To not want to be DP’s tenant?

[barhumbug]

DP and I have been together almost 4yrs. I moved in with him as he owns his own home and at the time we met I was in shared accommodation so it made a lot more sense. He has always wanted me to feel like it’s ‘my’ home rather than me living in his house but I can’t help but still feeling like I am. He’s never made me feel that way but it’s always in the back of my mind that I am and I hoped that one day this would change.

Since I moved in he has refused to allow me to contribute a penny to anything related to the house. I give a contribution to bills but that’s it. Mortgage, white goods that need replacing etc have all been paid by him 100%. I have offered to contribute to white goods but he has refused. I understand completely his reluctance to allow me to contribute to the mortgage as he doesn’t want me having any kind of claim to any part of his house if we were to split. Fair enough, I absolutely understand, he worked really hard to buy his home and I wouldn’t want to take away any part of that.

Due to an inheritance he has now paid off the mortgage in full so is mortgage free. Fantastic! He is now thinking about potentially upgrading to a bigger property with parking as we live in a very desirable area and parking is a nightmare. Plus maybe having an extra bedroom for guests to visit etc.

However, property is expensive here and the size/type he is looking at would be right at the top of his budget, meaning his living costs would increase a lot with a new mortgage. Basically, he could just about afford it on his own but it would be a stretch. His plan, as it currently stands is for me to pay ‘rent’ as a contribution to housing costs but I wouldn’t be on the mortgage or have a claim to any part of the house so he would keep everything in the event of a split.

Due to a combination of unfortunate circumstances when I met DP I was in the process of digging myself out of debt and had no savings. Since then I’m very proud of myself in that I’ve managed to completely clear my debts, rebuild my credit rating to excellent and have a few grand in savings. As such I have very little chance of getting a property on my own but we could easily afford a decent place together with our joint earnings.

Aibu in thinking I’m not ok with this? It doesn’t make sense (to me) for him to stretch himself super thin just to be able to keep 100% of the risk and responsibility of a new house while I pay him ‘rent’ and effectively build nothing for myself? I will obviously continue to save as much as I can anyway but I still would have no chance of buying my own place if we split in the future. He doesn’t have any immediate plans to buy, he’s thinking ahead for 5yrs time to enable him to
build a bigger deposit for a new place. He could change his mind in that time as by then we would have been together almost 9yrs but I’m not
sure I want take that risk. I see us very much as being in a long term, potentially life long partnership and I really want us to have something that is ‘ours’ and currently there is nothing. All our finances are separate, we won’t be getting married as he is staunchly against it. I’ve come to terms with that and I’m ok with it as I understand his reasoning but for some reason this feels like a hill I’m willing to die on. I’m sure he does love me and very much also sees us as a life long partnership but I know he also got badly burned by a previous long term partner and narrowly avoided losing his home when they split so I’m sure that’s a big factor here.

I just really don’t want to be his ‘tenant’. I want to be an equal partner and if this goes ahead I will still feel like I’m ’living in his house’ no matter how much he wants me to see it as ‘ours’. I can’t quite explain but it feels like the power dynamic would be totally off. I’m not even sure how the logistics would work, would I have a tenancy agreement etc?

I’m not sure if I’m making a bigger deal of it than it is? Tbh I’m only in the position I’m in now because of his encouragement and support and this feels a bit like I’m throwing my toys out the pram if I don’t get my way. I don’t know if it’s worth throwing away what is, in every other sense a fantastic relationship.

*We don’t have kids and will be staying child free so no need to worry about any of that!

It doesn't bode well that he doesn't want to share his house with you and essentially doesn't want to commit. Can you afford your own place? In your position I'd say go for it and I'll get my own place too. I wonder if he can afford a bigger place so easily without you paying "rent".

It's not fair OP but it's what he's offering so make sure you look out for yourself.

Whilst you have benefited from the arrangement- you are leaving yourself completely at risk. I know you've said you're not getting married but if something happens to him then you would get nothing. Your house would belong to his next of kin and you'd have no claim. You'd also have no say in any medical issues as you're not next of kin. Getting married protects both of you to a degree but you're the one who stands to lose everything. If he saw this as a committed relationship then he'd want some kind of protection for you surely?
He benefits from moving and you paying rent but unlike a renter - you'd have no rights as you'd actually be a lodger as its his main residence so you have zero rights if he kicks you out.
Perhaps put a post in one of the reddit legal pages as you're wide open with no protection.

@barhumbug this.

Sit him down and explain that you don't want to pay rent in a bigger house because you need to save so that you can buy a property in your own name. Suggest that you stay in the present property. Why does he need a big house?

There are a few things at play here.

There is 1) looking at this from a purely commercial pov and 2) trying to read into what those commercial decisions mean related to emotional, longer term relationship commitments.

OP would 'love' to get married. But is willing to forgo this to stay with this guy. But marriage has commercial implications - and he isn't making a commercial decision equivalent to marriage.

I think this is the crux of it. OP wants commitment - emotional and commercial equivalent to marriage - even if she isn't married Her partner isn't giving this. So, at a cross roads.

It would be very possible to drift along for years like this. But OP is exposed as she isn't getting what she wants. And the relationship is therefore wildly imbalanced. This doesn't make the partner financially abusive. It makes him and her not commercially compatible without compromise.

What a bizarre method of “making a point.” Don’t we have language for that?

And isn’t this the equivalent of saying “Elon Musk today ran over a homeless man while driving a Tesla. ‘I was not at fault’ reported the billionaire’I was just making the point that the man should have chosen to be in a house and not on the street.’

Funny how many men are absolutely as committed as marriage without the actually ceremony..... but are out the door without a backwards glance when something younger catches their eye, as quick as they can pack.
In this case he would simply be telling OP she has 24 hours to be packed and gone.

I saw it quite a few times in work with men in their late 30's and even early 40's.
They weren't interested in children either.

Funny that they were married with a baby on the way within 12 months.

So many women absolutely refuse to countenance the idea that they are "the good enough for now partner", while men enjoy the comforts of a relationship until they find the one.

In my experience most women either really like a man or not, they have zero interest in wasting their time investing in a guy that is fine for now until the one appears, certainly not actually living with one.

Yet men do it time and again.
I have a couple of friends who have sons now living with girlfriends in their very late 20's and they absolutely know there will not be a day out.

One of them mentioned to us that her husband had a very firm word with him reminding him about contraception and taking absolutely full responsibility for it.
The conversation came up because he is hoping to work abroad with his company when his current project ends in 18 months and his girlfriend is a primary teacher with no interest in working abroad. My friend has said what a lovely young woman she is, but she fears he is wasting her time, even though he is fond of her.

It's one thing in your 20's but some men do this happily into their 30's when they think sharing costs makes financial sense to them.

I would be advising any young woman to think long and hard about living with men in their 20's.
Far better to have fun in a house share with young women whilst enjoying your freedom and not move in with anyone who isn't really interested in talking about a future with you.

I really hope the OP realises this guy has decided to monetise their relationship and she had better wake up to the fact that she is 100% on her own in providing for herself long term.

Anything else is gambling and foolish.

Sorry @barhumbug, but you have literally been living rent free. You would be paying bills, food etc no matter where you lived, so that amount is not the equivalent of rent, ie you're currently paying, say, £750 for those bills, but if you lived elsewhere you'd be paying £750 rent PLUS £750 bills and food. I assume you've been able to clear your debt and put so much away in savings in just a few years BECAUSE you have not been paying rent.

Yes I do agree with much of this perspective.
Men will happily take all the advantages of being in a ‘marriage’ type relationship with all the benefits of wife work included, but very very wary of the actual real commitment of marriage.

If they do then settle down (get married) and have babies with a younger woman it’s because that woman is worth marrying and ‘locking down’ with children.

It’s fine to be the placeholder live-in girlfriend as long as you aren’t making sacrifices and decisions based on the assumption that you will one day marry this man, or stay together for life. Obviously getting married and staying together isn’t guaranteed but at least if you’ve taken your foot off the gas career wise to ‘make house’ with your man, you do have the chance of financially compensation.

It’s expensive not cohabiting, but at least you are free and all your money is your own.
Yes sounds like the op has lived for cheaper than if she lived solo in her own flat/house. But let’s not forget he has too. So then you start to look at the other benefits, she’s been paying contributions to the household, and paying down debt, he’s been increasing his wealth & preparing for the next step up property wise. He’s happy for op to help facilitate that, and be along for the ride, but there’s where it ends. There’s no sign of commitment there.

If op was single/living alone she may have been more strategic and more open to improving her financial position, it’s so easy to be complacent when you have a roof over your head and have the assumption that the man views you as wife material because she’s told it’s marriage & babies he has an issue with, nothing personal.
But as Tgfh has pointed out, he’s got a lot more flexibility to change his mind about that, he’s possibly getting to be more of a ‘catch’ as he gets older and richer.

Obviously this is just one scenario, and it may not play out like this at all, but think about how vulnerable you are op, you can be put out the door whenever he likes, you need to consider your situation and your future based on all the possible outcomes.

I really hope the OP realises this guy has decided to monetise their relationship and she had better wake up to the fact that she is 100% on her own in providing for herself long term.

Spot on, @Tgfh .

Stick to your guns. This isn't right for you and why should you supplement future stability and financial security for him when it offers you nothing? Also, if you pay him rent, you would have a legal claim to the property in any case so he hasn't thought this through very well.

You get a joint mortgage and work out what percentage that entitles you both to - dependent on the balance of how much you both pay towards it. He can ring-fence his deposit. You can ring-fence yours.

If you break-up, the house would be sold or he would need to buy you out a % of the house.

Why on earth would he think this is an unfair proposition? There is no fairer way of doing it.

You need to lay it all out. Currently your housing is entirely at the whim of your partner. If he decided to chuck you out tomorrow he could. If he died you would have no legal right to stay in his house. Ask him what he thinks your lives together will look like if you are still together in 5, 10, 20 years time.

If you aren’t going to get married then look at other protections you can put in place, e.g. a civil partnership, wills etc.

I wish people were not so willing to throw around words like “partner “ when they really mean something much less significant like “boyfriend.” I am not criticizing the OP here but just sort if thinking out loud about how deceptive the word partner is when it is applied to a mere temporary romantic liason

Buying as tenants in common with deposits etc ring fenced puts the risk on both of you.

His proposal puts all the risk on you.

Ask him how he thinks that’s fair.