Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 17 18

Original poster

Who should really own our house?

429 replies

Littlething · 14/07/2022 12:47

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.

OP posts:

SleeplessInEngland · 14/07/2022 15:34

mellicauli · 14/07/2022 15:31

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

Nothing the OP has said merits that conclusion.

Grumpyoldpersonwithcats · 14/07/2022 15:39

HinchcliffeandMurgatroyd · 14/07/2022 15:33

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

Show quote history

And if house prices go down. The loss will be entirely his until they get to negative equity...

Not fair at all.

RollingInTheCreek · 14/07/2022 15:41

No contribution other than wow you are so lucky OP. SO SO lucky to have this problem. Given a flat in London and a massive deposit and being a SAHM for 11 years. I am green over here.

SirVixofVixHall · 14/07/2022 15:42

Bunty55 · 14/07/2022 12:50

I think if he wants his name on your house then your name should be on his house also.. I have briefly read your post and am going back to read again but that's my first thought. He wants his cake but he wants to eat yours as well ??

Agree.
You aren’t married. He may well be lovely but if things ever go wrong between you and you split, he will have his house but your will also be half his. If he then marries and has more children, his wife and other children could get half your house.

BoJoGoGo · 14/07/2022 15:42

See a solicitor.
He’s not offering to sell his flat and put his equity into the new house, I’d tread very carefully.

CharlotteOH · 14/07/2022 15:44

Lots of interesting thoughts on the thread.

If you guys have chosen not to get married and chosen not to have joint finances and you’re paying for the house, then legally it makes sense for it to be in your name. I’m not sure it makes any sense emotionally though.

Sounds like you need to work out if this is a joint family home or your personal property. But if you pick the latter, it will affect your relationship which at the end of the day are all about taking the risk of trusting someone 🤷‍♀️

Maybe have it in both names but hold it as tenants in common (not joint owners) so eg hr owns 10% and you own 90%?

BoJoGoGo · 14/07/2022 15:46

I wouldn’t get married if I was the OP, I surprised the DP isn’t dragging the OP down the alter.

unicornglittersprinkles · 14/07/2022 15:47

YABVVU in my opinion. His money gets spent on living expenses and keeping you and the kids in the lifestyle you're used to, meaning you're in the fortunate position to not need to work. You now have an opportunity to contribute to the family through inheritance and you want to ring fence your contribution in a property, solely in your name which will likely make you money in the long run whilst his money, once spent is spent. Not fair at all!

VioletInsolence · 14/07/2022 15:47

You both have your own flats. Depending on how long he’s been financing you all and how long he continues, he could end up paying more than the value of half the house. I think it’s fair that his name is on the deeds and I think you may have already damaged the relationship by not properly acknowledging his contribution. It’s not as if you’re going to be destitute anyway if you own a flat outright in London….that’s enough for a property elsewhere plus a pension.

Anothernamechangeplease · 14/07/2022 15:47

I can see both sides. You're not married and you clearly have separate finances. You presumably feel that you're contributing to family finances by providing the accommodation. However, he is out working while you're at home, presumably living a pretty easy life now that your children are older.

I can understand why you think it's your money and you should be able to keep it. However, I also understand why he feels that it's unfair. You get to invest your money and keep the asset for the future, while he has to fritter away his income on food, bills and other expenditure for the family that doesn't add to his assets in the longer term. If he wasn't working, or if he only covered half of the bills and invested the other half for his own future security, you would have to cover your living costs by getting a job or spending some of your inheritance.

If you want to keep the house in your name, then I think the fairest way would be for each of you to cover half of the living costs so that he can invest what he saves as a result of this. That way, you can both protect your future while contributing equally.

I do think that some of the responses would have been different if the house was in the man's name.🙄

DogInATent · 14/07/2022 15:48

There is no financial balance in this relationship. At the moment, despite all her assets the OP doesn't contribute an income - and when she's in a position to do so (renting the flat) she wants to selfishly protect that income by turning it 100% into an appreciating fixed asset (the house).

There is a possible alternative though, but it still needs professional advice.

His flat. Remains his. The rental income pays the mortgage on the flat.
London flat. Remains hers. The rent provides her with an income.

New house. Large deposit paid with the remaining inheritance. Mortgage paid 50:50 by him (from salary) and her (from rental income). Running costs, utilities, food and family expenses paid jointly according to ability to pay based on the balance of residual incomes (his salary after mortgage, her rental income after mortgage). Ownership is tenants in common split as a percentage to reflect deposit plus half mortgage (her) and half mortgage (him) - this only works if mortgage contributions are equal otherwise the maths gets very complicated due to compound variable interest.

The current problem is, as pointed out in a recent reply, that one person is gaining all the appreciating assets whilst the other is pouring all their income down the revenue expense drain. Both members of this relationship need an income from which to cover their fair share of expenses.

If anyone needs a perspective change, it's the OP not her DP.

dolobug · 14/07/2022 15:49

I don't think you are being either reasonable or unreasonable, I guess I think you should just get married and be all in, both of you.

PinkCheetah · 14/07/2022 15:49

Do not put his name on the deed unless he's willing to add your name to his flat.

BoJoGoGo · 14/07/2022 15:50

The OP does have an income, rental income from her London flat which will pay the nee mortgage. She’s also doing all the childcare.

1FootInTheRave · 14/07/2022 15:51

No way I'd be paying towards something I wouldn't have a stake in.

BoJoGoGo · 14/07/2022 15:53

He could remortgage his London flat to raise money to put down on the new property .

Winter2020 · 14/07/2022 15:55

Hi OP,
I have read your update - that neither you or your partner had any objection to getting married it was just that life got in the way.
Get married and (in your long term established situation) all of this headache goes away... all properties/ income/ savings and pensions will be joint marital assets with no need for the legal advice.

You have two children and have lived as a married couple for years so becoming divided about who owns what is silly.

Why not chat to your partner then ring your local registry office for availability?

Anothernamechangeplease · 14/07/2022 15:55

BoJoGoGo · 14/07/2022 15:50

The OP does have an income, rental income from her London flat which will pay the nee mortgage. She’s also doing all the childcare.

Yes, but the children are 8 and 11, so it's not as if she is at home with preschoolers!

And the point is, the rental income is being used to pay for the house, which will appreciate in value over time. Meanwhile, the partner's income will be spent on consumables with nothing to show at the end of it.

TiddleyWink · 14/07/2022 15:59

This sounds a bit odd and not like you’re operating as a proper committed family unit. TBH it sounds like what’s his is yours (in terms of his salary coming in while you don’t work) but what’s yours is also yours.

In my opinion after 15 years you’re either all in as a family or not. If my partner was still legally ring fencing their own assets after 15 years and two kids, while not working and bringing no salary in, I can’t say I’d be happy. Yes the rental income from your flat has helped support your household but your parents gave you that, it’s not like you worked hard for it. I can’t imagine having such good fortune yet wanting to ensure my partner of 15 years and kids father was prevented from sharing in it. Is he some kind of poor relation in the set up and that’s why he’s not allowed an opinion on the wallpaper! Sounds like an awful way to live to me but that’s why I’m married I guess.

Yes he might leave you, but if I were him and you ring fenced all the assets you were literally handed, expected to continue not working while I earned and supported the household, and then told me you would be having the upper hand in decisions about things like decor in our family home, well let’s say that would increase the chances of the relationship breaking down substantially!!

I just can’t fathom living like this as a family.

stuntbubbles · 14/07/2022 15:59

If it’s the family home for all of you, and you’re demanding the right to choose all the renovations and decor etc just because you’re richer than him, then that’s really unfair of you. Imagine if you married someone richer than you and he wouldn’t let you decorate or take any of your renovation ideas on board. Wouldn’t be much of a relationship would it.
This with bells on. You need to consider the finances, deeds, inheritance, who owns what, etc, as one issue. And the renovation and decor decisions as another entirely separate thing: it’s his home, even if you decide that financially, it’s not his house.

Although I do think you’re both being VVVVVU to end up owning three properties between you when you only need to live in one.

picklemewalnuts · 14/07/2022 16:07

Honestly, given that he's raised it as an issue, I'd use that as an introduction to the need to regularise everything. It's the best way to secure the future of your dc in the event of something happening to either of you.

Each get independent financial advice, discuss the ramifications of marriage, and make an informed choice about who owns what and how to proceed.

Then make a conscious, informed choice about what to do- which may be to ensure all things are in joint names, or it may be that you each make wills in favour of your DC. There are all sorts of options. Explore them.

Hont1986 · 14/07/2022 16:09

I think this is financial abuse to be honest, and if you were a man people would have seen it from the very start. It's fair enough to ringfence your deposit, but I can't see why you get to claim that your income pays for the mortgage only, not any of the other bills.

Why can't his income pay for the mortgage (thus making him 'deserving' of being on the deeds) and your income pay for the bills?

itsgettingweird · 14/07/2022 16:10

If you put in the capital for this and pay the mortgage I think you need to then get a job and earn enough to pay 50% of the family bills and keep your left overs separate too.

At the minute you want your cake and to eat it.

You want to put your money into the house which he gets nothing from.

Then want to have his money fund your bills and your food etc and he gets nothing to show for it.

Then all children novices are split equally and holidays split equally.

I'm always for protecting ourselves at woman but not at the detriment of the male getting equality in the relationship.

Pinkdelight3 · 14/07/2022 16:10

Sounds a bit like you've got very used to being funded by everyone else yet don't think anyone else deserves financial security.

This 1000%

Higgeldypiggeldy35 · 14/07/2022 16:10

Definitely do tenants in common and draw up an agreement that deposit is protecetd but profit it split equally

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 17 18