Don't understand 100% joint finances

[Lorendo]

I know I'll get flamed for this but I don't get it when couples only have joint finances and nothing separate.

Me and DH have a joint account to cover joint expenses (house, cars childcare) etc. We each put same in each month as earn similar.

We also have joint saving pots for certain things where we put certain amount into eg holiday, emergency fund, kids stuff.

That's it. Anything left stays in our separate personal accounts for whatever we please.

This seems like a logical way to do it. All joint obligations are sorted together but we still retain independence with what's left.

A friend of mine only does joint. She only works part time so a different situation to us but husband monitors every penny in and out. If she buys something he doesn't agree with or that she didn't clear with him first, he brings it up.

I told her my arrangement and she just said 'yes well we like to manage all the money together, as a team'. Right ok, sounds more like financial abuse than team work but hey ho

Ours are completely joint. We’ve been married since we were young though and been through various combinations of me working, DH studying, both working, me sahm, DH high earning, both part time etc so it never made sense to have separate. We also both brought similar amounts of money to the relationship. I think it’s very different if you come into a relationship older, already with children or unequal financial position.

I deal with all the money. DH doesn’t have to “ask permission” to buy stuff though, but surely it’s sensible as a couple to discuss big purchases? ISAs and pensions etc are single names but we consider them joint.

Works for us - each to their own!

Exactly how we did it - and as I said above it made things so very simple when he died, which is not something we tend to think about but it truly was such a blessing not to have to worry about access to money during such a difficult time.

I am sorry for those who have financially irresponsible spouses or think that a time might come when they need to part, but that was not the case with us - and I would not have married him if I thought he might be financially controlling or dishonest in any way - but I guess everyone could say that and say I struck lucky,

We did both spend money on frivolous things sometimes and did not begrudge these for the other.

If you have to share the money you earn with a man who didn't earn it then it's not really yours to begin with
Just because you have to spend some of the money you earn on a Mortgage you agreed to pay, does it mean that the money was never yours to begin with? Your statement makes zero sense, irrespective of whether you agree with joint finances or not.

What is the point of being economically productive?
To pay for stuff? Whether you choose to do that from a joint account or separate accounts, doesn't change the fact that we all need to pay for stuff. Ironically, Not being economically productive (which I presume is your alternative plan) would make you wholly reliant on the state or possibly a man - I am failing to see how that is a feminist statement?

To be honest I don't understand how you can be married and not have joint finances?

I am not talking about non married couples - that's different.

I think your definition of work is narrowed and anti-feminist. Does only paid work count as 'work'? It devalues the work involved in raising children and ignores the 'motherhood penalty' women face re. work (of course in an ideal world this wouldn't exist, but we're dealing in reality and it does).

FWIW I do work. But I'd never sneer or say it gives me the 'ick' to someone who has made a different choice.

By your logic, so could I! We completely trust each other not to do that.

Too complicated. Everything in the same pot, admin is too painful otherwise.

We have the same set up as you, it works for us. But I totally understand 100% joint works for other couples but your friend is not a good example of how that works well.

What specifically don't you understand?

Why a married couple would have anything other than joint finances.

Exactly this. What also helps is that neither of us have wild habits and have similar approaches to money. If you have one party who basically drains the account with their personal spending then that would not work. So for example I get a bonus a couple of grand which I never think of spending all on myself - husband this year transferred it into my personal account that I have had since before we got married in an effort to take ur away from the joint account and make me spend it.

im the higher earner now but it’s been the other way round as well.

In our case, our savings are in individual names for tax reasons. You can’t have joint ISAs anyway. So I always have access to money.
But equally, if so inclined I could also transfer all the money from the joint account into my own name and leave him with nothing.

DH and I don't have joint finances either, although we do still view things as our money, there's no concept of mine and yours and paying each other back, that seems quite fucked up in a relationship.

But I like the privacy of it, if for no other reason than buying birthday presents is easier! And I prefer not to see what he spends as I can just see myself getting moany about it, so best be out of sight, out of mind.

I am in an even better position as I have my husbands Isas App on my phone as I set them up. The fool!

Haha same! I handle all of our finances.

We’re joint, our wages are paid into the joint account, all bills come out of that account as well as family expenses like kids clothes etc. We then have a standing order so we both receive £300 pocket money each month into our personal accounts to spend on whatever we want.

I think everyone needs to find the system they are comfortable with and agree that the example in the OP is about financial abuse not joint finances but also think from personal experience, something that should be taken into account is what happens with joint accounts if one holder loses capacity and there is no PoA in place (for various reasons it was not possible in the end to get PoAs in place before my Mum was diagnosed as having lost capacity). This has happened to my parents, they had their own separate accounts but their main one is joint. This has meant that even though my Mum's pensions now go into a separate account managed by us, her children, under a deputyship order as there was no PoA and they now have totally separate accounts with the main joint account now just having my Dad's pensions going into it and it operating as a sole account, his money is counted as joint for the purposes of the deputyship reports that have to be submitted quarterly because my Mum's name is on the account and she cannot be removed as she cannot request this herself since she has lost capacity. My Dad understandably really resents this and it is taking years to sort this out with no end in sight at the moment. I have concluded that this scenario should also be considered in the whole joint or separate finances debate. It isn't just divorce that throws a spanner in the works.

Agree with others, joint money isn’t the problem, he is.

All of our money is joint money, everything is paid from there, neither of us question the others spending, it is no different than us having separate accounts in practice.

So nothing specific then. Okie dokes.
Maybe just accept that people organise their finances in ways that work for them? Then there's nothing for you to try and "understand".

No nothing specific - it's just alien concept to me that's all.

This 100% me and DH do the same.... never caused us any issue but I can see how it would with others. IMO it's about mutual respect and trust.

I don't understand it when people who are married DON'T have everything joint. I mean, if you co-own a house and you have children, your lives are, well, joint. That's what marriage means. Doing anything else seems to me like someone isn't really all in, like they don't trust their spouse. And if you don't, why marry? Why make someone you don't trust the other parent of your children, and take on a committment like a mortgage? If you're with the sort of man who's going to monitor and criticize your spending, or who you can't trust not to overspend himself, why marry him?

That is how I feel really - but I do recognise that some have been very unlucky in that the partner they trusted let them down. I never had any fear of that - but I would guess that neither did those to whom it happened.

That sounds as though you are quite comfortable financially though. It might be a bit different in one person spent freely not leaving enough to pay bills and eat

For me, it's not about not trusting my DH. It's about me having financial independence. I like having my own money to spend as I want. Simple as that really. It's never occurred to us to have a joint account because we don't need one.