To not want to contribute to a house not in my name?

[Kate8889]

Before we got married or engaged, DH and were living in his small condo for 6 months.

His parents offered to buy us a house so we could have more room, a street away from them that had just gone on sale.

I didn't see anything terribly wrong with this, but now I wish we'd gotten a mortgage and done everything ourselves.

We have two children together (genetically his but not mine due to needing IVF and egg donor, probably not relevant) and if my husband passes the house goes to me, but I have been contributing here and there for repairs, like a new roof and a new door to the sunroom. I also pay my share of utilities/food/real estate taxes etc.

I just feel like I'm investing in something that I realistically have no rights to (at least at this point), although my husband points out we don't have a mortgage and so I'm able to save more because of that.

Every time I ask when I can get my name put on the deed for my own feeling of safety, he says something non-committal.

We have been married since 2021. Am I being ungrateful and unreasonable?

You’d be best to post on a site with more people from US or speak to a US lawyer.

What information would the lawyer give me that I don't know already? They're expensive

Its not free housing as she pays for upkeep/taxes.

I think you’ve missed rhe point of the thread, it’s right there in the title. She doesn’t want to.

Are you on Reddit? A lot from the US post on there. They have different communities of people you can ask.

You shouldn’t be paying the property taxes.

Yanbu to be cautious about what you are agreeing to - but equally of course you should be contributing something towards the place where you live. Only parasites live for free. The question is - if this was a room-mates rental situation, what would you be paying as your fair share of rent? Presumably you don't have your own bedroom so base it on rents for shared rooms. If the amount of housework you do is greater than exactly 50% then deduct a reasonable weekly wage for the additional work you from that fair rent. If the amount you are paying, excluding food and lifestyle activities costs, is less than that then it's probably reasonable. If you are paying more than that you are being exploited. Tenants don't get to benefit from the increasing equity of the place they live in, but equally they are not expected to contribute to repairs and maintenance - the landlord has to pay for that out of the profit margin of the rent they get. You aren't a tenant but comparing yourself to the equivalent situation if you were is helpful because in your situation it is 100% right and proper that you should be better off than if you were a tenant.

I do have my own bedroom because my husband is a super light sleeper and was a zombie when we tried to share a bed, but that's neither here nor there. I would probably be in about the same situation financially if we were renting and splitting the rent proportionally, it just doesn't sit right with me in principle, doesn't feel like a partnership. If I had a house I would add him on without him asking.

I think that's fair then. Why should you benefit from something you didn't contribute towards?

Your contributions are from the point you bought the house, not before, so you get the benefit of any work done and thus increase to its value from then on.

It's essentially the same as if you had bought the house together jointly but he put the deposit down - because that was his money to start with and nothing to do with you, it would be fair for that to be ringfenced so that if you split up he would get it back, and you'd split the rest of the property's worth between you. The only difference in this case is the 'deposit' was enough to buy the house upfront.

Use the money you are saving by being mortgage free to buy yourself a small property. You can rent this out but it will give you a bit of security.

But he doesn't own the house. He's the beneficiary of a trust that owns the house.

If your name were on the deeds, how much better off would you be (a) in the event of a divorce and (b) in the event that your relationship lasts until the day he dies (you do not need to worry about (c) where you die first)?

I think it’s important to remember OP would have preferred to get a joint mortgage with her DH. She is / was obviously in an awkward position because DH’s parents offered to buy him a house so her hands were tied a bit. I do think it’s unfair to call OP a cocklodger in this instance.

Married and kids I’d say everything split, with both names on the mortage and all income in a joint account with shared finances and equal amount of spending per month each. That’s just my opinion.

He didnt buy the house, his parents bought the house surely?

They bought it for him and it's in his name

Yes he didnt buy then did he?

Not his money

Thanks everyone, I think I need to let go of resentment and simply make saving for my future (in case anything implodes) a very high priority. Buying a rental property is not practical atm because we raising 2 under 5.

Bollocks. Put your money into YOUR savings account and nothing towards the house until your name is on the deeds. If anything should go wrong you could lose everything.

I think your problem stems from you thinking you should be having his + yours divided by 2. He and his parents see the two of you as two separate people (albeit if he dies or you divorce, as you have children it’s right you have enough to continue to raise those children).

You don’t really have a choice in this. No comment on the rights and wrongs of this but you are where you are. If you’re to be separate then you should look after yourself the way he’s looking after himself (with backing from wealthy parents, I’m guessing you don’t have the same?). Save your money, invest in it, put yourself first the way he’s put himself first. It’ll be empowering and give you peace of mind. Also, let go of thinking you’re equal to him financially. Clearly, you’re not.

Very well put. Thank you. My family were never super wealthy but what we did have was wiped out with the fall of Soviet Union and subsequent devaluations. It feels selfish and against my altruism to put myself first and to not invest in our family but it's realistically the only chance I have at fairness/being able to walk away if I am mistreated.

In the UK a house can be bought using a Trust fund specifically to avoid sideways disinheritance in the event of a divorce. The Trust owns the house (not the husband or wife) and it's not counted by the courts when divvying up the assets.

I think you need your own investment vehicle. I get you don’t want to buy a rental- that’s understandable. There are other ways to invest money without buying a rental home.

If I were you I’d go and see a financial advisor without your husband. Explain the situation and say you want to invest your money to give you financial stability should you split.

in the mean time I would aggressively pursue my own career- no making sacrifices for the family eg taking a lower paid more flexible role. He’s told you who he is- you cannot rely on him financially.

I think I would sit your dh down and say you love him, you hope you’ll be together forever. However, realistically if things go awry you want to be able to ensure there’s a roof over your dc’s heads for both of you, especially as it sounds as if you’re the default parent. Then ask him what he’d like to do about that. You can then brainstorm ideas. Get him involved in buying a buy to let or adding you to the deeds etc.

Fellow American here. On the deed, are you joint tenants with the right of survivorship or tenants in common?

Nothing wrong with it.

Income tax is a tax on income - what's your problem?

We have a tax that's based on the value of your house - it used to be Rates, now it's Council Tax

She's not on the deeds at all, is she (that's what she said)?