AIBU to expect 50 50 house costs with lower earning partner?

[TheSnappyHelper]

Been with partner 10 years. No kids, not married, no plans to be. But we are long-term partners and are both planning that this is hopefully the partner for life.

I am higher earner and self employed. Used to be on significantly more, now on a pretty average salary due to industry changes.

He has always been on a lower amount. He was pursuing art things (and doing quite well) and freelancing in odd jobs. For various reasons, he is not suited to an office career job (he tried).

I got on the property ladder (all my own hard work, no help from parents). I recently sold, and made a reasonable amount of money. He paid me a token amount while we lived there. (Lower than market rent). Me and my partner have now bought a house together.

Now we are both on the deeds. He is working a minimum wage job again. (He works bloody hard. He is a grafter.) He does have plans to improve his income (but it doesn't always work out).

How much should we each pay? We agreed 50/50 towards all house bills and house improvements. (Because otherwise, I would feel resentful given I have reduced my own investment to help him get on the property ladder and I want to protect myself in case we break up one day).

But, I feel guilty every time I bring up money stuff, and conscious that he's on less as I can see the stress in his face about paying. And I read a lot about how it's normal for higher earners to pay more... But I've paid more for 10 years.

YABU - you should pay more, he earns less
YANBU - your setup is fair and 50/50 is reasonable

I would do it proportionally to income, so you’d be paying more but it would be the same proportionally to what he is paying. But then to be honest if it was someone I wanted to be with forever I wouldn’t want them left with substantially less than I was because that will just breed resentment in other ways and would impact our lives together, what things we could do, holidays we could go on etc would all either be limited to what the lower earner could afford or it would be me paying the extra anyway so no different really.

True apart from the mortgage part! She owns 65ish and he owns 35ish percent…

Well if you're actually partners for life, building a life, home and potentially a family should mean you're a team on this and you each contribute according to your earnings. If you love him and you're fully sharing your lives, why would you see him with less than you?

I agree with this. We’ve leap frogged each other in salary terms our whole marriage and adjusted our contribution accordingly. We made a joint decision at one point that he would make a career change that meant I became the main breadwinner and I paid the entire mortgage for years. It’s what committed partners who are in it for the long haul do.

Proportionate to net take home pay is fairer.

Split the mortgage in two bits. Calculate in day 1 house value to deposit and remaining mortgage.

1st bit pay 50:50 as that’s what your share will be.
2nd bit pay 48:7

Your 48% will go up with time and I don’t think it’s fair to take 48% of any potential sale if you’re paying 50:50 going forward.

Agreed.

Given OPs fairly pragmatic / sensible attitude amazed she let it unfold like this.

I think it's really confusing that you didn't do any sums. You both appear to have assumed different things - which is exactly as anyone would expect since you didn't figure it out.

It all just seems a bit transactional - which is fine as two un-linked adults basically house-sharing. But if you are a partnership you need to work like that. If you are two unrelated adults who live in the same place then I guess this is fair enough. Did he choose to buy this new house he can't afford? Does he have equal say in house decisions? I think that's where it gets very tricky as well - if you get a new sofa and you want what you can afford at 50% and he is happy to go without or get a used sofa or get something that works for his own budget... who makes the call?

If he just can't afford to pay 50% of the life you want to lead then what?

I have the awful feeling this is going to come and bite you on the arse. Hard.

I think you are being unfair to say that OP is ‘leaving him short’. It’s hardly her fault that he hasn’t increased his salary.

Living alone is usually MUCH more expensive than living with someone and sharing bills. He is likely much better off, even paying 50% with OP, than he would be without her.

Is your mortgage way more than a couple both earning your DP salary would be allowed to borrow?

Would it not be better to rewrite your property share agreement that he gets a lesser percentage of the property sale (above the existing deposit related agreement) on the condition that he pays less per month than you.

Also if you bought a property together above his means that pushed you up a council tax band it might be resoanble for you absorb some of this, likewise bills for a bigger property.

But it does start to get awefully complicated.

I get your resentement though over him having had an easier life whilst you worked hard to progress.

I spent my late 20s/ early 30s doing a part time degree alongside full time rotating shifts to put me where i am now. My exH went backpacking and teaching diving in mexico, which is not necessarily a poor life choice but has consequences. I went very part time after having DD (zero family support for childcare and my shift workand also I had health problems) but I still bought in 40% of the household income, but because I was part time i was picking up the vast vast majority of childcare and housework whilst exH had the luxury of no commute (WFH) and an easy homelife of the back of my hard work when I was younger, and I certainly felt resentful as I didn't feel like I was the one benefiting from my sacrifice.

If you’re not financially aligned I’ve got no idea why you have got yourself financially mixed up with him. You’re either true partners and it’s one pot, or you keep things totally separate

That only applies when there are children involved which causes one parent (usually the mother) to earn less due to maternity leave, reduced working hours to fit around childcare and lack of promotion. In those circumstances, it's appropriate for the higher earner to contribute more.

If there are no children involved, no woman should expect her husband/partner to subsidise her earnings if he doesn't want to.

My DH and I used to have a similar wage difference and level as what you're describing here OP, and I think you need to be more realistic about the fact that your DP simply won't be able to afford to pay 50/50 of all house-related costs on 25k.

I would agree with others that you should both put in a % each rather than strictly 50/50, this seems the fairer way. Either that or you just go all-in together and all spends come out of that, so you know everyone is paying what they can, but personally that wasn't something I was ever keen on in my own situation as we have quite different attitudes to money and I felt like I was just giving him a load of extra whilst losing my own ability to save for emergencies etc.

I would go for the % split, yes you will still be paying a bit more but you earn more and say you love this man and want to share your life with him. Even if you pay 60 of house costs and he pays 40 it will help him out a bit.

I always like these threads, because women are very quick to say ‘but he could leave you and take your money’ not realising that this is the majority of relationships with the gender swapped 😆

This is what I think too.

Seems unfair for him to pay 50/50 on a mortgage when his share of the property is always going to be lower.

All other bills can be split equally but equal payments to the mortgage makes no sense to me.

I sit in the camp where it isn't normal to want to live a significantly more comfortable lifestyle than your partner.

Are you sure you actually want to move in with him? It sounds like you resent losing your independence, and that's understandable. But don't move forward if it's going to make you uncomfortable!

OP does not own 65% of the mortgage, she owns 65% of the deposit.

You can ignore the deposit because they will each get back the same amount that they put in.

It's the mortgage that needs to be paid and as the equity is to be split 50/50, the mortgage payments must be 50/50 as well. Otherwise OP would be subsidising his mortgage payment to allow him a greater share of the equity.

So this arse won't commit and has been poncing off you for 10 years? Usually I never say this, but you deserve better. Leave him, let him dick around on his minimum wage in a minimum wage accommodation with minimum wage food. Why do you need this shit at all, never mind 50-50?

This. You've agreed he will shoulder 50% of the mortgage and the non-discretionary* household bills. In return, he will receive 50% of the equity in the house. That is more than fair and your deposit allows him to significantly benefit from a lower cost of living while building an asset unless you two have seriously overextended yourselves.

If he can no longer afford to do that or wants to have a higher disposable income while you cover more cost then you need to revisit the legal agreement. You are not married, you have no children so don't treat it like a marriage where as the higher earner you need to align on finances and your mutual expectations "in sickness and in health".

*if you are signing up for lots of streaming channels, regular lobster dinners or house refurbishment he hasn't budgeted for then you need a conversation because either one of you simply assuming that all costs will be 50:50 is unfair.

Yeah, this is what I would do. Match the deposit that he put down, and then put the rest of your money investments for retirement etc. Makes things much easier if you separate and can just split the house 50/50.

It's the same regardless of the sex of the poster. Both parties should protect their interests. This is why so many women are advised to marry if they are the lower earner but not to marry if they are the higher earner. It just depends who is asking for advice. In this case, OP is female but the advice would be same if she were male.

Mortgage payments 50:50 because that's how you would split the 48% equity (that isn't your original deposits) if you broke up.

Other bills/expenses proportionate to wages for each of you.

If that makes you resentful that he pays less because his lower wage is the result of pissing about, break up with him as you aren't on the same page about life goals.

Did you protect yourself in writing stating you have paid most of the deposit etc. in case you split. It would be unfair if he were to get half of the value of the house considering you pretty much paid the whole deposit. This also means the remaining monthly payments are much lower than it would be without your large deposit. I would definitely be expecting 50% if you have been working hard for these years whilst he pretty much messed around. Has he factored in the fact the payments are only this much as you put in such a large deposit yourself?
He needs to grow up. I think I would resent my husband if I felt I was carrying the financial load whilst he messed around/didn't push on his career whilst I was working long days. 50/50 is more than acceptable in my opinion.

If you have much more money and you've agreed 50/50 then i'd just assume you'd pay for more things outwith the bills?

Meals, holidays etc?

The decision about how to split expenditure is about so much more than money. You say you plan a life with this person. You can't expect him to be struggling and have much less disposable income than you - it will destroy the relationship. Equally he couldn't expect you to use up your extra £20 pa (i.e. the difference between the £45K and the £25K you mention above) first and then to split anything above the first £20K 50/50 - he would be getting off scot free. The proportionate split is by far the most fair and sustainable. Not 50/50.