AIBU to think that if your partner pays part of the mortgage off you are not then expected to pay them back!

[whattheactual121]

So, this is really difficult to explain but here goes. My husband and I have been married for 3 years. I have a daughter from a previous marriage (deceased husband). We are really happy and have a great life but we have very different attitudes to money and we seem to talk about it a lot and find ourselves on completely different pages. The house we live in was my house. He has a house elsewhere that he worked hard to get and loves so does not want to sell it or rent it out (which I can understand) so it is a kind of holiday home (although I am not allowed to call it that!). A couple of years ago when the interest rates went up it was decided (I thought WE had decided but...) that hubbie would use 50k he had invested to pay off part of the mortgage, I also paid 50k at the same time, leaving us with only a small mortgage but naturally we both had a lot less ready cash. Simple, so I thought. Now, he is saying that this has used up a lot of his liquid assets and the deal was that it was the best use of the money at the time but that he thought he would get it back and now I am going back on what we discussed by clearly having no intention paying it back. I am flabbergasted and completely confused. He says he is really cross that I have gone against what was discussed. I of course assumed that once money goes to the mortgage that's it, you don't expect someone to reimburse you. In his defence, he is referring to the fact that I have rental properties that I had said could be used to pay off the mortgage, but that was my plan before we were married, since then I was really thinking that these will be a retirement fund, particularly as now is such a bad time to sell. He worries about money a lot and has been unemployed for a few months (between contracts) and doesn't cope with this uncertainly and stress. But this is not the first time he's mentioned it, before was when he was in a very well paid contract. Overall we are really financially secure and have no reason to worry, certainly a lot better off than most. However he still sees things very much 'yours' and 'mine' and cannot see 'ours'. I won't change his attitude, but am I losing my mind thinking that it was fair to assume that the money he paid off the mortgage was put into the joint property, out home and that's that? He says I should not have assumed that.

He paid off 50 and you paid off 50? What does he want repaying? Which house? A bit confused sorry!

Sounds messy- divorce him

I'm totally confused. Did you spend £50k of your own money on paying his mortgage? What does he want paying back on?

Surely you discussed terms? My oh bought me a car when I couldn't get a loan, I paid him bCK over 5 years only 12,500 but still.

Assuming the mortgage he has put 50K towards is the one on the house that was previously just yours, is he now on the mortgage too?

Does he pay you rent for living in your house? If he genuinely wants “his” and “yours” then I would back charge him rent.

I don’t fully understand whose is what and if you own him or not. But I think the pair of you have 100% brought this on yourselves by spending 100k and not actually discussing the terms of it at the time, it’s stupid.

Well you are right that we did not discuss terms. I really didn't think it was necessary! I suppose that's what I am asking, AIBU to think that this is a very normal and straightforward thing. We were just paying off part of the mortgage of a house that we both live in, that is our home. We are married so it will be his if anything happens to me anyway. If we divorce he can take half the house anyway!
To be clear, it is the mortgage on the house we live in (that was mine before, the mortgage is in my name only, he does not want to be on the mortgage). The house he has has no mortgage. We split the mortgage payments each month, but it is only around £150 each.

Is the house fully paid off now and in your name? So you have a house each. Does he pay for the expenses of his own house or does he take it out of joint money? Does he pay towards the expenses of your house or do you solely pay for that? If you died tomorrow, would the house be his or your daughter's?
I guess he's looking for you both to be in an equal position. I don't think I'd want to give my savings to pay off my husbands mortgage if I wasn't on the deeds.

Cross posted. Having read your last post, yes, if I were him, I'd expect t get my £50,000 back.

Have you drawn up wills? My understanding is that the first £259k belongs to the spouse after that if no will it's split between children and spouse if a will then by the will. So he may be entitled automatically to some of your home but you not to his. If he's intending to leave it to you and vice versa what's his problem

Not quite fully paid off yet which is why the mortgage is low. We can only have one home and that's the one we live in - we split bills but I pay for a lot more in terms of family stuff, pets, nice to haves etc. I'm fine with that btw. If I die, the house goes to him. There are other assets that dd would get. He will be her guardian so will have access to 100% of everything. I have mentioned the fact that he needs to be on the deeds, but he keeps brushing that off. It's solely about the cold hard liquid cash now!

Surely all your properties and all his will belong to both of you now you are married.

So he has helped pay for one of your joint properties 🤷‍♀️

Really? I'm genuinely interested to know why. You would be paying towards a house you live in and call home. Showing commitment, investing in that property. I don't see where the concept of paying it back comes in?

That's what I thought, but apparently I should not have presumed???

So he had £50k readily available

He used this to pay down the mortgage (you did the same) leaving a small mortgage with low monthly repayments

He is now saying he expected to get this money back

Where from exactly?? It's paid down the mortgage! Does he expect you to remortgage now to repay him? What on Earth would have been the point of it all??

So do you get your 150 a month back off his own previous home?

That’s so bizarre. I would have presumed the same thing as you - you’re combining finances in the effective manner. And if you were to separate at any point, surely his money would be worth more if kept invested in the house?

Surely the logical thing to do is to put the house in both your names, since you both paid the mortgage? That is paying him back, since he then owns part of it.

The "if we divorce" justification for not paying him back or putting his name on the deeds is tenuous, because if you have a great lawyer and he only has a good one, that'd be relatively easy to argue your way out of, and you're potentially unfairly £50k to the good.

The fact is that neither house is a joint property, because he owned one outright (I think?) before you married, and yours is only in your name (even though he's paid for a significant portion of it).

Put the house in your daughter’s name.

In your will, I mean.

Previous home makes no money - just sits there. Costs 5k per year in council tax! plus loads of maintenance. We go down there maybe 4 times per year. It is purely emotional connection.

"However he still sees things very much 'yours' and 'mine' and cannot see 'ours'."

The deeds need to change. I can see why he's unhappy putting 50k into the house that is held only in your name. You may think it's now "our house" but he thinks it's still yours, and legally it still is.

He is trying to rewrite the agenda in making you "pay him back". He put £50k into the house and he pays half the mortgage, that affects what proportion of the house he now owns. Does he expect you to pay him back his mortgage contribution every month and if not, why not? A lump sum payment is no different.

I just want to clarify I have this correct.
You and your husband both have additional properties/money plus the shared family home you live in (which used to be just yours in your previous marriage). You have a mortgage on this property.
At one time it made financial sense for your OH to liquidate some of his investments and use the money from that to pay off some of the mortgage on the family home. Presumably he was getting poor returns and mortgage interest had increased. You had considered selling one of your rental properties but instead you both decided to each raise £50k leaving you with a small mortgage on the family home.
Your OH financial security has changed as he now has no secure income and has used his 'safety net' to pay off the mortgage.

It seems to me that he now wants his £50k back so he can spend/count/invest independently. You don't have a spare £50k unless you sell one of your rental properties. You were going to do that initially.

If all that is correct this is about your OH having independent money to draw on. He can't do that unless he sells the family home which no-one is intending to do. Somehow he needs his £50k back so you can either remortgage, sell something, or offer him a share in the home. It could be a mix.
The challenge then comes with how to calculate what you owe.
What would his £50k investment be worth?
If you had not taken the £50k would you have been better off with your old mortgage, or with a remortgage now?
Would he accept say £25k and £25k share of family house (presumably to be inherited by your son)? Could you 'give' him a share of your rental?
It all sounds rather anal to me but I'm guessing it's come up because your OH feels insecure. If you had known this was his plan ie let's use his money for time being whilst interest rates suit, what different decisions would you have made. How ever you work it, if one of you looses out you should half/share the loss.

It sounds like he was expecting OP to sell one of her rental properties to pay him back and cover the remaining mortgage- based on previous conversations.

OP has now decided not to sell the rental property, but had not communicated this to her DH. I'm guessing this is because the mortgage is manageable now it's smaller.

I can see both sides. Sounds like the DH feels financially vulnerable while he's between contracts with no liquid assets.