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?

Quite aware. How do you think those without funding are paid for? And where do those funds come from?

Well, to be honest, having lived a very comfortable life I don’t think I want to end up in a basic council funded care home in my old age, if it’s needed. So I have made damn sure I can afford a care home that will
provide the comfort and service I am used to, if I need it. And if I don’t, well, that’s good!!

100k is not much unless he has a private pension too. What will he live off once retired, his rental income?

So as long as the house is in OP name only, if he pays towards the mortgage, ie. gives her money that she then pays the mortgage with then he has no rights? I see a few posts saying different on mn about how they get a stake. But thinking about it, it is just rent. The opinion is nothing in his name, no bills, building work. I think a lodger agreement is best.

His pension?

The OP doesn't know what he's saving for though. Plenty are currently saving so they can pay off a chunk of mortgage when their current deal is up. Some are saving because they don't want to work until they are nearly 70. It's not like this guy has millions in the bank. I think he and the op just like spending money (or not) on different things. She has no claim on his cash. If she feels like she does, she could charge him rent.

I don't understand the mentality that you might as well spend it because you might die tomorrow. If you die, what does it matter if you saved and 'missed out' on consumer goods? I'm insured to the hilt and have substantial savings and investments. My wife and children would inherit enough money to pay off the mortgage and not have to worry about money. My wife is pretty sensible with money and could probably get away with never working again.

I'd rather pop my cloggs knowing that my family are going to be ok financially, rather than fearful they'll be destitute.

Yes and the security of knowing the rainy day fund is there is worth more to me than the short lived "thrill" of a better holiday or any material goods.

100% agree.

While I'm very fortunate that we're able to both save/invest, contribute substantially to pensions and still have plenty spare to spend on other things we value, if we so choose, there is nothing I could buy that would bring me more satisfaction than knowing we have a good level of security and certainty for the future from our saving.

I do think some (many?) people totally miss the psychological side of having big savings.

We’ve managed both. We’ve had - and are planning more - the holidays and nice things and we’re financially secure. We’ve both seen very clearly how easily life can drop stuff on you that all the money in the world can’t mitigate and there’s no certainty in life. Money is great servant and a poor master.

YABU.

I hate when people try to spend my money for him. He just sounds frugal which is a good thing. It’s not as if you have to do without basics so he can save obsessively.

The voice of reason