Rent and bills. Doesn't seem fair. AIBU?

[Perfectworld]

How would you split bills / rent in this scenario?

Both of us have 1x child each from previous relationships, both late 30s. Fiancé earns £120k, I earn £28k. I currently get child benefit and UC top up, which will cease when we move in together. He has suggested we pay half the rent each, plus he covers all joint utility bills, meaning I still have all non 'joint' bills e.g. my mobile phone, my car payment. Due to this, I will probably be left with less that I currently have spare each month (which is already very little). The rent I pay will be the same as I pay currently, due to needing a bigger house to support both of our DC. I will be worse off some months, and others about the same financially because I cannot claim UC or child benefit. On more expensive months, for instance, the months when DC's school dinner fee is due, I will be worse off than I am now. He will be saving approx £2k per month in this scenario, which he has said will be put towards joint savings.

What do you think is reasonable for each person, how would you split finances?

It doesn’t sound like he is very committed to this relationship

This.

I would go with what @Eeksteek suggests but that only works in a committed relationship, potentially marriage.

Make a list of all outgoings plus rough expectation of food, activities etc. Total it up, he pays just over 75% (too early for maths!) you pay just under 25% so you are each paying the same proportion of your wage.
Or
Add up all bills, decide an amount to save add together. Add wages together defect bills and savings. Split the remainder 50/50

I really don't get the main view on here. I make only slightly less than OP's boyfriend. I have worked hard for that and the savings I put aside are for retirement and my kids. While I am not currently looking to move a single dad - I would never do so under the flag of whats mine is yours ever. Why would I sacrifice my children's future for his? I want an equal partner not two more people to look after and provide for. I wouldn't even date someone who was a low earner and looking at me with $$ in their eyes - thinking that once we move in together - then all the things mentioned in this thead that OP should get will happen. I don't care if you would call me a thousand names and think I am the worst human alive for not giving all my money to the new live in partner and his child but I wouldn't. I am mid 40s and have zero interest in a partner who is looking at the relationship as a way to benefit financially. I would 100% expect a new partner to pull their own weight. I am not going to downgrade my kids lifestyle to upgrade someone else's.

Once we have been married for years and years things would naturally join more but to off the bat when moving someone in - not a chance at all.

Your finances are tight and will be even tighter. His are comfortable and will be even more extremely comfortable although he’s dressing it up in the fiction of ‘joint savings’-wtf does that mean? I bet it doesn’t mean that those months you will be underwater you can draw from savings which is a pretty common definition for savings, but it sounds like joint savings aren’t so you can afford to eat and aren’t really joint. Ie it sounds like he is full of shit. And when you say presumably he will continue to look after his child that’s a big presumably. You might have thought before that presumably he wouldn’t see you even more skint because you shared a house.
op, If someone said come on a lovely holiday with me, it costs x and you didn’t have x, you’d say no. Here someone is saying move in with me, you’ll be poorer and I’ll be even richer but we love each other dont we? And by the way I won’t cover any of your costs even though I’m costing you your benefits but can you look after my child Saturdays when they are here?
(I’m guessing the last bit might be not too far away)

No he's not. He's just saying what he thinks is fair Up to the OP to discuss with him that maybe it isn't. If they can't agree then best to stay living apart.

This is a good thread ot save though for the next time a woman posts that she is hte higher earner and her new partner is moving in with the expectsation that she will now take over the majorityof all his expenses and his kids expenses. I wonder if she will get called all the same names if she doesn't take over his expenses and immediately create joint accounts and divert her savings to him.

@Midlifemusings if this hypothetical woman is happy for a skint partner to be even more skint by moving in then they shouldn’t move in together. Most fair people moving in together can make sure both of them are better off. If you aren’t doing that the other person should run. That’s totally different from saying everything should be joint.

As I said I don't think she should be more skint in day to day expenses and that is worth a conversation. But she is gaining by having 2K a month taken from his own savings for him and his kids and put into a joint savings she can access for herself and her son.

Both will be worse off as he will have 24K less in savings for him and his kids than he did before and she will have a little less each month (but more in savings). They should talk about how it will work - but I disagree with all the comments that unless he gives her joint access to his money he is an awful person and that he isn't committed to the relationship if he doesn't take over paying expenses for her and her son.

And I woudn't move in with a new partner and child who wanted joint access to my accounts and saw my money as their money. I wouldn't do this move from Ops boyfriend's side in a situation where the other person thinks I should take care of them and their children financially - at cost to my own kids.

Does that take into account his £1.2K a month maintenance and debt repayments?

Talk to him again, let him know that you will be worse off. Prepare figures and propose a more realistic/reasonable split. Tell him how much he will save under the current proposal, tell him how much you’re going to lose.

it might be that he really didn’t realise that you would be worse off. sometimes people on higher incomes don’t realise how someone on a lower income “survives”.

Why would a step dad be expected to pay for her son's uni?

Check out the step parent board - the step parents on there do not believe they should pay for anything or be expected to do anything for a partner's child - ever.

There's quite a few people making stories up on this thread about what is being proposed. I wonder why that is...

The reasonable thing would be that both of you are slightly better off than you are at present. What the DP is proposing in this case would leave the OP worse off. That's what people are saying is unfair.

I don't think the OP thinks her DP should give her all his money. That's not what she's asking for at all. And don't paint her as some gold digger. She's already said she's supported lower earning partners in the past.

OP I'm not sure whether you've actually sat down together to thrash out what would be fair: working out how much each of you have atm, taking all income, including benefits, into account and all expenditure. Then seeing what you'd both be left with afterwards, and then deciding if there should be a better balance. Him putting money into 'joint savings' which are only in his name, does not make it a fairer balance.

If he's not someone you could do this with, either because he's a poor communicator or because he won't do it fairly, then he's not someone you should stay in a relationship with.

He won't save anything. His expenses will go up to cover all the joint costs and he is contributing to a joint savings.

I don't get how he is going to be £2k better off if the OP is only contributing £500 to the house. Is his current rental £3k a month? What am I missing.

So his kid's going to be skipping off to pony club and ballet classes while your kid is going to have to wait until next month for new school shoes if her school dinner fees are due?

Fuck that for a game of soldiers.

I would not only not move in with him but would seriously rethink the whole getting married thing given he is effectively proposing a two tier household.

The bottom line is, don't move in if you will be worse off and don't move in if you aren't happy with his attitude towards money. And he is obviously terrible with money if he has debt on that salary.

But what he is suggesting isn't ridiculous. I would suggest readjusting so that you are in the same financial position you would have been (so maybe he pays slightly more than 50 50 rent). And then he pays for expensive things like meals out, holidays, so that you don't end up feeling pinched. Things like your car loan and phone contracts aren't essential, they are luxury things so I don't see why it would be his concern, they should come out of your spending money (which should be no less than it was before).

Once married it is different as you have more of a claim on his money but he still may want his child to have it rather than you. Also you could look at buying a house instead of renting which would get you both in a better position.

I am a bit surprised that universal credit is being spent on a car loan and phone contract to be honest. Surely it's meant to be for people who wouldn't get by without it.

Not the point of the thread, but I think you can still claim child benefit. He would have to fill out a self assessment form and pay it back through tax.
But that still won't make the split fair.

Op If you were a high earner before that could support yourself and your kids and your partners and their kids - why the low income now? I would get yourself back into a role where you are making more money. You have the skills and experience from doing it before so it should be a stretch to work your way back up. Regardless of this relationship - better to not be barely making ends meet each month when you have the skills, education, and professional experience to do more.

I would run a mile from a partner who suggested such a split. It’s incredibly unfair to leave you out of pocket.

don’t move in with him until this is properly resolved.

Yes why are you both not saving more by sharing rent? Are you moving into a house that is double the rent to your current ones? If so get a smaller house and you will both be better off than currently.
Also don't bother with joint savings if he has debt. It's better to pay off the debt.

OP means he will be £2k better off than her. Not that them living together will make him £2k better off than not living together! That could surely only happen if she was subsidising him thousands bit obviously she isn’t as she doesn’t even have that.

@Hutchy16
@Midlifemusings

Op never said a joint bank account. Joint savings sound more like an account in his name, which he deems to be joint savings but in the event of a split, she would likely not see a penny. Even if it were a joint account, it isn’t reasonable for op to be dictated to in this way. She should not be forced to live a more frugal life than she is already by losing some of her disposable income and benefits at the expense of these savings, which he will see as his.

To the question what would you do. Well I only lived with someone I knew I was going to marry, so we kind of went into married, one pot living more or less straight away. I earned significantly more than now DH, similar to OP and boyfriend. There were no complications of children.

Had I decided to live with someone more as a test run, then no I don’t think it would have been one pot from the start, I think I would have expected a more even split of expenses and then yes, my much higher earnings would be my savings.

But I would not expect the other person to be worse off for living together versus living separately. For a start, I would not expect them to agree to that, I would expect them to say, “that isn’t going to work because I will be worse off”! Which is what you need to be saying here OP. Then you sit down and do the maths and work out what makes sense for both of you, you should both benefit from living together.

Absolutely no. Out of the question. Anyone can see you'd be worse off, why can't he?

mmmm, so he has a large income and already has debts? his talk about savings is utter nonsense - he has debt so clearly can't manage on what he earns now - how would that miraculously change?

Another sign that says don't move in I'm afraid.