To think this level of saving is extreme and I’m right to question it?

[ITru]

My DP earns 3,800 after tax. Although we live together he also owns a home and so our finances have always been separate and we just split food bills and heating for my place. Anyway…

it recently came to light that DP is saving 1,500 from an income of 3,800. He never asks me to sub him or anything so that’s not the issue… the issue is he has often said let’s go somewhere cheaper for dinner or let’s go abroad one less night etc. he’s always trying to cut costs. Now I know he’s saving this it’s really annoyed me. Like I say he does pay his way so that’s fine but I can’t understand why for example we went somewhere average for my birthday dinner recently or why we couldn’t have split the cost of a swanky hotel when we went away in summer rather than camping like we did!!

I know everyone has a different perspective on how to spend money and what to spend it on but AIBU to think this is extreme?

Yep, and neither of them would be better off for it.

Do people disagree with the arrangement because it's a man living in a woman's house, perhaps? Would it be more acceptable the other way around? 🤔

He needs to save more sensibly, pension and stocks and shares ISA’s. Far far far too much cash. It’s falling in value in real terms. THAT’s the issue here, not the saving.

Where does the OP say the savings are sitting in his current account?

You pay to live somewhere. It’s that simple.

It's his choice. He'll build up a really good fund for retirement, possibly be able to retire early, or take a sabbatical, not be stressed out if he loses his job, or take more time with the kids if that's your plan.

Neither of you is unreasonable you're just prioritising differently.

I can't tell from your post whether it is simply the fact he saves more than you deem appropriate that bothers you, or that he's cheap and will always look for the bargain basement option, even for special occassions like a birthday celebration. If it's the former, I was taught to save half my salary every month, just as my mother did. Unforunately, with today's costs and my extremely low income, that's just not possible for me. I find your other half's saving sensible and admirable.

If the real problem is he's cheap and mean and would never ever agree to something nice because he won't spend more than a penny, then that is an issue. There needs to be a balance. But surely you have discussed what this balance looks like to each of you? As others have pointed out, there's a wide variety between 5* holidays and camping in a caravan park.

You pay to live somewhere. It’s that simple.

He is paying bills though.

. Have you actually discussed your differing attitudes to money op?

You have already proven that you don't understand investing and so have no idea of the risk rating of specific investment funds. You also don't seem to understand FCA regulations.

He's paying what they, between them deemed appropriate for their situation.

What's your attitude to adult children moving back and not being made to pay rent?

If the boyfriend starts contributing to the OPs mortgage then he may ask for an agreement to be drawn up in the event of a breakup & if he pays rent the OP may need to pay tax on that.

What's your attitude to adult children moving back and not being made to pay rent?

Or someone who doesn’t work but shares a home with their partner. It’s almost like it’s not that simple 😆😆

She can repeat it many many times but it doesn’t make it true 🤷‍♀️

in a normal relationship, accomodation costs are shared. men who don’t contribute towards the cost of accommodation are typically considered to be cocklodgers. The fact that he has his own house makes no difference.

no one in their right mind would allow a man to move in and not contribute to accommodation, so that he could save significant sums of money whilst they are unable to do so themselves.

@ITru it’d be great if you could explain the the situation with the house, is he keeping it empty in case your relationship fails, or is there someone living in there?

in a normal relationship, accomodation costs are shared. men who don’t contribute towards the cost of accommodation are typically considered to be cocklodgers. The fact that he has his own house makes no difference.

only on MNs, in real life I know plenty of people who moved in together & didn’t pay towards the others rent/mortgage immediately if ever. That tended to happen when property was sold/new property was bought. And I know some women who never did as they stopped working after a baby.

DH provided 3/4s of a significant deposit for our home but it’s 50/50. He also pays far more in living costs because I’m p/t. Am I a female cocklodger?

I thimk he can save as much as he wants, it's just odd that you never had a conversation on why he had so little money on such a good wage before. Neither of you are wrong in what you want to save. You have to decide if this is the lifestyle you want or not.

If anyone else was living there then they’d be paying rent though!

@Trainerstrainers

“He also pays far more in living costs because I’m p/t. Am I a female cocklodger?”

only if you believe there is no intrinsic value in you being the primary carer to your DC.

but if you were unmarried, with no shared DC and were squirrelling away double what your partner could save, whilst contributing nothing to the accommodation costs, yes, I’d absolutely think you were the female equivalent. Would you argue that you weren’t in this circumstances? Be sure that seems more akin to the OPs situation.

Would they?

Adult child back from uni? Stay at home parent? Elderly parent?

Families support each other in different ways. Whatever that family looks like. It's not up to you to decide who should or shouldn't be paying rent to live in that house. It's upto the owner of the house and the person moving in as to what's appropriate for their situation.

MN posters deciding he's a cock lodger doesn't change that decision or the situation.

And if they both move into his house instead, with exactly the same setup regarding costs? Neither of them is better or worse off however they do this.

They clearly both want to each own a home but live together.

If OP's partner was renting his house out then yes, I expect they'd be doing things differently.

You seem desperate to paint this man in a bad light even though OP is doing noth8ng of the sort herself, other than questioning the proportions of saving v spending on luxuries.

Families support each other in different ways. Whatever that family looks like. It's not up to you to decide who should or shouldn't be paying rent to live in that house. It's upto the owner of the house and the person moving in as to what's appropriate for their situation

Absolutely. But that’s entirely separate to the matter of whether the OPs DP is then pulling his weight with the OP.

anyway the OP seems to be conspicuously reluctant to answer questions about what is going on with her DPs house so this thread can be nothing more than assumptions and guess work.

either way if my so called “darling” partner was able to save double what I could because he wasn’t equally contributing to our shared living costs and reducing our holidays to camping trips to boot I’d be reconsidering my life choices.

£77k is a lot in cash but not much in terms of saving for retirement. He might be better directing around half into his pension as he would also get an extra tax top up and benefit from investment growth.

@CagneyAndLazy

“You seem desperate to paint this man in a bad light”

it’s a chat thread so i’m not desperate to do anything, but certainly if OP was my friend and she was living with a man who was able to save double what she was because he wasn’t contributing equally to their shared accomodation I’d be miffed for her.

I’m genuinely surprised how many people think it’s ok for him to live rent free. I’d be more sympathetic if he didn’t pay anything because he was broke but the fact he’s able to save significantly more than she can, purely because he doesn’t pay rent puts her at a huge financial disadvantage and it wouldn’t be for me 🤷‍♀️

But the whole point is, the reason he has more savings is that he saves and she doesn’t. It’s nothing to do with ‘rent’.

Their actual costs are very similar. They both pay a mortgage. They share the bills 50:50 on the house they are living in, and I expect he has some bills for the unoccupied house as well. But, of what’s left after their similar bills, he saves more than she does. And she thinks he should save less and spend more (on her).

There’s nothing in the OPs post that indicates she wants any rent from him (wisely, as it’s far better for her not to, from a security of her own perspective). But even if he did pay rent I think he’d still save more than she does, as they have very different approaches to money.

@DancingNotDrowning He's able to save more as he earns more.

OP hasn't said what the mortgages cost (understandably as it's irrelevant to her thread) but if they both pay out £500 on their respective mortgages then the fact he lives in OP's house, paying half the bills and food, etc., has absolutely zero to do with how much each can save.

It would be no different if they both lived in his house instead, or if they lived half the year in each other's homes in turn.

@CagneyAndLazy does he earn more?

we have absolutely no way of knowing what their incomings and outgoings are and how they compare but it’s an absolute that if he was paying towards their shared accommodation expense, she’d have more money coming in and would therefore be able to at least choose to save more. I’m baffled that you and other posters think income and ability to save are not linked.

anyway this is like one of those weird maths questions where everyone comes up with a different answer. I don’t think we’re going to agree.

Where has the OP said she would like to save more but can’t afford too?