Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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:
DaphneDuBois · 02/05/2021 16:03

All that would be a deal breaker for me. It’s shows exactly how little he thinks of you if, after that massive list of things you’ve contributed, he’s suggesting you somehow owe him gratitude for a place to live. ‘Let you’?! Arrogant man.

neilmomareglas · 02/05/2021 16:12

wewereliars
I had never heard of the Morgan case.
Absolutely horrific.
How long did the rapists serve ?
There were children in the house, she called out for their help.
What did the RAF do ?
The rapists all worked for the RAF.

wewereliars · 02/05/2021 16:28

I didn't look the case up before I quoted from it, but you can google it and it will pop up no doubt.

I was in Law School over 20 years ago so the details are forgotten but the broad facts stuck with me. The friends were convicted of rape on appeal. They had defended it on the basis that they believed she was consenting because of what he told them. I think the teaching point was about mens rea and actus reus, ie plan and action, both of which are needed to prove a crime. The husband planned the offence, but no offence by him as no actus reus because there was no offence of a man raping his wife, then. Or for a further 25 years ! That poor woman

wewereliars · 02/05/2021 16:29

Sorry that was to neilmomareglas

wewereliars · 02/05/2021 16:33

I hadn't realised there were children in the house. Beyond horrific, like a horror film

ChristmasAlone · 02/05/2021 16:40

Was it a serious comment or a joke. Would he actually expect you to pay rent? It's something I would jokingly say to DP but we have the kind of relationship. I think if I was in you OH position I would expect you to do the majority of things round the house if you haven't worked for 16 years and didn't pay bills/rent etc. Do you plan to get a job when the youngest goes to nursery full time?

Lineofconcepcion · 02/05/2021 22:21

@wewereliars

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?
I've been a solicitor for 12 years and success in this area is often entirely dependent upon witness statements as to what was agreed, when, and how, as I'm sure you know.
wewereliars · 02/05/2021 22:41

There's no often about it, this is a rarely used area of law. The OP can make all the witness statement she wants, but if there is no contemperaneous record, which shows the parties' intentions at the time the OP acted to her detriment any claim is highly unlikely to succeed. Unless her partner also signs a statement that he wanted her to have a share of the property. In which case she's home free.

RUOKHon · 02/05/2021 23:05

Also, isn’t it quite an expensive remedy to seek? Like, you can’t just fill out some forms down the CAB. It would cost thousands in solicitors fees it doesn’t sound like the op has.

Lineofconcepcion · 03/05/2021 00:18

@wewereliars

There's no often about it, this is a rarely used area of law. The OP can make all the witness statement she wants, but if there is no contemperaneous record, which shows the parties' intentions at the time the OP acted to her detriment any claim is highly unlikely to succeed. Unless her partner also signs a statement that he wanted her to have a share of the property. In which case she's home free.
And as you know the majority of cases are settled well before they reach the application stage.
Lineofconcepcion · 03/05/2021 00:21

@wewereliars

I didn't look the case up before I quoted from it, but you can google it and it will pop up no doubt.

I was in Law School over 20 years ago so the details are forgotten but the broad facts stuck with me. The friends were convicted of rape on appeal. They had defended it on the basis that they believed she was consenting because of what he told them. I think the teaching point was about mens rea and actus reus, ie plan and action, both of which are needed to prove a crime. The husband planned the offence, but no offence by him as no actus reus because there was no offence of a man raping his wife, then. Or for a further 25 years ! That poor woman

And as I'm sure you are aware the convicted men served their full sentence in this case. Your comments are misleading readers.
wewereliars · 03/05/2021 08:54

Lineofconcepicion every bit of "advice" you have given the OP has been incorrect and misleading. The risk is that she will throw money away on a hopeless case. I am not sure whst your agenda is but if you really are a solicitor you should know what you don't know.

SofiaMichelle · 03/05/2021 09:12

@MorrisZapp

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 can't think of any in my circle where it's wasn't the woman wanting a baby and to give up work, either.

I just asked DH if any of his male friends were the instigator in them having children and he said he can't think of any he's aware of.

I'm sure there must be some, but it's not common.

MayorGoodwaysChicken · 03/05/2021 09:20

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.

It would be significantly cheaper for him to just pay for childcare, like millions of parents do every day, rather than hand thousands of pounds to his ex. Wouldn’t happen in a million years. He would probably also have women acquaintances lining up to help the poor single dad of the kids whose heartless mother abandoned them. Sad but true.

Wrongnamegame4 · 03/05/2021 09:50

Why isnt your name on the deeds? Even if not working you can have your name put on.

LagunaBubbles · 03/05/2021 09:57

Hes your partner and the father of your children nit your landlord. I'm another one that could scream, these threads are sadly too common. Why have children with a dick like this who has opted out of family life?

UserAtRandom · 03/05/2021 11:33

The house was only bought a few years' ago. By which point OP already had her 2 oldest children so she and her DP had already been together for a good few years. What were the reasons given at the time for not making the house a joint purchase? Why did this issue not surface then?

tortoiselover100 · 03/05/2021 11:54

I would move out and empty the house, it's the only way you'll get some value back.

Lineofconcepcion · 03/05/2021 11:55

@wewereliars

Lineofconcepicion every bit of "advice" you have given the OP has been incorrect and misleading. The risk is that she will throw money away on a hopeless case. I am not sure whst your agenda is but if you really are a solicitor you should know what you don't know.
You clearly don't practice in this area and your knowledge is out of date. Things have moved on.

There is also the possibility of an order under the Children Act, good practitioner should be able to advise and help which OP would be best consulting, rather than random people on the internet with out of date knowledge.

wewereliars · 03/05/2021 12:07

I have referrred to the Children Act in one of my posts. Not sure what your issue is Lineofconcepcion, but maybe advise the OP as you have suggested, like the good practioner you seem to think you are.

CuriousSeal · 03/05/2021 13:46

YABU to accept this situation in the first place, let alone bring children into the equation.

apalledandshocked · 03/05/2021 13:53

@Hont1986

I was just reading the other thread where most posters were insisting that one partner should have to pay rent towards the house-owning partner, so I guess in their eyes he is being generous for not charging you.

The financial setup doesn't sound completely unreasonable to me. He covers the rent/mortgage and most other household bills, including food. And you cover kid's clothes/uniforms, and presents? That seems like a fair enough split tbh.

The 90% housework/childcare is another story, but again it sounds like you were working part time compared to his full time, so I wouldn't expect a 50/50 split there.

I don't think you should have to pay rent though, I think it's weird when anyone makes their partner pay 'rent' on a house they own outright.

Did they have children though? That changes everything. I am a single parent and managing quite well career wise. However, there is no doubt that if I had another adult at home doing all the heavy lifting with the children (especially this year) my earning ability and standard of living would be considerably higher. Them "living there for free" would be a small price. Completely different if you are living with a partner but both child free. And the CTC reduced as a result of his earning more because (not unreasonably) it is assumed that if one parent is earning a decent income they can use that to pay for their children - while the OPs partner seems to think that if one parent is earning a decent income it is theirs all theirs and the childrens costs are his partners problem.
Rejoiningperson · 03/05/2021 20:00

@RUOKHon I agree with this, there is a lot of victim blaming. And OP is a victim of financial inequality, the person who is the main carer of the children is shafted financially which has been a misogynistic bedrock for hundreds of years.

OP ‘picked the wrong one’. It’s not her fault he’s a scumbag who can financially shaft her with impunity. Stop putting it on her like she should have known.

I also was ‘shafted’ by my Ex, we were to be married etc but foolish me (look I still even blame myself) completely trusted him. Why wouldn’t I? People like me see the good in others, especially who we’ve chosen as a partner. It’s very difficult to see that a the man you love, when you have his children, would then go back on his promise to put you on the mortgage (as happened to me) even when your child is disabled and you can’t go back to work! It’s really a shock. A trauma to be honest and I wouldn’t use that word lightly at all.

RUOKHon · 03/05/2021 20:05

I’m so sorry that happened to you.

Agree with you completely. Why on earth would you have children and move in with someone you believe would fuck you over? You have children and love in with someone whom you trust and believe is lovely. That’s how it works. They promise the earth, ‘trust me’, and then when you’re committed with a couple of kids, he shafts you.

Rejoiningperson · 03/05/2021 20:18

If I had a daughter I would be advising them to marry first before children in all circumstances. However that still isn’t a complete fail safe. I think we as a society should be coming down very hard on men who have children, and the mother takes the hit by either being SAHM or working part-time, or less competitive job etc - and who then use their financially superior position to withhold that from the mother of the kids, and penalise her.

I also think this should be a key feminist issue where SAHMs are championed as much as women who work. We do not have to pit against each other here. Both are to be supported. SAHMs are often put down as ‘having a free ride’ which is just misogyny, and worse when it comes out of women’s mouths.

Swipe left for the next trending thread