To think DP is taking the piss over house costs?

[LurkioJr]

NB Edited for clarity and traffic:

Please help me with this one. My partner and I had a serious disagreement about money yesterday. We have been together for 8 years. Last June we transferred my house into joint names. I had 40k of equity and he paid 16k for an uneven share. He didn’t pay for half because (my recollection) he said he didn’t have 20k of ready cash. His recollection- he offered to pay 20k for half and I said no because it would clean him out. I then spent 23k on home improvements; he contributed about 2k for sundries e.g flooring, lights. He received a redundancy package of 35k in December and found a new job in March. At the time we put the house into joint names he earned 65k and I earned 40k, now we both earn about 50k. The final renovation we needed for the house was a new bathroom cost 9k. We agreed to pay half each. I have about 20k in savings mixture of cash and shares. It now transpires that he has 70k in cash and shares. 35k of that was the redundancy package; the other 35k he must have had at the time we agreed the house transfer. He thinks our deal last June was fair; I feel taken advantage of. I’ve asked him to pay me the 4K equity shortfall and to pay the whole cost of the bathroom renovations which he’s agreed to. It’s not a full 50/50 split of the total cost of the renovations but I think it will iron out in time because I’ll be asking him to foot the bill every time we need something for the house for the foreseeable future! AIBU to think he took the piss last June?

The fact that someone who has been with you for 8 years can do this to you should give you pause. I hope you protect yourself from now on. Generosity can and will often be exploited.

Surely it all depends on how you shared all the other expenses too?
(I didn't note this in the op, and no one else I see has raised this but surely it's completely relevant?)

Was everything split 50/50 for the whole rest of the time? (Ie food, bills, holidays, everything)

For example, if you paid £2k for a patio (or whatever), but that month he paid £2k for you both to go on holiday; then it would be very unfair to say 'I paid £2k and you paid nothing'

There was £40k of equity of which he paid £16k and the balance of £24k is yours.

How much is the property worth, and who pays the mortgage?

You might be a solicitor, but you don't know much about finance. Find an accountant friend and speak to them. I think you have shafted yourself, to be honest.

IF the house is in joint names 50/50, then he should now pay you whatever it takes to make it so that you have each paid 50/50 for the total cost of the house/improvements combined.

That makes it completely fair and there shouldn't be any resentment should you split up later down the line.

Did he have 35k secretly or is that money he could of been saving since his new job?

That's quite worrying actually. I wouldn't quite believe him about not knowing he had the money, or putting on the poor mouth so you coughed up more than your share.

I'd also be worried that as solicitors you have ended up in such a muddle.

For a family solicitor you seem to be breathtakingly naive. You have placed yourself in a an extremely vulnerable position and now are realising why all the dull paperwork you wanted to avoid is really necessary.

Do you know how much money he has and where now?

So he has paid £16k for half a house that you have paid £61k towards (your £40k equity and £21k extra on renovations). So he is already up £41k on this so called equal relationship. All whilst sitting on £70k in the bank which you have no access to. Doesn't sound very fair to me. Quite frankly Id be marrying him if you want to stay with him, so that everything is actually 50/50. And if he refuses then you know you've tricked and cheated out of over £40k.

How ridiculous. And you are a solicitor? That's frightening. Would you advise a client to do what you've done?!

@knittingaddict

So you're a solicitor, but didn't legally ring fence your unequal share of the property? You did it informally instead? Why did you do that?

That puzzled me too actually. Just because the OP and her DP are solicitors, why on earth would she not do this all formally and legally? Weird.

You see each other as a team, he doesn't. He's deliberately lied to you about his finances. He is not on your team OP.

You’ll be back in a couple of years upset that he’s really screwed you over this time. The lying about savings to get easy equity in your house was the first one… people like this don’t change

But is it more than just equalising the contributions now. It might be an idea to get him to explicitly state what savings he had at the time and what his thinking was when he said he didn't have £20k in ready cash. Now he might say the investments weren't liquid but I doubt he offered full and frank disclosure that you might have hoped for from a lartner.
You might want to understand how misleading he was and why. I suppose it depends on your intentions about the relationship in the future but bad faith is seldom a good look. If you are a solicitor then bring your analytical brain and what would you advise your best friend? Let sleeping dogs lie because that's what she deserves or does she deserve some honesty?

Good luck.

He's taken you for a fool OP & I'm afraid you've proved him right.
Time to get your life in order by throwing him out.

Missing the point of the thread but I’d never own a house with someone I wasn’t married to. Maybe you don’t believe in marriage, but if you do and it hasn’t happened after 8 years together then maybe it’s time to call it a day. Financial equality, pooling money and investing in your future together are the main reasons why many people marry.

After 8 years, is there a reason you're not married?

He's been living in your house for 3 years with him just paying some of the bills while you paid the mortgage and a lot more. I suppose you do the food shop, cooking, and cleaning too?

He was on 15k more than you for 3 years so unless he has some outrageous expenses, it would make sense he'd be able to save a lot while living with you.

Final update from me: we’ve agreed to redress the imbalance in contributions so he will reimburse me half of everything spent/ shortfall in equity. He saw his shares as illiquid but now accepts his position was better than mine, agreement was unfair. We both agree that the other’s feelings are valid, no one is a shit. Different attitudes to money etc. Also: No one needs to get litigious, mumsnet! we’ve been together for nearly a decade most sane people can work things out with a bit of discussion. Appreciate all your insight (apart from the person who called me breathtakingly naive, making a deliberate decision to trust that you can rely on your other half is a legit way to live, even if it results in financial loss in the future…)

Don't have kids with him OP FGS.

I am a solicitor, did not marry, but made sure I was on the house deeds. He can't get over the fact that he had to give me even half the equity, after over 25 years and 2 kids. He seemed to think I should walk away in rags. Luckily it's plenty for me to start again.

As a family solicitor you see all day every day how women get shafted by men, yours is no different by the sound of it.

You’ll be back in a couple of years upset that he’s really screwed you over this time.

Yes when you have a baby and have to fund your maternity leave and baby stuff out of your savings because he "can't afford it/ doesn't have the cash available" ...

You really are naive OP, he's backed down because you called him out on it. He will screw you over again if he can.

What advice would you give a client? When I first qualified, I used to view the middle aged women who had been screwed over by their husbands with pity. I would never be like that, in my youthful arrogance I thought myself far too clever.

As a result of what I saw, I did make sure I always worked, but guess what, after years and years it turned out I had spent half my life with a selfish money grabbing shit. Good luck OP, you are going to need it.

That sounds like progress, OP, but in what way did he rationalise his shares as being illiquid (I thought that would be his reason but you might find it interesting why he rationalises this). Were they shares traded on the stock market? If so was it the vehicle or the capital gains tax or was he grasping at straws?

Good luck.

Goodness, the updates are worse. He’s manipulated you into thinking it’s just a difference of opinion?!

Please do let us know how you get on when you’re on maternity leave in the future…

I’m not taking back the comments about the naivety. I hope I’m wrong but his lack of honesty is worrying. I’m also concerned that you go to work everyday and meet people who have been shafted and assume it won’t happen to you. It can happen to anyone.