To ask how I make her feel more secure

[Partnersworries]

NC for this as outing on several finance bits.

Partner and I have been together for nearly 2 years. Last year we bought a house; she owns 50% of the house with the exception of my substantial deposit (62k which I legally ringfenced as this came from inheritance pre our relationship).

I’m the main earner of the two of us, my salary is just north of 95k and hers 30k. As such we split the mortgage 50/50 (It’s a house we chose together, small 3 beds and affordable for both).

I pay 3/4 of the other bills and for joint holidays etc. I also pay for my dog as he’s an old boy and quite expensive in insurance etc

However, she has raised some concerns that she feels that there is big financial inequity between us and worries about being dependent upon me financially. I don’t see it that way, but I wouldn’t would I!

I also have about 80k in ISAs (stocks and shares and cash ISAs)

How do I make her feel more secure? I’ve suggested she reduces down her bills contribution to save more (to give her a financial buffer) but she still seems worried.

What do I do? Do I just give her a 3 month financial buffer? I could do this without much hardship TBH but worry it would make things feel even more inequitable.

I don’t want this to impact our relationship but am a bit of a loss on how to make her feel better about this without a)being a dick and b)keeping her happy

@PurpleOkapi I think the reference is to me 😀

I don’t know… maybe he is a golddigga and I’m a fool and rubbish at spotting it 🧐
Or maybe I’m financially a because although he’s much better off now he’s with me, I still have more money than him and I sure as fuck am not planning to pool it! 🤣

I’m with you though… like yours, my husband isn’t manipulative at all.

I have less money because of him, but I’m still happy with what I have.
He has less money than me, but more than he had without me.
So he’s doing better than me purely in terms of the financial impact of our relationship.
But… I love the bugger, so 🤷🏻‍♀️

Difference here is OP’s partner is talking bollocks. Who (financially) fears their partner’s death when they stand to get £570K plus their share of the house (from the deposit at least another £60K) plus 70% of the pension - which for someone earning £95K is not going to be fuck all 🤷🏻‍♀️

I note though, that the OP has not commented on this oddness of attitude.

It sounds like she wants a proposal.

[quote Cocomarine]@PurpleOkapi I think the reference is to me 😀

I don’t know… maybe he is a golddigga and I’m a fool and rubbish at spotting it 🧐
Or maybe I’m financially a because although he’s much better off now he’s with me, I still have more money than him and I sure as fuck am not planning to pool it! 🤣

I’m with you though… like yours, my husband isn’t manipulative at all.

I have less money because of him, but I’m still happy with what I have.
He has less money than me, but more than he had without me.
So he’s doing better than me purely in terms of the financial impact of our relationship.
But… I love the bugger, so 🤷🏻‍♀️

Difference here is OP’s partner is talking bollocks. Who (financially) fears their partner’s death when they stand to get £570K plus their share of the house (from the deposit at least another £60K) plus 70% of the pension - which for someone earning £95K is not going to be fuck all 🤷🏻‍♀️

I note though, that the OP has not commented on this oddness of attitude.[/quote]
OP also hasn't commented on why he/she doesn't want to marry until being 100% sure but jumped straight to buying a house with a partner of less than two years. Whatever happened to renting?

She’s not dependent on you financially and I’m not why she feels she is. Dependent would be her being without a property if you split up, whereas she owns half the house minus the deposit. Similarly, you aren’t paying her mortgage for her - she’s paying half, so she’s not reliant on you for that. You pay proportionally more for bills as you earn more. If she’s unhappy with that, she can go halves on that too! It sounds like ‘reliant’ isn’t the right word as she’s clearly contributing. Perhaps she means it feels unfair or is worried that you might resent paying for more? Your situation is almost identical to mine was when I met my husband btw.

Also, I’d be very careful about having someone you’ve been dating for less than two years as the beneficiary to your will when you aren’t married. It all seems like she’s getting an incredibly good share of all of this for someone who isn’t your wife. Your share of the house, your inheritance, your life insurance etc and you’ve not been together two years or married? But your brother gets less than her?

@TractorAndHeadphones “OP also hasn't commented on why he/she doesn't want to marry until being 100% sure but jumped straight to buying a house with a partner of less than two years. Whatever happened to renting?”

Why not buy together instead of rent?

It wouldn’t be my decision, but it’s not a bad one. If they split up, they’re not stuck in the house together - either one has financial wherewithal to move out to another place quickly. They’ll a most certainly have saved money on rent, and most likely made money via capital growth on the house.

Difference here is OP’s partner is talking bollocks. Who (financially) fears their partner’s death when they stand to get £570K plus their share of the house (from the deposit at least another £60K) plus 70% of the pension - which for someone earning £95K is not going to be fuck all 🤷🏻‍♀️

Yep. She's not really afraid of him dying. She's afraid of them splitting up, because she knows she wouldn't be able to afford the property or the same lifestyle if that happened. And that's an understandable enough fear, because she's right - she can't. Going back to living on 30k won't leave her with 900+ left over to play with every month.

But what some seem to be missing is that if they split up, there's no reason that shouldn't happen, because why the heck should he keep paying for her in that situation? He'd probably buy her out with the house, and then she'd get back every cent she paid, which is equivalent to having lived there rent-free for however long. Failing that, they can sell it, and she'll still get at least the same amount back. I'm just not seeing a real problem here.

As an aside: I did assume the OP was female also.
Mostly because my sister is gay and rather fond of the joke, “what does a lesbian bring to a second date? - Her furniture!” - and that seemed rather apt here 🤣

I didn't assume any of the sexes.
I still think the issue is one of communication.

Add up your mortgage and other core living costs.

Compare your take home pay. Your take home must be double hers. Work out what proportion

Split those costs proportionately on take home pay. You must take home a bit more than double her take home pay?

So basically you are both contributing the same proportion of your income to your joint life. Then you are in an important sense contributing equally to a shared endeavour.

But maintain the 50/50 ownership of house.

Also think about things like a life insurance policy with her as a beneficiary that would at least pay off the house if not a bit more. Also having a will that makes things clear like you’d leave her your share in the house including deposit (if you have someone else you’d like to leave this too then make sure the life insurance policy replaces that too as well as the outstanding mortgage amount).

Another thing to consider is to vary the shared amount further so she make pension/savings contributions that are a similar proportion in relation to her take home income as they are to yours.

Basically create a space where both your futures are equally protected.

@NadiaVulvokov you can use “see all” to read all the OP’s threads, if you don’t want to read 8 pages of replies.

OP already is paying for life insurance, which will pay out to the partner £570K.

Would you say that was enough to give your partner a sense of financial security in case of your death?

She also gets OP’s share of the house (so at least £60K of deposit, any further capital growth and mortgage repayment effect. And 70% of her pension. And she is already one of the beneficiaries of the will.

Do you reckon that’s enough?

@cocomarine firstly my apologies to the OP for not having RTFT. I don’t think they’d be offended by the nature of my suggestions given they’ve already adopted most of them. However you do seem to be very offended on their behalf.

One thing I would say to you though is sometimes whether or not someone feels secure is down not the monetary amounts involved but whether they feel equally important in the relationship. That’s why my post focuses on proportions not on specific amounts.

There is something about a love based relationship being cognisant of love and care and not just money that is absolutely central to it. If you love someone you want to take care of them and make sure they are safe. It’s not all about the £.

[quote Cocomarine]@TractorAndHeadphones “OP also hasn't commented on why he/she doesn't want to marry until being 100% sure but jumped straight to buying a house with a partner of less than two years. Whatever happened to renting?”

Why not buy together instead of rent?

It wouldn’t be my decision, but it’s not a bad one. If they split up, they’re not stuck in the house together - either one has financial wherewithal to move out to another place quickly. They’ll a most certainly have saved money on rent, and most likely made money via capital growth on the house.[/quote]
Because buying a house together is the biggest financial commitment you can make to a partner (kids excepted). House prices could fall, people could be in negative equity (as many were in 2008, not so long ago!). There are too many variables to consider.

DP and I have been together for a similar amount of time as OP, lived together for 1.5 years and are now considering buying a house. I'm very clear that I consider this a big step and expect marriage after we've saved up enough for the wedding post house buying, which he agrees with. Vague timelines, marrying at 'some point in the future' etc etc is not something I'll accept.

Maybe a mortgage is less of a financial commitment for the OP but what do they mean by 100% sure? What would make them 100% sure? 2 years of living together? 5? 10? After a certain point it's not wrong for one party to expect marriage. In terms of timeline just under 2 years is very short. However in terms of milestones achieved (providing for her in his will, buying a house together) the relationship is very advanced. That's why the message is confusing.

Also to add I'm aware other people have different views but the point is that people have different timelines in their heads.

OP, I think you need to open your eyes here.

In less than 2 years, her life and wealth has improved massively.

She owns 50% of a house she could never afford in her own and her insurance of paying 50% of the mortgage speaks volumes in terms of her intention to retain it.

She's a named beneficiary on everything.

I'm not sure she is the one that should be insecure under the circumstances.

You need to talk to her. Hopefully, it's just a messed up way of her pushing for marraige because if it, she's out to fleece you.

@NadiaVulvokov not offended at all! Admittedly, I just don’t understand why people post on 8 page long threads without scanning all the OP posts 🤷🏻‍♀️
But having pointed out to you what the OP had already done - my question to you was genuine, did you think it was enough?

I agree with you that it’s not always about the exact £. But, would you agree with me that to extent this is about £ (and keep in my the OP’s partner said it was in part about financial security if OP died unexpectedly) then well north of half a million definitely covers off the £.

I do agree with you that feeling important in a relationship is key. But would you feel unimportant to someone, if less than 2 years in, they’d made you their main beneficiary? That act says a lot completely regardless of what it adds up to in pounds and pence.

@TractorAndHeadphones I don’t disagree with you personally - no way in hell would I have bought a house together at this point as the stronger financial party, and probably not as the weaker. Far too much could go wrong - more from a human (poor) behaviour point of view than the financials in this case. I just don’t think it’s a totally crazy thing to have done!

Thank you all for your advice

For those who have asked on why she is the beneficiary, my family are fairly affluent so would likely look after my other siblings with their wills.

We bought the house together as I was planning to buy a house anyway, and we agreed it was sensible to have a joint mortgage rather than her living with me without building any equity.

@Partnersworries when she said she was worried that she couldn’t pay the £700 mortgage her on if you died, presumably you pointed out the £570K life insurance. What did she say to that? Had she just forgotten it?

@Cocomarine she hadn’t known the amount of the policy until this weekend but did know I had an LA policy with work. She has said it makes her feel better knowing that.

£700 rent on 30K p.a. is affordable for a single person. Do you actually believe her when she said that?

@Partnersworries

We bought the house together as I was planning to buy a house anyway, and we agreed it was sensible to have a joint mortgage rather than her living with me without building any equity.

Also I find this argument strange - if she was paying rent she wouldn't be building any equity anyway. You provided all of the deposit which she piggybacked on. But it's your call

"She has said it makes her feel better knowing that."

Really? I thought her concern was her inability to save?

[quote Partnersworries]@Cocomarine she hadn’t known the amount of the policy until this weekend but did know I had an LA policy with work. She has said it makes her feel better knowing that.[/quote]
I bet it does.
Watch you don't end up at the bottom of a cliff. 🤑🤑🤑