DH to pay off mortgage then stop house bill contributions

[Luannaa]

DH will take early retirement at the end of the year from a job he has worked very very hard in and made a huge difference to people’s lives and it has also taken its toll on him with things he has had to witness- hence earlier retirement.

This will give him enough money to pay off our joint mortgage which he wants to do so we can be mortgage free. I am extremely grateful for this as it’s huge security for the future and our dc.

However DH then doesn’t want to go into any work for at least a year, for his hobbies his small pension will see him through but this means he cannot pay anything towards the weekly/ monthly bills.

As it stands we combine £1k per month for all joint and household bills, one of these being the £900 mortgage.
With that gone, technically he doesn’t need to contribute any more as he has paid his bit but I feel a bit miffed to carry on working 40+ hours a week and sometimes overtime while he has no job, no bills to pay and just enjoys his hobbies (they are free/ low cost).

AIBU?

Please share your opinions and be honest as I want to get this right for us both.

'Yes I always knew he would retire before me and no issue however at this age where he is taking early retirement I am not sure if I am being like an adult brat feeling it’s ’not fair’ I pay ALL the house bills however he will have used HIS OWN money to pay off the mortgage.'

Sorry OP - I fail to see the point you're making here. He's using his pension money to clear the mortgage which you will certainly benefit from. Yes you have to keep paying towards bill, but he has effectively made a huge advanced contribution.

55 is early to retire, however, so he should think about doing something else

He's so traumatised that he can't clean the loo (though he might push the hoover around a bit!) and won't take his kids to school?

Meanwhile, the OP needs to do the absolute majority of the housework, the childcare (including during school holidays because being around his own children makes this psychologically terribly damaged man "grumpy") and the earning, while he lives the life of, essentially, a single man with a maid?

Have you thought about the actual sums of money involved in this at all @EcoChica1980?

Say his lump sum is 100,000 (a fair estimate given their modest mortgage and other monthly outgoings). That equates to less than two years of the monthly contributions they have each been making to cover their joint, family costs.

So after two years, she will essentially be funding his lifestyle entirely. Based on a unilateral decision he has imposed on her. While refusing to make any other contributions, like ensuring that the majority of the housework is done and the children are well looked after. Which is what he expects the OP to continue doing ON TOP OF working full-time, earning all the money AND doing everything at home.

Is that fair? I'm not sure...

@Mandemikc No, I am not a detriment to this thread or Mumsnet. What I am is a differing opinion that falls outside of the female mind think.
Amd to be clear, I stand by every word I used before, because they are accurate and factual.

There is no such thing as "the female mind think". The description in itself is offensive.

Yours words "oestrogen driven" weren't accurate or factual about my younger self never mind my post menopausal self. Along with many other women.

And even if words are accurate there are acceptable ways to get your meaning across and unacceptable ways. Your way was pure misogyny.

But you don't care about any of that, do you?

I would be interested to hear your views on him unilaterally deciding to reduce their joint pension and her widow's pension if she outlives him as is likely. But only if you can put your inflammatory labels away for the duration.

1000 EACH .

I’m actually not sure why MN are allowing a lot of these posts to stand given their inflammatory language and misogynistic nature.

He can’t afford to take a year off without OP stepping up and covering all household bills. Why are posters not recognising that simply paying off the mortgage is not enough when your family can’t afford to keep living in the home without one person taking on all of the responsibility for the expenses involved ?

And if you read OP’s updates it’s very clear that his intention is not just to take a year off - he wants to be a house husband. He’s said as much. So in a years’ time when he’s 56 and has made himself unemployed for a year and can’t get back into the job market OP will just have to suck it up. That’s not even taking into account the fact that he is reducing their circumstances - not only now, but in the future. His lump sum pays off the mortgage but doesn’t leave him anything to contribute to day to day expenses or bills. It also makes both of them poorer in retirement, and doesn’t even begin to take in the needs of their children who are in primary school.

That’s the crux of it, and still so many people supporting it. It’s absolute bollocks. The only person who will benefit from paying off the mortgage is DH. OP will still have to work, and now in the knowledge that if the slightest little thing goes wrong financially, they’re stuffed. Who would willingly put their family in such a precarious position ?

How will OP benefit from it ? He’s paying off the mortgage but in doing so he’s leaving himself with no useful income to contribute towards the running of the home after that. He intends to use his pittance of a pension to fund his hobbies while OP is left working to ensure that they can all continue to live in their home.

There is no safety net, no plan for unexpected expenditure or emergencies and at 56, having been out of work for a year, his employment prospects are hugely reduced. This plan only benefits him, and in later years he and OP will pay for it by way of massively reduced circumstances because he’s taken a lump sum out of his pension to pay off a mortgage he didn’t need to. If his job is stressful, by all means take the early retirement package. But secure another job before doing so, so that your partner isn’t saddled with the lot.

Agree. The poster has no understanding of how this will massively impact the whole family in the future. The priority seems to be DH indulging his mental health at the expense of everyone and everything else. Says more about the poster than anyone else here. There are other ways to approach this, but that would entail actually thinking of the others who will be affected - particularly OP who will pick up the slack indefinitely. But what the hell, she’s only a woman, and we all know men are the priority.

Hes being unfair, fine he’s paying off the mortgage but half of that is his debt anyway. If he won’t pick up the school runs or the childcare the he needs to work to pay for the luxury of these things, he can’t just not do that because he doesn’t like it and he needs to adapt. I’d rather he kept working and kept up the lifestyle and didn’t pay the mortgage off

Have a few months off fine and then get something part time, you don’t need to switch off at 55 regardless of the job you’ve done and leave your partner running round working full
time and sorting your children. All that’s coming from someone who’s worked what sounds to be the same role

I dont think you're one or the other. It's more complex than that. If DH pays off all the mortgage in one go, it leaves you with a huge burden. Whilst it may clear all the mortgage and reduce the interest paid, you still need to pay all the other bills that sound as though they are significantly more than the mortgage. Maybe he should put the money in a high interest account and you both continue contributing as usual. The fact is, he is in a position to retire and it sounds like you're younger and it isn't your time yet. It also sounds like he has had a stressful job that has impacted his mental health, but I'm also getting that the thought of being the sole earner is impacting yours. Is this true? And if so, is it because you are a little jealous of the free time he will now have? If by paying off the mortgage he has paid 'his share' do you not feel like you need to uphold your end of the unwritten agreement and see to it that you are also contributing, i.e., continue working until such a time you can also afford to retire? Further, he is only saying he'll take a year out, it's not like he has asked you to keep him in luxury for the rest of his life, but maybe cross that bridge if he decides not to contribute ever again.

His bit isn’t done until you’ve both raised your children.

Is there a plan that will allow you to retire at 55, or will you have to carry on working to support your children? What happens if you become ill or disabled and can’t work? How much has he contributed towards his pension versus you? I appreciate the contributions might have been fixed if he’s public sector, but It’s not ‘his’ money if he’s been able to contribute more at your expense.

He sounds selfish and irresponsible. DH has had a couple of periods at home (redundancy/furlough) and he did all the cleaning, school runs, cooking etc. I find it unfathomable that a parent would take such a view when you still have young children. It doesn’t matter how tough his job has been.

A few months off yes, but it doesn’t sound like he’ll be overly keen to find something after his year off.

Yes indeed - The misogynistic poster has missed the great Peelian principle that ‘the police are the people, and the people are the police’.

It took longer than I expected for a man to come along and mansplain at the little wimmin how silly we all are to expect the poor man to put his wife and children’s needs above his mid life crisis……

thank gawd @Mandemikccame along and saved the day with his logical sense speak!

Of course he can, they are both putting in a £1000 a month, if he pays off the mortage the remaining bills are only £1000, if he doesn't pay off the mortgage then he has a lumps sum of money to contribute his £1000 each month for the year.

Why does it always have to be a competition? You can also contribute in other was than just bring money into the household.

I have a friend who was a fireman for 30 years and had to retire at 51, he definitely needs a break after all the horrors he has seen and dealt with over that time.

How can you compare retiring with being made redundant? Completely different scenarios, I have a friend who was in fire brigade, he had to retire after 30 years service a 51 will a full pension. Was hardly worth him working as just ended up paying tax.

it was hardly worth him working as his earnings would take him over the tax threshold and he clearly could afford not to work. Because there is no tax level in Britain really that makes working pointless in the main.

I am not convinced either of these are true of this scenario

It's always a competition on here, especially if a man is involved. We all know if it's was the other way round, most would have no issue with OP being a SAHP.
Look at how @Imdunfer has been treated, you don't have to agree with posters, but everyone has a right to post.
Ignore and move on, but no, let's get anyone who doesn't tow the line banned.

RTFT. The salient point here is that he does NOT want to be a SAHP.

The OP has already made it clear he cannot be relied upon for housework or childcare. She is expected to earn AND do the chores and parenting.

It's not a competition, it's a question of what marriage is all about. You know, team work, negotiation, sharing...

Because it's selfish and he's not thinking along the lines of partnership as I would expect from someone who is married. He's refusing to take on the household tasks and children.
He wants the life of a single retired person with a housekeeper. If this was my DH he'd be out of the front door... or the back under the patio.

It doesn't sound fair to me..But then if you are married, I never understood separate bank accounts either . I don't think you are spoiled in seeing you are having to carry on working for x years whilst he won't need to..

Sorry haven't read the thread so may have missed an important point

I was going to say you were being unreasonable, but from reading your updates it sounds like he may have shouldered the work stress but meanwhile you’ve been shouldering all the home stress.

id be agreeing on the basis that :

• he covers a portion of the school holidays - you definitely shouldn’t be using all your annual leave for this if he’s at home!
• he covers a certain amount of school runs per week
• after 1 year, he starts to contribute again. How he manages that (ie gets a job or uses pension etc)

OP said she's resentful he gets to have lie-ins, that's where the competition is.
Why begrudge a partner for that, he's paid off the mortgage and asking for 1 year off.

Regarding childcare etc:
I said in a previous post that we don't always want to do some jobs, but they need doing, end of.

If she can't rely on him to look after his own kids, then it's not a marriage is it and OP has bigger issues.

@Luannaa

"DH has always taken a back seat with childcare which was agreed before we had dc and I was more than happy with this as his job was the more stable one so was more important for him to have work focus and his downtime."

Given the age of your husband, and his apparent disinterest in his children, was there an agreement that your husband would father children he didn't actually want on the understanding that you would do 100% of the child related stuff?

If he didn't want children, was their impact upon his retirement planning one of the reasons he gave? Did you make promises that he'd be free to retire as normal, so long as certain conditions were met - e.g. the mortgage was paid off?