Am I paying too much to live at my partners house?

[RJCHelp]

At the beginning of the year I moved into my partners house and I offered that I would pay £600 per month (not including food, I contribute separately to this). I came to this number as this was the amount I used to pay for my mortgage + service charge at my flat.

I have since found out that his bills (utilities only) total £800 per month but in recent months, he has been reducing these e.g cancelling sky and moving onto a cheaper energy tarriff (his electric car sucks most of the energy!) so essentially, I am paying for more than 50% of the bills here and he always said prior to me moving in that he didn’t need any help with the mortgage… HOWEVER I am better off than when I was living at my flat (£725 pre inflation) 🙁.

Do you think my contribution is too much? I am essentially paying £200 towards his mortgage here…

Please help x

You will be paying tax on the income from your resented out property. Plus the general up keep and possibly paying estate agents. And covering when property is free. If you add this extra cost to your payment to partner, are you not actually spending more per month than when you lived in your flat?

sounds like you have the responsibility of half (or more than) of the bills but none of the power

@YoBeaches

Her DP was managing financially before she moved in. They didn't get a new place together, yet somehow he thinks it's fine to profit from her.

But she was managing financially before she moved in to his too and continues to be managing financially by renting her place out for more than her mortgage costs (obviously) something she can do because she lives with him.

She literally says "I am better off than when I was living at my flat" so is profiting from the situation too. If you don't think 'it's fine' for him to profit from the new arrangement, does that mean she shouldn't think 'it's fine' to profit from it either? Or is it ok if she's better off, but not him?

Then you should still be paying the service charge on the flat.
You need to sit down and work out what the outgoings are for both of you

I think the fair way to do this is split it 50/50 then it is totally fair. This will stop any resentment and feeling used or being taking the p*ss put of. Half is reasonable and you should discuss what extras you both agree on and want/need I.e, sky. If it was a friend the I think they could ask for what they want but the fact your together makes the difference 💯

Let me make it easier for people to understand then: it's because living with a partner gives the guy a lot privileges such as: using everywhere in the house as mutual space which wouldn't be possible if there was a stranger living there (more spatial freedom), expecting to eat his partner's food if she has cooked something already (less money towards food), washing done together (less energy and water bills), being able to invite a family member/friend to stay over some nights in the second bedroom or the living room (higher social freedom) as the couple can share the same bed, not having to create a contract for his partner and pay lawyer/agency fees (less money on bureaucracy stuff) etc etc. This is coupled with the fact that domestic work is still a very gendered phenomenon (look at the social research on this) and it is fair to assume that an average household has the woman working more towards the chores.

So you see that being partners with the lodger/tenant does give a landlord certain privileges and it sounds a bit more exploitative when he has his cake and can eat it too.

Don't you see how this is different than the landlord living with a tenant whom he isn't romantically involved with?

She has her mortgage. He has his mortgage. They should share the bills (cost of living) equally until such a point they are financially tied together, then they can consider their joint income and joint outgoings together as one.

This is fair in the event they break up, nobody has been hard done by or feels hard done by the other.

If that's not affordable to one of them, it's needs to be discussed prior to moving in, but that's not the case here.

Didn't op say his was rented?

No, she said he said he didn't need any help with his mortgage.

Ah yes i misread it. Where she said it's rented she must mean her own place that she rented out.
Been a long day

I think £600 sounds fine. My then boyfriend (now DH) paid me £500 per month when he moved in with me nearly 30 years ago, we were both better off from the arrangement.

She didn't say she was against paying rent, but paying 75% of the bills while he benefits from the equity in unfair

If it is fair for OP to pay nothing towards the mortgage OP will be fine if her partner suggests it is now his turn to rent his property out covering his mortgage "making little profit" and they can both take a turn to live in OP's property with him paying 50% of the bills and none of the mortgage. Depending on the size of his mortgage he could be a grand a month better off.

but she benefits from her rise in equity from the place she rents out.

paying 75% of the fixed bills but no rent contribution - ie living rent free - sounds a fair deal to me. it avoids her paying towards his mortgage and equity issues if they split. and you'd look to change it down the line when things more serious, you choose to buy together etc.
Though if i am paying 75% of the bills, i don't want some removed - I WANT MY SKY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The way I read it the £800 figure for bills included the mortgage?

If the £800 includes mortgage then it's unfair.

If £800 is only utilities and he pays the mortgage separately then yes I can see how it's fair she pays more % of bills as her contribution

This thread is super frustrating to read!

What isn’t mentioned in the first post (but clarified later) is that OP has her own property and mortgage which she rents out and makes a small profit (rent covers the mortgage). Moving in with her partner has enabled her to do this.

If the roles were reversed and her partner rented his house out and moved in with her, would it be fair for him to only pay for half of bills/utilities but allow OP to pay for the full mortgage with no assistance (even though his mortgage is being covered by rent)? I highly doubt it! Double standards on most of the advice in this post.

He’s not “profiting” from her or being a CF - they are both benefitting from the arrangement!

I think that’s fine £600 all in plus food? No utility bills, council tax, house insurance, garden waste collection, window cleaners, wi-fi?
What about wear and tear and what happens in white goods need replacing?
I think you’re just about right with £600.

The correct way of doing this is to work out what the house would cost to buy currently with NO DEPOSIT on an INTEREST ONLY mortgage, then pay half of this and half of the bills. That way no one is subsidising anyone.
Everyone ignores the equity in the property - this is removed by finding out the full current market value of the property.
Using the figure for an interest only mortgage is the figure that a bank would charge for borrowing the full market value of the property.
This is not subsidising his mortgage - this is paying half of the irretrievable cost each month of the property. Like paying rent - as he does.
He is still left paying the principal (assuming he is on a repayment mortgage) and she should have no rights to the equity in the future.
This is the ONLY fair way to do things as no one subsidises anyone - no emotions just pure logic.

I think your partner has shown a lack of honesty or generosity about this. You pay £600 per month. You pay separately for food as well. You pay more than half the utilities since your share would be £400 pounds or maybe less since you say it's his electric vehicle that is chewing through electricity. In fact, you are now subsidising his mortgage to the tune of £200 a month - on a property you don't own, have no claim on and could be kicked out without notice, not to mention sharing the bedroom. He's now only paying for half the utilities when he was previously responsible for all of them and although there may be a slight rise with another person in the house there's only one lot of heating, lighting and so on. Yes, you own another property which is rented - and you are taking the risks of careless tenants or tenants who fail to pay the rent and have to be winkled out at great expense or some dreadful combination of both so you are saving money but so is he. On the other hand, in your property you had security of tenure and you don't here. I imagine your tenants might have a fixed term lease so it's not as if the place would be available for your immediate use if he did kick you out.

To be honest, I would find financial underhandedness more difficult to deal with than sexual infidelity. I think it's because financial underhandedness requires planning as well as stealth rather than being random lust. I just can't imagine my husband, and we had separate finances for many years, taking advantage like this. This would be a massive red flag for me. This is how he is acting in what I assume are the early stages of your relationship. Just imagine how he might be acting 10 years in.

move out, rent somewhere
your BF can get a lodger at a more commercial rate.

I live with my partner in his house. When I moved in he showed me all his bill to utilities etc and we divided it in half. It works out at £390 per month which includes everything including stuff like broadband, council tax, tv licence energy, water etc. So £600 sounds a lot if it’s just the 2 of you. It’s not fair if you are paying more than him so you definitely need a conversion about that.

Go back to your own house, OP. You're allowing this man to live almost free of charge. Whilst sharing a bed with him, too. I bet you do chores as well. & it sounds like you're paying a big whack of the usage cost for his electric car. He's sneaky, and mean. He must be laughing, especially if he's cutting down everything to absolute basic packages. If your own house has more than 2 bedrooms you could simply rent out 1 room and you have the other(s). I mean you don't even have your own room where you are now. Just go home and stop letting a man use you.

Just thinking this same thing…for the second time tonight.

I'd say exactly the same thing if the genders were reversed or the same genders or whatever. If he wanted help with the mortgage he should have been upfront about it and it would be categorised as rent rather than giving her any right to his house. She wouldn't actually be paying the mortgage she'd be paying him. She thought she was paying half the utilities and it turns out she was paying more than half and he was probably using more of the electricity anyway with his electric car guzzling electricity. She was also paying for her own food. He didn't tell her what was actually going on.

Presumably the new lodger won't be sharing a room or having sex with him. Or what sort of lodging arrangement did you have in mind?

Not exactly, as the concept of a mortgage is that interest payments are much higher to start with than the equity paid off and that ratio changes as you pay more of it off. It’s not an interest only mortgage after all, so the interest only calc interest always stays high and isn’t accurate; you’d be paying off their mortgage. Rent is a better comparison to use here, it takes out the element where you gain equity.