Should I let DP take a share in the house?

[Minki]

DP and I are getting married next month. He has 2 kids aged 11 and 8 and I have 2 boys aged 6 and 4. We don't yet live together. We will be having a pre-nup at my request because there is a lot of equity in my house, which DP and his kids will move into at some point, and I earn significantly more than DP. I got badly burnt in my divorce last year (after my ex had an affair and left us) and spent 30k on solicitors and court proceedings trying to stay in the house so I want to do everything possible to protect myself and the boys and to have peace of mind if things to go wrong. My solicitor has told me that getting re-married is a big risk as pre-nups are not necessarily enforceable and my partner could make a claim on my assets, including on the house. Things are further complicated because my ex still has an interest in the house which is repayable if I do re-marry. That said, I love DP and I want to build a life with him, including by getting married. My solicitor has said that if I must re-marry then to keep everthing separate, i.e. do not let him take a share in the house unless he makes a capital contributions. This creates a couple of problems. First of all, we need capital to pay off my ex who could otherwise apply for an order for sale if we don't repay him. DP was going to sell his house and we would use the proceeds to re-pay my ex and give DP a commensurate share in the property going forward (which will only be around 4% in any event). In addition, DP does not want to pay rent to me and says if he is paying money to live somewhere he wants it to count towards something. My solicitor countered this by saying that DP would need to pay to live somewhere anyway. In addition, I am broke and have very little money to live in so it would make sense to let him pay a share (probably only a 1/3rd share ) of the mortgagae going forward and to split the bills with him. Everyone benefits as DP gets an investment interest plus a bigger property where his kids will get a room each and I start saving a lot on living costs as I really cannot continue the way things are now. The catch is that my solicitor says that I am crazy to give DP an interest in the house, legal or equitable. Who is right and what should I do to protect myself? Bottom line is that I want to stay in the house in the event we split and I want to leave my share of the equity to my kids, all of which is covered in the pre-nup. DP would pay in capital which would give him a 4% interest and pay 1/3rd of the mortgage going forward (I would keep all equity up to the point he starts paying then we split the share 2/3rds to 1/3rd.

If you do go ahead with the wedding, I think it'll help if you can be totally honest with yourself about why you are ignoring your solicitor's advice.

Maybe you could write the solicitor's advice as items in a list (do x, do y,...) and write down a reason for why to ignore each piece of advice. If you are struggling to write a reason then of course you can go ahead with the wedding, but do so with your eyes open.

You've asked how to protect your children financially. Everyone seems to be saying the same thing. And it's not just what proportion of any inheritance they receive (split between two children or four), it's about how much money is to be inherited. If you've plans to buy your children cars or pay for a year out before uni, or help buy them a flat, can you do that x4? Do you want to?

From my own experience (career in the City) if the woman earns multiples of the man's income, any hints of controlling behaviour before living together will be exacerbated when you are all in the same house. From how much to spend on food to holidays, it's all fraught, and I've seen the resentment build. With children in the mix it just seems too risky to marry before living together.

I want to leave everything I have to my DCs and for DP to leave what he has to his DS. Very simple. I can afford uni, years out etc for 2 children not 4. I am not assuming parental, or financial responsibility for his kids. That it the intent, at least.

As for why I want to marry him despite the advice. I suppose I am really in love with him and have this romantic ideal in my head which is to marry him. I guess I am doing it for emotional, arguably selfish, reasons. However, I am trying to protect myself, and my kids as best I can. I recognise though that it is a gamble and I think it is worth the risk because I really love this person and if it works then it will be a great thing for both of us and our kids. I work full time (in the city) and I want/need a partner both emotionally, for myself, and also for my DCs, who adore him. I run around like an idiot, juggling a manic job, nannies/au-pairs, school, shopping etc, etc, and I feel like I want and need help, to able to breathe, someone to share the load etc etc. I live in an old house - things are constantly breaking/needing fixing; I need someone who can help with the running of the house. But aside from all the practical side, as I said, I really love him and my children are really fond of him. We have spent lots of time together (sleepovers most weekends), we've all been on holiday together for a week (twice) which went very well, and I feel like we know each other reasonably well, although living together will of course bring a different set of challenges but I think, with work, we will make it.

...and they all lived happily ever after.

It's tough isn't it, with DC and assets that you wish to protect. Ruins the fairy tale

From what you say above it sounds like you plan for you to be responsible for your children, and your partner to be responsible for his. If you've agreed on that stuff then great, hopefully your outgoings won't increase, but it seems likely that if you marry and live together you will subsidise your new family- food , holidays, activities, electronics, school fees, uni... So even if your children inherit it all, there'll be less to inherit. If you don't subsidise your new family financially will your partner/husband make your life easier (e.g. taking over some childcare and running the house etc)?

It just seems to an outsider that if the marriage works, your outgoings will increase (your husband will want all children to receive the same advantages and opportunities) and there will be less for your children to inherit. If it fails, it could be financially devastating.

I expect we can all appreciate your desire for things to change, it just seems that marrying now will give you a bill (to your ex) with no advantage (you'll be living apart and have the same responsibilities.)

OP, can you sell the expensive old house and move to a cheaper house with more mod cons? That could potentially reduce the financial pressure.

I don't see how having a live-out husband will help you in any way. It won't "share the load". It'll be like being incredibly legally bound to a distant neighbour, or weekend fuck buddy.

And it'll make your ex entitled to push you for his £100k.

WHY?!?! Just postpone. I just postponed my wedding and nobody gave a shit. It wasn't embarrassing, we just told the guests we had stuff to sort out first and would let them know the new date. Nobody said a thing.

I run around like an idiot, juggling a manic job, nannies/au-pairs, school, shopping etc, etc, and I feel like I want and need help, to able to breathe, someone to share the load etc etc. I live in an old house - things are constantly breaking/needing fixing; I need someone who can help with the running of the house.

You are contradicting yourself. You say that you will be responsible for your DC and he his, however you want him to 'share the load'. Also to help running/fixing the house but if the worse were to happen he'd get nothing!?

but it seems likely that if you marry and live together you will subsidise your new family- food , holidays, activities, electronics, school fees, uni...

^ this.

How do you think you will only be responsible for your DC and him his?

What if there is something all children want to do when at yours but he can't afford to pay to allow his to do it? Or he is the only one around to take them. Do you expect him to only take his DC and leave yours behind?

In marrying this man, you are putting your need for "romance" ahead of your children's well being.

You would be better to sell the house, buy something more modern, and repay your ex. You may barely have to downsize.

You are doing this against your own legal advice. What more is there to say?

Well I think you need to step away from the romantic fairytale.

This is foolish of you but also you are going to get massive resentment from him and his children. So your 2children will get private education, gap years etc and large inheritance and his get none of that.

Good luck with that.

And if I were your ex I would want my money out of the house too.

And finally, if your dp won't be living with you why will he be able to help with all the stuff you list. I see that your life is hard but please don't rely on a man to fix it. Look at options, move to an easier to maintain house etc

Minki, my DH ex did what you are about to do. She had a mesher charge and a massive amount of equity, her DP had no steady income and a house in negative equity 50 miles away.

They married, and had to realise the charge, they couldn't afford to buy DH out, they were running two mortgages (or she was) as his house sat on the market for years not selling as they needed to make enough to cover the negative equity.

She had to sell the FMH and they all moved to the DP's home. All her money has gone, so she says and DSS says. She is angry at DH for not letting her have all the equity and not giving up his charge.

They had a massive romantic wedding, her third, his second, fancy honeymoon etc. All money is gone. No forward thinking at all. The children have suffered big time. Her eldest now live with dad (not dh).

Romance doesn't keep you or children warm at night, and you really are setting yourself up for a massive amount of heartache.

If you need someone to help with things, employ a housekeeper for a few hours a week. Get a handyman to fix things. It would be cheaper.

This is completely bizarre; you have this romantic fantasy of togetherness but you are talking about separate responsibilities for the children financially, you are basing your ability to live together on a couple of weeks away, and there doesn't seem to be any real plan about how to work out the blending longer term, apart from I'm sure it will be difficult, but we will manage.

You can't on one hand, expect your dp to marry you, help you run your household, take some of the juggling burden off your shoulders, and fix things when they break; and then on the other, treat his dc as second class citizens and make sure that your assets (which he has then helped you maintain and manage) are ring-fenced.

I think you are dressing up what you hope will work to your advantage as love. What I don't get is why your dp would agree to this.

As I said before, I got married when, for professional reasons, we were living apart, because it was important to my husband. It was a car crash.

Marriage is not going to bond you. You are using it to paper over the difficulties that exist in living together.

If your relationship is strong it will cope with you saying you need to delay it.

I don't think you will listen because you want this fairytale SO much. You don't have to marry to have that. Marriage is not the fairytale ending

How on earth can you marry and be a family whilst parenting completely separately, and having different pots of money? You say you want to leave your money to your dcs but the longer you are married and the more work he puts into the house the greater a claim he has on it.0

Very very much in agreement with Chunderella.

I can see why you would feel marriage would give you more "security". But - as you found with your first marriage - it doesn't, really. It just gives someone else legal rights over your assets and your cash.

Honestly, now you're a mum with a hugely valuable financial asset, you need to start thinking like a businesswoman. Not like a lovestruck young girl.

Make a list of everything you need: help with the house, childcare, £100k for the ex, a certain amount if money every month, a house for you to live in with your kids short-term, and an inheritance for them long-term. Then think PRACTICALLY about how you can achieve those things. Is it marriage to THIS man? It doesn't sound like it. Is it living alone but with a housekeeper, an au pair, another person (who won't activate your ex's charge on the house)?

Please don't argue with your own solicitor! They have NO reason to warn you off this marriage except that it's not in your best interests yet. In the future, when your ex is paid off and maybe you've sold the house and put some of the money into trusts for your kids (for example), it might be. But right now it's not. It won't give you financial security, help at home, protect your kids or get rid of your ex. In most logical terms, marriage right now is pointless.

Have a party or a blessing or some hand-tying celebration in a field if you want to cement your love, but please please please don't give all your cash away! Not now. Not yet.

Why are you so stubborn about this?! Is your DP really pushing for it? If he is, don't dall into the trap of thinking that's really romantic and a sign of his true, eternal love. Honestly - a man who loves a woman generally just wants to live with her all the time. Let him work out the logistics of that to show you how keen he is.

The last post from OP made it sound like she neesd help (and I can remember being newly divorced working full time and solely supporting us and wanting more help with the children. i didn't get it but they got bigger and then I needed less help). I think she is very very short of cash so cannot hire a housekeeper.

I suspect when Mr Wonderful moves in he will be more work not less unless he is going to take over all the cleaning, cooking and washing which he might. It is possible she will have him to look after plus his children who may not mesh with hers when they stay and there will be less money all round.

I do have to warn people that if step children move in and you pay towards them then after a new divorce you even if you are female may well have to continue to pay for those children as they have become children of the family in law. This is less likely if she does not pay school fees for the steps and also if they only stay one night a week.

The way I understood it, at least part of the financial issue is that getting married triggers a payment to the xH. Therefore, by getting married, the OP is creating a cost.

Day to day running costs are a different matter, but I am not sure that getting married to have someone contribute to the mortgage is a good idea. Running of the house and working full-time, yes, this is hard, I do it too, but my experience is that a husband and step-children make additional demands on your time, rather than saving you time. This is particularly true if you are running two houses, as you will be at the start, plus the emotional time and energy of blending them.

30k to protect your assets from the first marriage is a lot of money, but it is also a lot of emotional energy invested in lawyers and negotiations, which you are now continuing with the pre-nup stuff. You must be emotionally as well as physically exhausted. It is really not the best frame of mind to make these kind of decisions.

The fundamental problem is that marriage is a legal construct to create a single, permanent unit that protects dependents (traditionally women and children) so trying to ring-fence assets (which I think is right for the existing children) is at odds with what marriage is designed to achieve.

If you go ahead with the marriage, at least you know that it is risky- the pre-nup may not protect you and you could acquire 3 dependents to be taken care of in the event of a later divorce. (To maintain their new standard of living / compensate a SAHD).

Yes for higher earners in a sense you put lust before your own existing children (if you're divorced with children) if you choose to marry. You don't really acquire a load of help particularly if you're female and 60% of these second unions with children sadly break down usually at least in part over different styles of parenting.

Here she wants the new man's £50k and is short of money and wants some moral support and presumably most of all loves him. When my mother was dying I reassured her I would marry again (I was divorced about a 18 months then)..... She rushed to say not to rush into it. Don't belittle the many advantages of being single. You can still see men or a man. You can have them come in to help. They can go with you to school events and social events but they don't have to move in and they don't have to move their children in and you don't have to marry them.

I guess I don't see it as "giving all my cash away." I am fairly optimistic that the pre-nup will hold some weight and that DP is unlikely to walk off with half my assets, especially in the early years. My solicitor didn't volunteer a percentage (I agree that that lawyers never like to do this) but when I asked this is the percentage he gave. I can get it in writing but THB I am not going going to sue my lawyer if DP does claim more that what he puts in! I know it's not an exact science. My solicitor is more like, don't take the risk. As for my income, I would say that I have NO money but, having paid between 2k and 3k per month in childcare over the last 5 years, I want/need to reduce costs and it would seem massively extravagant hiring a house-keeper. Noone I know has one let alone a single parent on a one and a bit income. I was considering an au-pair but all the ones I have spoken to seem fairly young and inexperienced and I have zero time to spend training or supervising them so think I am better off finding an experienced live out nanny then having the hassle of someone living in.

As for allowing DP to contribute to the mortgage, I am not sure that this is so terrible as everyone makes out. The whole point seems to be that I should try to keep the house/asset to myself to leave to my kids when i kick the bucket. Well, first of all, the asset in question in huge, and, one the charges have been paid off, a larger mortgage than I, as a single person, would have voluntarily taken on. I should be able to afford it but it will be a stretch. I don't find the thought of allowing DP to have a share in the house, albeit a small one, and shouldering some of that responsibility with me, especially with interest rates going up. If the mortgage is 3k (with the charges paid off), it is a huge help if DP pays 1k of that rather that me paying 3k which I would struggle to afford without making sacrifices. Yes I could make those sacrifices but it would be a struggle and for what? To leave my kids a house/asset worth a few million? I have never expected or depended on my parents for handouts or an inheritance; I have done it all myself. Even if I do allow DP an interest which he would leave to his DCs, I would still be leaving DSs a hefty inheritance but I would have more money now, when I really need it, for living costs, school fees, clothes, tennis lessons, holidays etc. If it does all go tits up in 10 years, which it could, my kids will be 14 and 16. His kids would be 21 and 19 and possibly not living at home. I am pretty certain I would manage to keep the house for a couple of years (an order for sale would take at least 12-18 months) and at that point I think I would be happy to sell or move elsewhere. I genuinely don't see what is wrong with this approach. Am I missing something?

As for paying for big expenses for his kids, it simply won't happen because I don't have the money to pay for 2 more kids to go to private school (who does if it's 15k a year?). I absolutely expect to pay a bit more for food/outings/holidays etc as I earn more and what I can do to help I will but it isn't much until I dig myself out of debt. In exchange I hope that DP would do a bit more around the house/with the kids.

Sorry, loads of typos in that! I wouldn't say that I have NO money!

I should also clarify a couple of things about the charge. There are in fact two charges, one to my ex which is an equitable charge fixed at 7% of the charge of the property which is currently worth 1.4 million. There is another charge in favour of my father in law, a legal charge in the amount of 105k. He basically "lent" my ex and I money when we brought the house but never charged interest or tried to reclaim it until I started divorce proceedings. He joined in our divorce proceedings to try to get it repaid (he was trying to force a sale as he wanted his money back) but the court refused as that was never the deal. The judge ordered, however, that interest of 6% p.a. is payable on the 105k, which was the terms of the original loan by the fIL never enforced. I negotiated a 2 year grace period which runs out in March 2015 at which point the loan will start accruing 6% interest (more than a personal loan!) although it is only payable when I sell the house. The repayment date is when my oldest, now 6, finishes primary school. Both charges are triggered if I remarry or cohabit. So, I basically need to re-pay the 105k next year anyway otherwise I start accruing interest at a massive rate. I also need to repay my ex but I am sure he would be more flexible over this /allow more time for repayment, especially if it meant the kids and I having to move further away as we currently live near to my ex (he bought a house 15 minutes away). I am even wondering if he would agree to keep his share in the house until I get repay it so that it is protected for the boys.

Finally, I should also clarify that the main reason I want to marry DP is because I love him. The practical issues around needing help etc are very much secondary issues and I totally realise I can get those needs met in another way (nanny/au-pair, downsizing etc). I am just trying to point out reasons other than just love/romanticism why being with him makes sense.