Who should really own our house?

[Littlething]

I will appreciate some advice and fresh perspective on my situation please. Sorry if it is a bit long.
Me and my partner of 15 years (two dc, 11 and 8) are about to exchange on a house that we are buying with the money I inherited from my late parents. There will be a small mortgage, paid out of rental income on my flat in London. We moved to where we are now 2 years ago from London for his job. We were renting here while we were looking for a house to buy paying rent out of the income on my London flat. I have stopped working after my youngest was born, my dp has a good job (architect), that covers our bills. My parents gifted me the flat in London, so we lived rent/mortgage free and they gave us cash for holidays, new car etc, we would not be able to afford it otherwise. We spend rather carefully, shopping in H&M and Lidl but we like to entertain, go to the theatre and children have lots of hobbies. My partner has a flat in London that he bought before we met, he pays mortgage on it and rents it out, so mortgage is covered.
The house we are buying here is small and will need extension and loft conversion, it will be paid for with what’s left out of the money my parents left me. For context, we decided to buy a small house (in a not very ideal location) because it is all we can afford without selling mine or his flats and he is strongly against selling since “it is our pension”.
I agreed to put both our names on the title. I want to make it clear that he is a kind and loving person, he is my best friend and the children adore him. I do not want to upset him by spelling out that it is my money that we are spending on the purchase and renovation. However when I said the other day that I expect to have an upper hand when it comes to decisions to do with renovating (and maybe selling when the children are off to Uni) he got very upset. He feels that he will “pour all his energy, time and skills into the house and will be left with nothing”. He also said he feels his contribution to our finances is major because all his salary is spent every months, he provides for us and this needs to be recognised. AIBU to expect him to see it from my perspective?
Many thanks for reading and sharing what you think.

i would ringfence your inheritance and share the equity if you sell

not sure about the renovations shold be a compromise there

I don't understand why the rent from your flat will pay the mortgage and his wages will pay all of the bills, Surely, you have X amount coming in to cover mortgage, bills etc. You can't decide which bills you pay and get the better deal of paying off the mortgage (with appreciation in value). That's really unfair.

My first thought was that if you are paying the deposit for the new house and you will be paying the mortgage, then title should be held in your sole name in your DP should have no rights in the property

But, that feels like having your cake and eating it, when you haven't worked for eight years and DP is currently funding all the household costs

Combine finances or don't, but you can't cherry pick the bits that suit you

The problem is if you put his name on the deeds and you split up, you have no career, no pension and only half your inheritance left. While he has built his career, income and pension and you enabled this by taking on the unpaid work in the family. I think marriage is probably the best way around this, meaning all assets are on the table if you split, rather than just yours.

Like marriage, long term relationships need a huge investment of time, love and money. He should understand this, it seems to me he doesn't. If the boot was on the other foot, would you be asking for parity in the finances of the house?
In my marriage of fifty years, there have often been times when I felt my contribution was going unnoticed, and I'm sure my wife would say the same. Just suck it up and get on with the real job of living.
If in doubt, like others have said, see a lawyer, but it shouldn't even be necessary. Best of luck with your endeavours.....

I agree with this. My friends had something similar drawn up as he moved into her flat as he was renting and she owned hers. It stated that any money from the sale of the flat was hers and if the property they later bought together appreciated in value he would get half the equity after what she paid was taken out.

I don't know what the answer is but I don't think it's as clear cut as lots of posters are making. Yes it's your inheritance but you've been living off him for years and he'll continue to be the only earner. What will happen if you protect your inheritance and say its your house and he then stops using his money to fund you day to day?

You seem to have reached a life stage where "share and share alike" seems more natural than "his and hers".

Your have made children together, you are making a life together. You each own a flat, if I understand correctly? His rent pays a mortgage on his flat, you own yours outright. He earns well, you don't earn but have rent as income, you look after the children, presumably you share living expenses from your incomes. And you are buying a small house together.

Financially the two of you have a very complicated arrangement of rental flats, mortgages, inheritance and earnings. I can't really work out which of you (if any) is benefitting most financially from the arrangement. In case, who benefits most financially or loses out is bound to change over time as circumstances change, in ways that you probably can't predict. That's kind of what marriage is for.

It is strange that you are willing to share ownership of the house which has huge financial implications for you, yet you still want final say. Emotionally I think he is right that he should have an equal say in decisions about the house which going to be your joint home with your children. Even if it's being bought with your money. So are you planning to be together for the long term or do you still expect to split up?

If you really intend to stay together then you need to switch from the current situation where everything is separate and individual unless it is explicitly joint/shared, to a new situation where everything is shared/joint unless it is explicitly separate and individual. And that probably does mean marriage. It is a commitment but given the other commitments you have already made I'm not sure why you're both holding back on this one.

I am going to be really rude (so apologies in advance).
Don't be so bloody stupid, it is your parents money, in your name only and leave it in trust for your children. Even if you ever marry and in your situation I would not, make your the property is ring fenced or in trust for the children.
He has a house, he has an investment in property.

I think you need to take into consideration the fact that your dp has been supporting the family since you gave up work 8 years ago - this has allowed you not to have to dip into your inheritance and has meant he has not been able to build up any individual savings himself.

As pp said you can’t choose which bits of finances to combine. You’ve been happy to put your partners salary into a joint pot each month to fund all your joint expenses - you can’t then say that you don’t want any of your money to be combined.

The people in London who are actually paying for it.

"Our pensions" ffs

There is absolutely no way I would be named on a mortgage, as your partner presumably will be as I doubt you would get one on your own and then not be put on the deeds. Your partner would be insane to do this, if you split he would still be liable to pay that mortgage but with absolutely no claim to the property, you’re basically using him as a guarantor.

I have a friend like this. Her and DP have been together since university (now 40+) they have 2 children. She inherited a lot when her father passed. They upgraded to a much larger house but the bills etc were all shared.

At the time (pre children) she made him agree that if anything happened to her then her (larger) share of the house would go to her brother. That may have changed now that they have children, but I always felt a little bad for her partner. They're still not married either.

I do feel as though you are being a bit unreasonable. I can see how you would want to protect your inheritance but honestly think how you would feel if the boot was on the other foot. As a compromise ask for your name to be put onto the property in London. To have not worked for 9 years and your DP has totally supported you all I do feel as though its a bit mean. It does sound slightly childish that you get the "deciding vote" on things. What if your DP had that attitude during the last 9 years - your vote meant nothing because you weren't bringing in any money.

If you'd said that he was a massive shit and treated you appallingly then things would be different, but I still say get your name on the London property. That just makes sense.

not read the full thread ...

When me and my partner (now my DH) moved into our first house together last year I put a chunk of money in, which I have ringfenced and we only have a small mortgage.

The clause in my will means if anything happens to me he can stay in the house as long as he wants but if he meets anyone else, moves them in or gets married the house gets sold and the money I put in goes to my boys and what is left is up to him what he does with. It protects my investment because if he moved someone in/got married they could claim and my boys could end up with nothing.

I would definitely have something legally written up to protect your children if anything happens to you.

Him paying the bills and you paying the mortgage doesn't cancel each other out. Paying a mortgage is like putting money into a high interest savings account, you end up with more wealth than you started (until the mythical housing crash, at least).

I would definitely have something legally written up to protect your children if anything happens to you.

They are also OP's partner's children...

Agree entirely @Hingey . @Littlething you can't think it's fair that his salary gets the mortgage and pays it but he gets nothing in the property?! Ringfence your inheritance and split the rest, or, if you part, he gets the equity acrued by the mortgage he is paying because you choose not to work and let him finance your lifestyle.

I'm not surprised he's upset TBH

You need legal advice.

I bet all the points about it being your inheritance and your rent paying the mortgage but it's a bit blurred when you want your income to be yours and your control and yet his income is family money. It'll be money he's earning that's paying for the extensions and increasing the value.

Effectively your job is a landlord. What percentage of your income goes into the new house and will he match that equally?

This is where legal advice needs to be sort to establish what each of you own stake wise and who will get what should you split and/or sell.

I also do not believe it would be fair for him to have his name on the deeds for the house, if you are paying the down payment from your own money, paying for the mortgage from your own income from the flat, and for the renovation again from your own family money. Basically you will continue to provide the family accommodation, as well as the childcare.

Regarding economic contribution over the past ~10 years, if you stopped working only upon having children and then became an SAHM, while he was able to work continuously full-time without any childcare-related impediment to his career advancement then that has been your economic contribution for, and it will be of enduring benefit to him, and only him, should you split. You presumably allowed him to develop his career without him having to worry much if at all about childcare, and you now probably have much lower future earnings potential that will last forever into future compared to if the childcare had been 50-50. There is nothing inherently unfair about that but it deserves to be recognised. On top of that you have provided for the accommodation, which would otherwise typically be the number one cost for any family household.

Going forward, if you were to split up for any reason, he could walk away and keep his nice job and income, and his flat, without giving you anything except perhaps a bit of child maintenance until they are 18.

If he is concerned about putting his time and energy into a renovation project and "getting nothing", then perhaps he should step back and refrain from putting his time and energy into it, and leave you to take the lead and design the house refurbishment to suit your own tastes.

Any time he may spend influencing the renovation design is for his own comfort while he is with you living in the house; he should not also stake a future claim against the house in the eventuality of a split.

I am writing this as a sole-breadwinner Dad married to a SAHM; I am adding that bit of context in case you want to show him this post and point out that this is not a female perspective.

I can kind of see his point. You both have London properties so are equal but you get the house and he has nothing. Yes, you’re paying for it but he’s paying for everything else. He could argue he is paying the mortgage and you pay the bills on the new house and then it would be partly his. If it was me I would set it up (legally) that if you pay deposit of £x and £y to do it up, if you separate you get £x + £y and half of any remaining equity. Your DP would get the other half of the remaining equity.

You'll be fucked with IHT too if anything happens to either of you.
My friend recently had to have a death bed marriage ceremony. After being With her partner for 38 years the got diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. She passed away 6 weeks post diagnosis.
59 years old.
You've got more cash than sense if you don't sort it out. The tax office will happily take a chunk of your kids inheritance

Soooo...he wants to marry your house...but not you.
I really wouldn't worry about upsetting him.

No it doesn’t. It funds her house, which she owns and also won’t let him make decor decisions about. So her (inherited) money is solidifying as an asset and his (earned) money is all going on feeding, clothing, bills for the family and her house, while OP chooses not to work.

Much as I normally would just say “protect your asset”, the make partner is getting a raw deal here.

Have you ever worked much OP?

In our case, I basically put down the deposit for both places we've bought together, as I had family capital, but DH is the higher earner and contributes more to bills.

We agreed to be 'tenants in common' on the legal paperwork, with me owning 70% and him 30% of our first flat (his suggestion). When we moved to the house I offered it could be 60/40, but he insisted on it remaining the same - I think it's probably the best solution for you and partner. Sounds like under circs 70/30 might be right split.

Yes that sounds fair. Why the bell would he keep pouring his earnings into supporting four people every month with absolutely zero protection ?