Blended family finances

[PersephoneMidnight]

Regular user who has name changed. I am in the process of purchasing my first house with my partner of 10 years. I have a large down payment which consists of a combination of my own savings and an inheritance from my grandfather who died 2 years ago. It’s about half the purchase price, my partner is also contributing to the deposit but only has around £50k. We are disagreeing about how the house will be owned. He is pushing for joint tenants 50/50 whereas I want to be tenants in common with our deposits ringfenced. For context He is 39 earning 52k, he has two teenage daughters who live with us 50% of the week. I am 32 earning 75k with no dependents. We currently rent and split everything 50/50 but I do pay for our holidays, takeaways and days out. I also treat my step daughters with clothes, makeup and give them pocket money £20 a week each and pay for the phones. My partner does pay his ex wife CM £150 a week and covers the kids extra curriculars as she is a low earner.

He thinks I’m being selfish by not agreeing to a joint tenancy and sharing finances after 10 years. I think he is being unreasonable to expect me to basically gift him half of my grandfathers money. We are not married and never will be that’s my choice, I also do not want children. We have never had a joint account or shared finances as he has children and expenses that I do not.

I’m aware that mumsnet normally tells people to have joint finances etc but I feel really uncomfortable about this. I do love my partner and step daughters and they are included in my will but this seems a step too far, aibu?

Of course he wants the arrangement that ismore financially advantageous to him. But it's not fair. Each of you should get from the house what you put in.

Just tell him no.

Why is your partner paying so much to his ex wife? If she’s on a low wage, presumably she gets UC? Plus only has the children 50:50, seems rather unfair.

I disagree with @PloddingAlong21suggesting that he is looking at the situation emotionally.

Surely he is being very practical indeed to his own benefit, describing OP as selfish for not gifting him 50% of her substantial inheritance

It doesn’t put him in any good light, does it really ?

You have to protect yourself. Tenants in common unless you are married. Unless you draw up a legal agreement as to what happens if you split up or die. It doesn't matter who spends what or who does what outside of purchasing the house. If you are putting up half then your inheritance is at risk. Don't give in on any account.

Totally agree with everyone who has already posted, he is being extremely selfish and trying to take advantage of you. It sounds like you are a very generous person especially with all the contributions you make to his children.

If you do go ahead with the purchase, please do seek legal advice regarding what were to happen if he were to die before you. The last thing you would want is him to leave his share to his children and for them to be able force a sale and basically force you out of the home you’ve worked so hard for.

Why do you reference tenancy and tenants when you've said your buying? I'm confused, is this a thing

I think you have three options..

1. match his deposit and go 50/50.
2. stick to your guns and ring fence each what you have put in
3. back out all together.

do not back down you are 100% right to protect your money.

Probably because that's the going rate for 2 kids on 52k when no other dependants. Her being on uc would still be her on a low income

Tenants in common is becoming much more popular even with married couples. We bought our house like this and are set up so that if one of us dies the half share goes to children rather than other parent. It keeps the inheritance below tax limit and protects half the house in the event one needs a care home. You need to explain the practical financial reasons to him.

As someone who was in a similar position (larger deposit, higher wages and fewer kids) I absolutely ring fenced my deposit and the fact that my DP (soon to be DP) never batted an eyelid and that told me he 100% wasn’t with me for my money. I know getting married now complicates things but I want to get married and we now have joint children. However, being tenants in common is still better as he won’t automatically get my share whilst we’re not married, my closest relatives (children in my case) would, plus it means my share can’t be used to pay his care home fees if I die first as I will be leaving him with the right to live in our home and delay distribution of my share to my children until after his death, but he won’t own my share (or vice versa).

OP I haven't RTFT so apologies if someone else has already said this. I'm in a second marriage for both of us. I have three adult chlldren and DH has one. I am in my mid-70s and he is about to turn 84, so of course we have to consider estate planning. Although you are so much younger than us, I suggest you consider how this might affect the issue from your DP's point of view. Accidents happen at any age - that's how I lost my first DH when I was 50.

We have a joint account for our basic living expenses, but other than that our finances are separate. I am somewhat better off than he is, and he knows that when I die the majority of my estate will go to my children and grandchildren, though he is being looked after by a provision of my will until he dies. One of the provisions both of us have made in our wills is that the survivor of the two of us has the right to remain in the house until either the survivor dies or the house is sold, at which time the proceeds will be divided according to our wills. We bought our house for cash, though we have a home equity loan for renovations which we are slowly paying off. I own 60% of the house and he owns 40%, and that is the ratio on which we pay off the loan and the ratio in which the proceeds of sale when the house is sold will be divided among our children.

Do you pay CMS if you have the children 50:50?

The reference to 'Joint Tenants ' and 'Tenants in common' is legal speak for property ownership. Yup I know it sounds strange. I'm not a lawyer but as I understand it when you buy a house or flat with someone else there are two types of ownership available.

You can buy a share as such where one person owns say 20/30/40/50 percent whilst the other owns the remainder (say 80/70/60/50 percent). These people can do what they are any with their share, say will it to a charity, leave it to their other half, etc.

As joint tenants they both own the property 100%. They cannot leave their portion in a will to anyone as it automatically becomes the remaining tenants on their death.

So say someone in a second relationship with children would be best to own as tenants in common so their children can inherit their portion of the property. The joint tenants on the other hand have the security in knowing that in the death of one the property is still theirs in full and this way the property doesn't become part of the estate and it doesn't get subjected to probate.

As a parent surely he should want tenants in common otherwise there’s a risk he dies and his kids get nothing. He’s clearly banking on the risk being more favourable that you die and he gets it all!

I’m married but still bought as tenants in common as I have kids from a previous relationship and I wanted to protect their inheritance.

Would you consider matching his deposit and keeping the rest of your money invested elsewhere,

I think those saying he’s a cocklodger are being rather unfair - they’ve been together ten years!

I do think it’s reasonable for you to ring fence your deposit OP, but can also understand why he’s hurt by what he sees as your lack of commitment. I can see both sides.

Agree.
That most certainly isn't 50/50.

He has some cheek calling you selfish.

He completely takes you and your generosity for granted.

You are subbing him to the tune of thousands a year, and he calls you selfish?

I would be very wary of someone so entitled.

As you have your half of the property value in cash, I'd speak to a conveyancing solicitor and see if you can draw up an agreement where you are joint tenants. Yours is paid cash, his is partly funded via a mortgage (which he has to pay himself and is in his sole name) that way you have equal share of a property but when it comes to sell you receive half the value, as does he less his mortgage. If he doesn't agree to that, definitely question whether this is a money grab!

That’s equally unfair. A mortgage involves interest, he’d be paying more for his half. Far better that they both contribute 50% of the deposit and pay 50% of the mortgage.

Fairness is subjective. She would also lose the interest she currently earns on her savings by using them towards the purchase. Ultimately, it’s up to the OP how they want to structure it. Most people pay interest when buying a home because they need a mortgage, so it seems illogical to argue that paying interest should be a barrier for him when he wants to buy a property in excess of the funds he has available.

Never mix your finances.

Match his deposit and buy a house within his means. That’s the only way to do what he’s asking.

Then you both split the mortgage, bills and upkeep cost equally.

I would also stop paying for all the holidays, takeaways etc - unless it’s the occasional treat,

He isn’t a particularly low earner. It’s the CMS payments that are lowering his monthly take home. That isn’t your problem.

If he doesn’t agree to this, I wouldn’t buy with him.

Personally, I wouldn’t buy with him at all.

No, fairness is fairness. They should both pay the same for a 50/50 split. The interest on OP’s money would be compensated for with the increase in capital value - if the housing market ever recovers.

That is 10 years for him to observe OP's earning potential and coerce her into paying for his kids, while he and his ex wife take a back seat.

Thankfully, most on here can see through his manipulation. I don't think the OP has but she came here for opinions.

He is winning as it stands and wants to guilt OP into winning even more.

I have encountered chumps like this one. His kids phones and clothes and pocket money is taken care of, next it will be their share of the house.. University fees.. This man is all about taking. He will try to wear the OP down until he gets what he wants.

She is entrenched and will probably compromise to his favour. He will guilt trip her over his kids otherwise.

Not sure why you’re subsidising this leech to start with. He should be paying a larger portion of the bills as his kids spend so much time with you.
I definitely wouldn’t buy a property with him as he sounds extremely entitled, but if you do certainly protect your own interests legally!

So you believe it fair that she should pay interest on half the mortgage simply because he doesn’t have the same funds available? That might be your definition of fairness, but it isn’t everyone’s. Hence it being subjective...