Boyfriend wants me to pay ‘rent’ on his mortgaged house.

[Beachshell]

I’ve been with boyfriend for 2 years, we both have a child from a previous relationship. He has a mortgage on his house and has done for a number of years. Currently I rent.

We’ve got to the stage where we’d really like to live with each other. The most logical move is for me to move into his mortgaged house, then we would look to buy together once we know that our blended family works.

We got into the discussion of finances and I said I would be happy to pay half of all the bills + I would buy all of the food, toiletries, cleaning products etc. I’d also be doing the majority of housework and cooking due to the nature of our jobs.

He thinks I should pay half of the bills, but also pay him half of what I’d be saving from not renting anymore. I don’t feel comfortable with this for a few reasons. I don’t think I should be contributing towards his appreciating asset that I have no stake in. By moving to his house, it’s much more risky financially for me and my child should things not work out. I am going to need to find storage for some of my furniture (or sell it) which won’t fit in his house. I’ve got a longer commute for the school run and work. He think his suggestion of paying him bills + ‘rent’ shows we are a team and working together, that I should want to help him out as much as possible. I’ve said if he wants everything 50/50, including what I deem as mortgage contributions, we should be properly committed e.g. married!

AIBU?

Why don't you get married? That way the house belongs to both of you and your contribution is also your own asset
Sure. Then gradually realise that she can't stand his child, and then gets pissed off when he defends his child, decide she doesn't want to be with him after all, demand a divorce and go for 50% of the house in 5 years time.

Works out great for her indeed. He'd be a fool to jump at the suggestion.

What am i missing here - is this not how it should be?
You're missing that men should pay because otherwise he is a cocklodger. Women however should protect themselves no matter what and always make sure any decision they make involve being better off financially.

You should pay minimal rent at first. If it's going ok you could buy in to a share of the house, see a solicitor and draw up a contract. He shouldn't lose what he already has nor make profit from you. Maybe you need more time to think about it

Would this work?

He pays the mortgage, house insurance and half of the bills

You pay half the bills and put the amount you usually pay for rent into a joint savings account (subtract the extra commuting costs and furniture storage cost maybe?)

If it works out the savings become deposit for your new shared house

If it doesn't you split the savings in half and move out with your half

She's only in rented accommodation now. She can rent again in the future. Agreed, he doesn't have to do this if things don't work out, but he's got a mortgaged 4 bedroom house, and OP has a rented flat, so it seems perfectly logical she's the one to move

Because 2 bed flats in the area you want with a decent reliable landlord are just dropping of the trees. Plus of course she would have all the moving costs and deposit costs.

If he is serious about them building a long term future together and he wants that to be in his house then a few months with the OP keeping the rental agreement on her flat instead of paying his mortgage with no security would show that he is serious about the long term.

Alternatively he can move in with her for a few months to see how it goes.

A high earner wanting half his sky sports bill paid and his houskeeping done by a much lower earner is not someone I'd entrust with my security let alone my DCs'.

Why would you possibly be moving you and your child to live with him?

You are saying that a landlord would give you more protection than the man you love. How can you contemplate living with someone you think might just throw you out and/or you don’t feel is treating you fairly?

A high earner wanting half his sky sports bill paid and his houskeeping done by a much lower earner is not someone I'd entrust with my security let alone my DCs'.

This.

50/50 on everything would surely be simpler - including cooking/cleaning etc. Your logic re the mortgage doesn't really stack up - he's technically got to pay bills without you there and you're going to contribute to those. Some of those bills will be fixed costs that won't increase because you are there.

However that said, you are leaving yourself in a financially riskier position than him. How about 'your' half of the mortgage is put aside for future joint house deposit, or your own housing should your relationship not work out.

The cooking, cleaning and childcare that you choose to offer voluntarily has no financial equivalent - unless he's agreed to pay for it! Bear that in mind while you cheerfully agree to pick up the majority of those tasks - are you sure? Because he's finding the time surely to do them at the moment. I'd be cautious about setting a precedent where you are his cleaner- why?

What a complicated situation.

When I met my bow husband, I was renting and he had a house. We pretty much earned the same amount of money.

I gave him £500 a month and this included payment towards the bills.

We shared food shopping costs and shared housework.

What exactly do you get out of this arrangement?

It sounds like he’s going to massively benefit whilst you get the shit end of the stick.

He's asking you to contribute half of your current rent, so that's a significant savings for you, because you're still saving the other half. Sure, living rent-free would be a bigger savings, but no one owes you that. Yes, he'd have to pay the mortgage whether you lived there or not, but you'd also have to pay rent somewhere whether you lived with him or not.

If you don't want to move in with him, then don't. If you want to give him ultimatums about marriage, do that (but be prepared for it to end badly). But you need to own those reservations and be able to discuss them honestly with him. This just seems like making up reasons because you'd rather not have to put your real feelings into words.

@Comedycook

Why should she pay towards his mortgage. He's already better off by her moving in and paying half bills and all food and doing the house work. His mortgage is his...the house is his. Why should she pay towards his asset?

Why should he let her use his asset for free? She's already better off by going down to paying half bills rather than all of them.

Neither of you are going to find a comprise you're happy with and your relationship will be eaten up with simmering resentment. Don't move in until you're married.

Why should he let her use his asset for free? She's already better off by going down to paying half bills rather than all of them.

Is she better off really? She faces disruption to her and her child's life, extra housework, extra kid to look after. Meanwhile he gets financial help with his mortgage, while earning so much more. Good deal? Doesn't look so.

From what you’ve said, I would consider waiting or renting together. Finding a big clash like this early on isn’t a good sign (been there, done that). Don’t put yourself in a precarious position EVER security-wise or financially. Especially when there is an amber flag waving.

@PurpleOkapi

He's asking you to contribute half of your current rent, so that's a significant savings for you, because you're still saving the other half. Sure, living rent-free would be a bigger savings, but no one owes you that. Yes, he'd have to pay the mortgage whether you lived there or not, but you'd also have to pay rent somewhere whether you lived with him or not.

If you don't want to move in with him, then don't. If you want to give him ultimatums about marriage, do that (but be prepared for it to end badly). But you need to own those reservations and be able to discuss them honestly with him. This just seems like making up reasons because you'd rather not have to put your real feelings into words.

You don’t know if she would be saving at all! She would be paying for the extra commute, furniture storage, potentially more for bills and food, and she loses her tax credits etc! So it’s not as simple as that.

I’m also absolutely staggered at the number of women here who think that fair means you paying him rent, but completely negate to mention him providing any security for that rent in return! Funny how “fair” always seems to mean prioritising the man.

Also, for all the “if this was the other way around, he’d be called a cocklodger” bores, please do feel free to share a thread where a man who earns significantly less than his partner, pays half of bills, all the shopping AND does the vast majority of cooking, cleaning and childcare, is being called a cocklodger.

Why should he let her use his asset for free? She's already better off by going down to paying half bills rather than all of them.

Is she better off though?

Her 'rent' may be cheaper but her bills (food, utilities, petrol) increase. Plus OP loses CHB and any tax credits or UC she may get. As PP have said, her take home is around £2000 whilst his £5000.

I'd take him up on the offer of letting you pay towards his mortage etc, that way you will probably have a beneficial interest in the property - england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/legal/relationship_breakdown/housing_rights_of_cohabiting_sole_homeowners/occupation_rights_if_one_partner_is_the_sole_owner
Make sure you tell him that you're pleased he wants to make sure you have the security of being entitled to a share of his property.
Also, will there be any tax implications on this 'income' that you will paying him with HMRC?

I would not move in in this scenario. Neither party wins, there is no advantage except getting more time together.

If you do do it, I think you should just agree a figure to pay each month. It shouldn't need to be split into bills/mortgage...you just give him X each month and he puts it toward the bills or whatever.

But it would have to be an amount you're both comfortable with.

You don’t know if she would be saving at all! She would be paying for the extra commute, furniture storage, potentially more for bills and food, and she loses her tax credits etc! So it’s not as simple as that.

Someone's going to have to pay for those things regardless of which of them moves in with the other. I assumed that they were folded into household bills, or at least that OP would have specifically mentioned it if she was coming out behind.

I’m also absolutely staggered at the number of women here who think that fair means you paying him rent, but completely negate to mention him providing any security for that rent in return! Funny how “fair” always seems to mean prioritising the man.

If she's paying him rent, she gets whatever "security" that arrangement entails under the law. Actually, drawing up a lease might be the best way to go here. If she owned the house and he was unwilling to contribute to the mortgage, I'd be joining the crowd calling him a cocklodger.

@PurpleOkapi

You don’t know if she would be saving at all! She would be paying for the extra commute, furniture storage, potentially more for bills and food, and she loses her tax credits etc! So it’s not as simple as that.

Someone's going to have to pay for those things regardless of which of them moves in with the other. I assumed that they were folded into household bills, or at least that OP would have specifically mentioned it if she was coming out behind.

I’m also absolutely staggered at the number of women here who think that fair means you paying him rent, but completely negate to mention him providing any security for that rent in return! Funny how “fair” always seems to mean prioritising the man.

If she's paying him rent, she gets whatever "security" that arrangement entails under the law. Actually, drawing up a lease might be the best way to go here. If she owned the house and he was unwilling to contribute to the mortgage, I'd be joining the crowd calling him a cocklodger.

Yes, those costs should be included but there’s nothing to indicate he’s suggested or agreed to that.

You don’t automatically get any legal security for paying rent. That’s why it’s important to make sure “fair” works both ways.

If she's paying him rent, she gets whatever "security" that arrangement entails under the law. Actually, drawing up a lease might be the best way to go here.

No, she doesn't. Cohabitation is not treated the same as a tenancy and OP is not treated as a lodger.

www.ftb.help/when-one-partner-owns-the-house-cohabitation-rights/#legal-rights-of-a-cohabiting-partner

Fine for you to put that money toward a larger deposit on a shared property later. Paying him rent when you have basically no rights or security would ring alarm bells for me.

The doing more of the housework etc also rings alarm bells for me to be honest. He wants to have a maid and get paid for the privilege!

You don’t automatically get any legal security for paying rent. That’s why it’s important to make sure “fair” works both ways.

Exactly. Which is why I don't understand why everyone's assuming that this arrangement leaves her with less security than she has in her current rental. Presumably she has some kind of lease limiting when and how she can be forced to leave, but it sounds like she's also paying more for that than she would be here.

It may be that for various practical and financial reasons, she's best off staying put. But that doesn't mean it's wrong or unfair of him to expect her to pay some manner of rent if she chooses to move into his house. Those are two different questions.

I have a friend in a similar position - although they have children together, not separately. She’s got no security and basically could be thrown out on her ear with nothing to show for the years she’s lived there and looked after the property. It’s horrendous. And to be honest, you don’t seem that sure about him?

I'm a bit late to the party, @Beachshell, but I wouldn't do this if I were you. It's too risky, as you say.

[quote Crikeyalmighty]@stuckinarut86. Did you a child in the equation though? — if it goes wrong the OP can’t just move out and get a room in a flatshare etc.[/quote]
No child involved however nobody would be in a position to just move out into a new rental and would rely on family or friends to help. She would be saving money to save for a deposit should it all go wrong. Even paying half she is saving money given the rent she is currently paying. Surly she wouldn't be planning to move in if she didn't think the relationship would work. If the situation was the other way around what would she be expecting from him? I don't think I would be happy knowing my partner would be saving half the bills and all the rent they pay