To be reluctant about long term commitment because I own my home?

[FaithD]

Five years ago I was able to buy a 2 bed flat outright using a mix of savings and an inheritance. Not having to rent has been amazing.

My partner of a year currently rents and is looking at buying a small holiday home in his home country (where it is much cheaper to buy more spacious homes in good locations). He says he may well be up for buying a house here in the UK too but he needs to get settled status first - which he can do later this year.

As I start to think about the long term, I realize that 1) if we have kids where would they live and how would we manage it? 2) I actually love having my own property asset and don't fancy giving it up in marriage for example.

I know that probably isn't the popular opinion?! Interested to hear thoughts about this could work...

I would suggest you keep your own separate property (Use the rental income to pay for upkeep. Don't comingle the funds.) and jointly buy as a couple somewhere else.

where is he from? In some countries when you marry the assets before marriage are not include in marriage so your flat will still be your flat if you marry in his birth country.

He is from Denmark

Are you a family lawyer ? Or a lawyer at all?

Please don't listen to wanna be lawyers. It's not where you get married it is where you live as a married couple.

Assuming you live in England, the jurisdiction will the England and Wales and her flat very much will be a marital asset.

Please don't give legal advice if you really don't know.

@HowIrresponsible Live in Scotland

Not sure if rules are the same or not

LOL

See this is the problem...potentially different. I'm a solicitor in England not Scotland. So I don't know how Scottish law differs re divorce.

Glad you find it funny

Following with interest. I'm in a similar situation although he is a British citizen (as am I).

Problem is, I am close to owning my (modest) house outright. He has nothing.

I love him dearly and love the idea of marrying him, but relationships are so hard to sustain in the long term. I can't risk my financial security. I wish there were a way to ring fence or safeguard my house. We don't live together at the moment and I'm reluctant to change this.

I think you need to move in together as a first step- would you ask him to pay rent, or just a contribution to council tax, utilities, food etc?

Firstly don’t get married. Never worth it if you have assets. Could you afford to rent out your existing property and buy somewhere together?

If so you can do it as tenants in common which allows you to pre-specify what percentage of the equity accrues to each partner if you split?

I have done this with my DP: I own a property separately from him which is mine (and which my DD will eventually inherit). We have bought a property as tenants in common and two thirds of the equity will be mine, reflecting the value of my investment in it. I was very upfront with my partner that I would never marry him (or anyone else) as I want to ring fence my asset in the event of a split. He’s fine with it.

To be honest if a man can’t accept your right to protect your own investment he’s not a keeper anyway.

Depends what you want from life really. You are effectively saying that your property is the most important thing to you, more important than getting married, more important than co habiting even if you have children. Are you sure it matters that much to you?

This is all valid and entirely your choice, but it's an unusual one and it might come as a shock to him, and might not be a path he is interested in taking. Most people don't want this, most people want to combine their lives with the person they want to spend their life with, partly for practical and financial reasons, but also I guess because of the intimacy and support that comes with that. Even if that comes at the risk that they might eventually lose out financially.

When I met my partner he owned a house and I didn't, but he didn't hesitate to invite me to move in and share his life, finances were a secondary concern, because we made each other very happy. Your partner might be looking for that too.

@Lincoln24

You are effectively saying that your property is the most important thing to you, more important than getting married, more important than co habiting even if you have children

Seems extremely sensible to me. An investment such as a property will always be worth much more than a man.

And if you have the asset you don’t need the man financially so you’re laughing. You can shack up if you like or have children but without playing Russian Roulette with your security through marriage.

Theres no upside whatsoever for the OP in getting married.

Seems extremely sensible to me. An investment such as a property will always be worth much more than a man.

It is seen on here time and time again that women end up unmarried and having had children to men and owning nothing of their property and it leaves them screwed over when they split as they have no rights.

These men are frequently called cunts for doing that on here.

But a woman is encouraged to do it. The double standards never cease to amaze me. What would you call a man who said his property was worth much more than a woman **

@HowIrresponsible

But a woman is encouraged to do it. The double standards never cease to amaze me. What would you call a man who said his property was worth much more than a woman

Not comparing like for like.

Marriage exists to protect women by safeguarding their finances due to the fact that they frequently have to be economically inactive for several years while raising children.

Men don’t lose their jobs when they get pregnant. They don’t get “mummy tracked” at work or persuaded to cut their hours because “it works better for the family”. Men aren’t disadvantaged by having children. Women are.

Marriage is to protect the financially vulnerable. It’s not designed to be a cocklodger’s charter. Women are entirely entitled to and should protect their assets if they’re lucky enough to have them.

Fellow Dane here... First of all, people saying to never have children with someone from another country... Wow. Ok. Eye-opening. Yes, there have certainly been some complex legal cases reported in the media, but actually many immigrants don't see themselves going back to where they came from. I certainly don't see myself living there again, I'm not an expat. Hopefully not everyone considers me a social pariah to not have a serious relationship with.

As to the legal advice part, if you do want to get married, you can make various kinds of private agreements to protect your assets. E.g. your partner and kids can live in your house, but you own it, it doesn't become a joint asset, the same way his country house doesn't. You could also buy a mortgaged family home together, with you still retaining your own home separately.

Marriage is essentially a legal contract that regulates joining things together, so if you are mostly doing it for sentimental reasons, you need to speak to a solicitor about your opt-outs. Not marrying would be more beneficial for the objectives you are looking to achieve though.

Being foreign isn't related to your legal issue though, advice would be the same if it's Mike from down the road who rents a property.

If you are going to have kids, I'd recommend having a quick glance at what that looks like in Denmark. You'll find that as a woman you'd have more rights, income and childcare support - if both of you had any interest in living there. Becoming a parent doesn't force you into low income there, which is why Scandinavian women usually don't marry for 'income protection' reasons. You would however have to take into account that moving your children back to the UK would be legally very difficult, same as he'd find it difficult to move them to Denmark if they are born and raised in the UK.

Good luck!