should be grateful for everything I do. It’s really shown me how he feels towards me; I’m just a lodger that doesn’t contribute in any way.

I realise all this is grounds to LTB and after several similar threads and being told to, I think I’m finally ready to call it a day, but right now I want to focus on who’s being unreasonable here and if I’m deluded.

OP posts:
minou123 · 02/05/2021 09:47

@Icantthinkofausername1

You do have rights. You have children! There is something called the schedule one children act and there is also something called Trusts of Land. Yes they can be expensive but worth exploring. Meet with a good solicitor, see where you stand.
wewereliars has been very kind in this thread and explained how the Trust of Land act works.

Unless the OP has lots of evidence and has a lot of money, her chances are nil.

minou123 · 02/05/2021 09:55

I understand where you're coming from RUOKHon.

I just think there is so much information now, from the Internet, from friends and family, that "I didn't know this could happen" can't really work anymore.

I think its more of a case of "That will never happen to me!. He loves me and the children, he'll never leave me without money and a home"

RUOKHon · 02/05/2021 10:39

I don’t know if that’s true. There are so many threads on here about exactly this issue that would suggest that plenty of people still have no idea.

I also think this is especially true retrospectively. Where a woman moved into her partner’s home with her kids 30 years ago and has been living there ever since only realising how vulnerable she is when he dies.

Tigertiger78 · 02/05/2021 10:59

I think when you love and trust someone you don’t see it going wrong. Mn has definitely educated me. I am the sole earner and pay the mortgage but am not on the deeds. We are married though. It’s not something I really thought about much. You just crack on with life and juggling it all. I do think more education is needed but who’s responsible for that education? Not sure it lies with schools.

Newestname001 · 02/05/2021 11:07

@Tigertiger78

I am the sole earner and pay the mortgage but am not on the deeds.

So will you now change that, and put your name in the Deeds?

Tigertiger78 · 02/05/2021 11:12

We are selling so the next place we buy most certainly! It was his place I moved into. He is sahp

wewereliars · 02/05/2021 11:13

I think a lot of people do not realise how deeply misogyntistic a lot of the law can be.

It was originaly developed to protect rich men's wealth, in this and most countries, written by wealthy men for wealthy men.

Over the last 75 years or so there have been important developments in women's and minorities' favour, but with the almost destruction of legal aid we are hurtling backwards.
My biggest shock as a law sudent was the 1975 criminal case re Morgan. At that time, rape within marriage did not exist, this didn't change until 1991 or thereabouts, as the law was clear that " the woman has consented to sex on marriage, and that consent cannot be withdrawn" or words to that effect. The case was, from memory, about whether assault had been committed by the husband, who without the wife's knowledge of what was going on,had brought 2 or 3 mates back from the pub. He told them that she liked rough sex, told them to force her and that the more she protested the more she was enjoying it. The question for the court was, as the husband could not be guilty of rape,could he be guilty of conspiracy to rape. Absolutely gut wrenching.

caringcarer · 02/05/2021 11:46

There is nothing there for you now. You are already a single parent in all but name. You need to leave and take furniture you paid for. You could ask him to repay £10k you paid on extension but he might refuse. Go and see a solicitor. Take any proof of his earnings or bank details you can.You will be able to claim child maintenance from him.

Lineofconcepcion · 02/05/2021 11:49

[quote Unreasonabubble]@Hont1986 - you are missing the point. She is not married to her DP. She has NO rights and he has no obligations towards her.[/quote]
Op has put money into the property by paying for an extension therefore she has an equitable interest in the property and so does have property rights at least equal to the amount she has contributed.

People should not post stuff that is untrue because other people may read it and believe them . . .

Barbie222 · 02/05/2021 11:50

Op has put money into the property by paying for an extension therefore she has an equitable interest in the property and so does have property rights at least equal to the amount she has contributed.

As has been explained, it's on her to prove that, and she doesn't have a good enough paper trail.

RUOKHon · 02/05/2021 11:52

I think a lot of people do not realise how deeply misogyntistic a lot of the law can be.
It was originaly developed to protect rich men's wealth, in this and most countries, written by wealthy men for wealthy men

100% agree. You can see it time and time again. In the family courts where women are made to hand over their children to their abusers or face legal consequences. In the sentencing of men who have ‘snapped’ and murdered their ‘nagging’ female partners, or who in the cases of men who are only convicted of manslaughter because the woman liked ‘rough sex’ and she was therefore ‘complicit’ in her own death.

And in property law too, where a man who is a home owner can promise a woman marriage - never having to fulfil that promise - in order to persuade her to bear and nurture his children, damage her earning potential in the process and yet have absolutely no claim on any of the assets she’s helped him appreciate during their partnership.

In each example, look at in whose interest does the law work? Who benefits?

RUOKHon · 02/05/2021 11:55

I studied law. However it was 20 years ago and I never went on to practice - I went into a different industry in the end. But some cases do stick with you, like Morgan.

TatianaBis · 02/05/2021 12:47

Absolutely agree about the law being patriarchal.

All the more reason for women to take responsibility for their own lives and financial outcomes in a society that is not legally structured to their benefit.

Lineofconcepcion · 02/05/2021 13:27

@Barbie222

Op has put money into the property by paying for an extension therefore she has an equitable interest in the property and so does have property rights at least equal to the amount she has contributed.

As has been explained, it's on her to prove that, and she doesn't have a good enough paper trail.

There is a witness who can give oral and written evidence.
Wastedusername · 02/05/2021 13:39

@Unreasonabubble

Why don't women just bloody well get married before they have children? I must have been so old fashioned. I "dated" my husband for 9 years before he proposed. I did tell him "no marriage, no children". It took us 2 years after Marriage to conceive.

Why do women just not know that they have no rights if they are not married? You would think in this day and age, they are more clued up than they are.

Where are women's brains?

I hate these harsh comments.

The answer is because most women wouldn't treat their partner like trash like that. So they just can't imagine that someone they have been with, enabled their career, given a great and easy life to through their labour as SAHM, and had children with, would treat them with such contempt and as if they are nothing, by doing them over so that they live in poverty for the rest of their life.

Because they believe their partner loves and cares for them and is a decent human being and just don't believe that he could be such a bastard at any time in the future.

They just can't imagine that someone who loves them and is a good person would treat them with such manifest unjustice.

It is quite hard to get your head around someone doing something so contemptible. And when they get together they probably don't know anyone this has happened to.

Being treated like that is just beyond their realm of experience.

KizzyMoo · 02/05/2021 13:41

Why have you contributed £15,000 towards your bfs house that you have no right over. Was that a gift to him? You are generous op.

MorrisZapp · 02/05/2021 13:42

Please don't add a pet, small or large, to this. Stop chucking good energy after bad.

Wastedusername · 02/05/2021 13:42

My biggest shock as a law sudent was the 1975 criminal case re Morgan. At that time, rape within marriage did not exist, this didn't change until 1991 or thereabouts, as the law was clear that " the woman has consented to sex on marriage, and that consent cannot be withdrawn" or words to that effect. The case was, from memory, about whether assault had been committed by the husband, who without the wife's knowledge of what was going on,had brought 2 or 3 mates back from the pub. He told them that she liked rough sex, told them to force her and that the more she protested the more she was enjoying it. The question for the court was, as the husband could not be guilty of rape,could he be guilty of conspiracy to rape. Absolutely gut wrenching

Jesus H Christ.

KizzyMoo · 02/05/2021 13:47

I had an ex live with me for a number of years, we didn't have kids together but I'd have been fuming if when he left he thought he had a share of my house.

wewereliars · 02/05/2021 13:58

Lineofconcepcion In criminal law, there is a defence of automatism, which means acts are committed unconsciously and is a complete defence. Quite a number of charged people on remand spend a lot of time in the prison library, and some develop an interest in the law. If they come across this potential defence think they have found the holy grail. But without solid medical evidence, of a neurological or similar disorder that defence is a total non starter. See the comparison?

MorrisZapp · 02/05/2021 15:09

@RUOKHon

*I think a lot of people do not realise how deeply misogyntistic a lot of the law can be. It was originaly developed to protect rich men's wealth, in this and most countries, written by wealthy men for wealthy men*

100% agree. You can see it time and time again. In the family courts where women are made to hand over their children to their abusers or face legal consequences. In the sentencing of men who have ‘snapped’ and murdered their ‘nagging’ female partners, or who in the cases of men who are only convicted of manslaughter because the woman liked ‘rough sex’ and she was therefore ‘complicit’ in her own death.

And in property law too, where a man who is a home owner can promise a woman marriage - never having to fulfil that promise - in order to persuade her to bear and nurture his children, damage her earning potential in the process and yet have absolutely no claim on any of the assets she’s helped him appreciate during their partnership.

In each example, look at in whose interest does the law work? Who benefits?

Anecdotally, in every case I know, it is women who persuade their partners that its time to start a family, and to add to that family. And women who are keen to give up work to stay at home with their kids.

I'm not saying no man ever persuaded his partner to have a baby or stop working, but it hadn't happened in my circle of acquaintance.

I do think women are conditioned to think 'baby first, think later' and its become the standard line on here. Even the poor op here who is having a horrible time is considering adding a pet.

Wizzbangfizz · 02/05/2021 15:20

This man has utterly screwed you over OP.

JackieWeaverHandforthCouncil · 02/05/2021 15:43

It’s pointless adding to what everyone else is saying but I will anyway. You are not in a good situation which you knew anyway. Financially you’re fucked currently. You have no rights.

Your best bet is to find a full time job and put your youngest in nursery. After a year or so of solid working you may qualify for a 95% mortgage as a first time buyer. Don’t walk out now, don’t tell him you’re planing to either just initiate plans to pivot your position.

And please don’t add another dependent into the mix. Can’t believe that was even on the cards in such a relationship where you said you knew he was useless since the birth of child number 1.

Other women of Mumsnet please let this be a warning to you. None of this ‘it makes sense’ to jack in my job ever really makes sense for the woman in the long term.

You’ll be ok in the long run OP. You have working years ahead of you so you can turn it around but you’ll be starting from scratch.

RUOKHon · 02/05/2021 15:45

Anecdotally, in every case I know, it is women who persuade their partners that its time to start a family, and to add to that family. And women who are keen to give up work to stay at home with their kids

I don’t see why that should have any bearing on whether or not those men then go on to treat their partners like shit.

SelkieFly · 02/05/2021 15:47

@Unreasonabubble

You have no rights. You need to get married OR you walk away now.
He won't marry you and you'd be mad to want to marry such an arsehole.

I'd leave him and leave the kids and leave him with such an immediate childcare problem that he reimburses you the money you put in to the house.

You need that for your own place. He has not ''allowed you to live in his house for free''. He has robbed you of security and he has robbed you of peace of mind and you have no rights to anything, no nest of your own to feather.

You cannot afford to prioritise him, or even your dc at the moment.

Leave him to deal with it all.