Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Original poster

Boyfriend charging me rent at a property he owns

255 replies

blueamanda · 20/03/2016 19:14

Hello everyone!

I'm in a bit of a dilemma... My bf has recently bought a flat, 95% of the money came from his parents, he doesn't have a mortgage and he took out a loan to cover the rest. The idea was that we'd move in together, but we haven't exactly discussed the details until now.

I was more then happy to share the bills and food costs with him from the get go, however he now wants to charge me rent as well, which would be half of my current rent. He calls this a non-specific contribution to the flat, this is not going to be a landlord tenant agreement. All this would be outlined in a living together agreement and he also wants me to sign a waiver saying I will have no claim on the property.

This ordeal has left a bitter taste for me, since I'd be contributing financially to the flat that isn't mine and I don't have the same protection a tenant does. I'm in a far more vulnerable position.

I would love to hear some advice and perspectives from anyone in a similar situation.

Also does anyone know if my bf is charging me rent is he legally obligated to pay tax on it? Would I be better off pushing for a landlord tenant agreement? I won't be renting a room from him, but sharing the bedroom.

Many thanks!

OP posts:
Whitney168 · 21/03/2016 11:08

Why on earth wouldn't you pay rent? You're not even living together at the moment, are you, so he'd be staking an awful lot on you to let you move in rent free. You say you'd contribute to bills etc. like you're doing him a favour, but surely everyone does that as a point of joint living as well as contributing to rent or mortgage?

Also, not actually seeing how there is any difference in paying him £200 a month, or £400 a month in to an account and halve it if you split? Seems a sensible way of saving to me, as long as it's in joint names and you both leave it to mount up.

Original poster
blueamanda · 21/03/2016 11:09

The 200 and 400 are just an example figure to make things simple, not the actual charge.

There is no children on the cards for us and no marriage on the cards for me (might change if we're together long enough and he feels it's important for him to get married).

But essentially, I will always be worse off financially, even if we but the next place together, my equity percentage will be much lower and he can always buy me out - this prospect is a downer if you spent years on making it a home.

We've been together for over 2 years. We agreed that living together agreement is going to cover him not being able to just kick me out. And of course all household responsibilities will be shared 50/50, I wouldn't have it any other way :)

I will be keeping half of my saving either way, but the initial suggestion was that i put my whole current rent into a savings account and when we split I'd get half of that back. I see no reason why i should put the whole amount into account if Im getting half of it either way, so decided that it's only half of the amount that goes into the account and the other half will be accessible to me to do what I like.

OP posts:
Pinkheart5915 · 21/03/2016 11:15

I agree with him wanting a waiver saying you have no claim to the flat as it is his property.
I agree with paying bills each 50/50 for example, but I do not understand why he wants "rent" as well
Wouldn't sit well with me.

MyKingdomForBrie · 21/03/2016 11:16

This is a difficult situation. I would say costs of the flat should be calculated and evenly split, as you both want to protect your financial positions. It feels to him I expect like you're 'making a profit' from him as you're living for less because of him BUT that shouldn't matter to him because he should feel love and affection for you.

My DH currently lives in the house I bought by myself before we got together, I still pay all the mortgage and bills because we haven't moved any direct debits around. We have shared finances so it's not really relevant.

Clearly you're not at that stage yet but it just seems that the sensible and fair thing is that you both share the costs equally. You get to save extra money and he will obviously retain 100% of his property in the event of a split.

suzannecaravaggio · 21/03/2016 11:24

Equally the OP is 'profiting too' if you want to look at it that way, but hey let's use anything we can to have a go at those that may have money

She would be profiting, but he doesn't lose anything if she doesn't pay rent, and he would be a wealthy person extracting a profit from a much less wealthy person with whom he is having a long term relatively

I'm not having a go at him...it just sounds to me as if things are too unequal, she has much more to lose and therefore he has much more power... Ipso facto it can never be an equal relationship

Meeep · 21/03/2016 11:24

If it's market rate or more it isn't fair, because you aren't getting your own space; you're sharing. Also you lack tenant rights.
But if it's less it seems right to me tbh.

guerre · 21/03/2016 12:12

I am worried that you do not see yourself as his equal, because he has the good fortune to be born into a family of means.
Particularly when you say if you buy together in the future his equity in a property would be greater than yours.
DH and I share equally the assets of our marriage, regardless of who has put what in. If, in the future, you were to have a child, and had to stop earning (e.g. due to needs of child) would your share of assets be reduced? Would he expect you to still contribute half to everything if you were on maternity leave? I know you said it's a long way down the line, but people do not tend to change their attitude to money, and if he's like this now, I wonder how you would feel in the situation I outlined above.
Two years together is long enough to judge whether you want to live together- good luck.

zippey · 21/03/2016 12:39

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TheOptimisticPessimist · 21/03/2016 13:24

It isn't about 'you're paying less than market rent so it's a good deal'. It's a relationship, it's not about making 'deals'.

He doesn't lose out financially by OP moving in and just contributing to bills and service costs etc unless he's currently renting a spare room out and ending the tenancy when she moves in.

The difference is he's not profiting either and I see no issue with that. I find the idea of one partner profiting off another so directly really unpalatable. So fine, technically Op might be 'profiting' by living rent free, but that profit is not to his detriment. On the other hand he is profiting from her detriment if she's paying him.

Making her pay rent just so he doesn't feel taken advantage of in the eventuality they break up just seems petty and spiteful.

At the end of the day if they break up then he still has his property. There's no reason OP should have a claim to it if she's not paying towards it so by all means sign a waiver stating that, but I can't imagine charging a Dp rent and begrudging them the opportunity to save if I was lucky enough to be gifted a property and only had to personally invest a small proportion.

If they break up and she hasn't paid rent then, realistically speaking, so what? It doesn't actually impact him in any way other than potentially making him feel a bit bitter. She may have been able to make savings that she couldn't otherwise, but so can he if he chooses to save money he would normally pay on rent. If they stay together then great, they can both contribute on more equal terms to their new place and keep that one to rent out or he can use it as his part of the deposit etc. If they don't then that's sad, but he's not actually any worse off than he would have been had he been living alone.

He is in a position to help her out in a very tangible way thanks to his good fortune and generous parents. She would just be giving him free money whilst lacking the protections a real tenancy would give. It puts her completely on the back foot and makes things notably unequal. Nitpicking over that from his position of power seems very selfish. It isn't about protecting his asset because OP has no claim over it. It's about whether or not he should get more.

If they were both paying rent to his parents I'd see it differently, but providing that the 'rent free' partner is contributing their fair share to the costs that increase due to their presence (ie the bills) then I don't think it's cocklodging at all.

bellsboys · 21/03/2016 13:34

When I moved in with DH we started pooling our money as we saw ourselves as a partnership from that moment on. He owned the house with a mortgage but it wouldn't have made sense for me to pay him rent as it was just one pot. But we only moved in after being together for five years and we saw it as the start of a long term commitment, not just testing the waters.

I think it would be best to hold off moving in together until you are more certain about your relationship.

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 14:05

'The 200 and 400 are just an example figure to make things simple, not the actual charge.'

Respectfully it's a bit odd that you came up with £200 not £100 as your example amount and so I guess the true amount is about £200?

I'ts cool that we are being asked to help understand your situation but I think we deserve to be given the facts.

Until you tell us what

  • the monthly rent payment is that's he's asked from you.
  • his monthly loan amount and service charge adds up to

No one on here can really help with the situation. The market rent for the new flat would be helpful to. IMO.

JeanGenie23 · 21/03/2016 14:09

Zippey this is a disgusting remark "You obviously want to live rent free and are some sort of cunt/cock lodger" how on earth can you say this without knowing the OP Shock

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 14:18

Joining this thread late but can see some not pleasant things have been said about the DP also and the poor man doent even have the opportunity to defend himself. ..

I'd appreciate a bit more openness with the numbers plz OP as if there isn't it makes me wonder.

EmpressTomatoKetchup · 21/03/2016 14:27

I would get legal advice. My DParents offered to give me and DP some money to buy a house but with many conditions attached which would mean DP would have no or limited share of claim on the property if we split up ( despite paying the mortgage! ) they'd had drawn up by a solicitor. Didn't seem fair to me.

Lunar1 · 21/03/2016 14:58

Why will you be worse off if you move in with him and pay half your current rent?

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 15:18

I don't understand the point about wanting a landlord/tenant relationship for your protection. If you break up, what would having this change? The legal agreement you are signing (which sounds very sensible and for both of you to know where you stand) will specify everything else surely.

suzannecaravaggio · 21/03/2016 15:23

what if the boyfriend owned a car/lawnmower/television
the OP doesnt have a car/lawnmower/television but would like to use his sometimes.
The boyfriend says if it wasn't for me you'd have to pay for the hire of a car/lawnmower/television therefore it is only fair that I charge you for the use of my car/lawnmower/television

is that the same?

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 15:25

You're comparing a London flat which has very high running costs with a lawnmower?

PurpleDaisies · 21/03/2016 15:26

is that the same?
In short, no.

Justanothermanicfriday · 21/03/2016 15:28

is that the same?

No where near the same

CleverPlansAndSecretTricks · 21/03/2016 15:50

What are you looking for in a relationship? Are you with him because you are deciding if he is the one you want to marry? Or because you want a boyfriend for now and you don't really mind about the future?

If the former I'd keep your own place. Spend lots of time staying over at his and he at yours but have your independence in case you decide he is not the one. Aim to decide either way in about 6 months. If you break up good that you don't also lose your home, if you decide to get married none of this is an issue.

If the later then I think either option he suggested is very sensible, but the paying him half rent and saving half is the least messy and emotionally charged.

suzannecaravaggio · 21/03/2016 15:51

the principle is the same, he owns something and he wont share it with his g/f even though it costs him nothing to share.

(running costs are irrelevant she would cover those whether it be a car a tv or a property)

suzannecaravaggio · 21/03/2016 15:58

No where near the same
at what point does it become different?

Say he owns a garage that he doesn't use (he doesn't want to rent it out or sell it) but he charges her rent to use it arguing that if not for him she would have to rent a garage from someone else.
It's as if he doesn't want her to benefit from anything that he owns even though he doesn't lose out in anyway by sharing with her

MrsSteptoe · 21/03/2016 15:58

is that the same?
Only if being of no fixed abode is the same as having no fixed ownership of car/lawnmower/television. Otherwise, no.

MrsSteptoe · 21/03/2016 16:00

"Darling, let's get a garage together."
And they say romance is dead.

Swipe left for the next trending thread