Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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:
BYOSnowman · 21/03/2016 16:03

How big is the flat?

A lawnmower is not a good comparison because you would never rent it out

Whereas he could rent some of his flat out. He has a finance cost and an opportunity cost.

However, this all comes down to how you are going to split your finances.

suzannecaravaggio · 21/03/2016 16:06

You obviously want to live rent free and are some sort of cunt/cock lodger
a c*cklodger or gold digger ( I think that's the female equivalent) is someone who feels that their sexual services are a fair exchange for full board and lodging.

So they contribute no money, no domestic work, it's a 'you keep me and I'll shag you' arrangement

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 16:07

Yes, is there a second bedroom? If he rents a bedroom to you for £200 instead of a second bedroom for loads more, then I think we can put to bed the idea that his primary motive is financial.
Maybe it's just me but I wish my DP offered me a London flat described by OP as fancy for £2400 a year. Steal of the century.

suzannecaravaggio · 21/03/2016 16:21

he doesn't love you OP, he wants a 'lodger with benefits'

Justanothermanicfriday · 21/03/2016 16:23

Maybe it's just me but I wish my DP offered me a London flat described by OP as fancy for £2400 a year. Steal of the century.

Me too.

Nottodaythankyouorever · 21/03/2016 16:24

he doesn't love you OP, he wants a 'lodger with benefits'

How do you possibly know that.

A fair amount of posters agree that the OP should pay some rent.

HarlotBronte · 21/03/2016 16:26

Delicate situation, this one. The issue is, are you willing to accept much less security than you'd have as a tenant in return for a lower rent allowing you to save? I can understand him feeling you shouldn't be able to live there for free since he isn't, on the other hand I also understand you feeling you don't want him to be making money off you (which he is, as he'll have few of the responsibilities a landlord would have while still getting paid a contribution).

If you want to do this, the best thing I think would be to put a time limit on it. Agree for 12 months, but if things are still going well after that, you'd expect this to be reassessed: you don't want to effectively be a lodger forever. Meanwhile, put the money you save on rent towards some kind of asset of your own. And think of it as splitting the benefit: you get much cheaper housing than you otherwise would have done, he gets some income from someone sharing the property with him whilst having virtually no responsibilities.

SarahUnderwood · 21/03/2016 16:28

I really think speculating on someone's "love" without knowing the facts or giving them a voice is a bit distasteful.

Teaandcakeat8 · 21/03/2016 16:28

I can't believe some posters wouldn't do this.

Yes the boyfriend might own the property but tbh if he and the op have never lived together I don't blame him for protecting his asset. It's surely just sensible?

If they split the op still benefits as she has savings behind her (which I definitely would keep in my own bank account btw).

As I said previously my ex dp and I did this and I didn't feel like a lodger. I knew full well I was saving for a place of my own if we split or to buy together if we didn't?

Shutthatdoor · 21/03/2016 16:29

I really think speculating on someone's "love" without knowing the facts or giving them a voice is a bit distasteful.

Just about to say the same thing

SarahUnderwood · 21/03/2016 16:32

"he'll have few of the responsibilities a landlord would have"

Sounds like he'll be paying for all the furniture and upkeep of the home, replacing the boiler when it conks out etc, dealing with contractors - just like a landlord - and he wont have any deposit from you or be getting anything like a commercial return - a bit worse than a landlord.

If you've never owned a home, you have no idea into the neverending costs and problems that come with it......

WottaMess · 21/03/2016 16:37

Would he put your £200 pm into an account which would go towards your next property together? So between you the £400 would be saving for your future together? If you break up he gets the 'rent', you keep your 'savings'. But if you stick together then you've both improved your joint position through the arrangement.

Worth bearing in mind that at some point it's nice to consider when things become joint. When I married my DH i didn't renew the previous agreements we'd had about my extra deposit contribution to the house. He now works pt to care for our son and relies on my being the breadwinner. We are a family, and if that ever breaks down we will need to review how best to sort it out. It no longer felt appropriate to have 'mine' and 'his'.

WottaMess · 21/03/2016 16:37

Would he put your £200 pm into an account which would go towards your next property together? So between you the £400 would be saving for your future together? If you break up he gets the 'rent', you keep your 'savings'. But if you stick together then you've both improved your joint position through the arrangement.

Worth bearing in mind that at some point it's nice to consider when things become joint. When I married my DH i didn't renew the previous agreements we'd had about my extra deposit contribution to the house. He now works pt to care for our son and relies on my being the breadwinner. We are a family, and if that ever breaks down we will need to review how best to sort it out. It no longer felt appropriate to have 'mine' and 'his'.

HarlotBronte · 21/03/2016 16:42

He won't actually have the same obligations wrt to furniture, upkeep and boiler replacement as he would if he were a landlord though sarahunderwood. He could choose to do without if he liked. And any maintenance he does do will be for his own benefit too, more so than it would be if he weren't living in the property. So if he decides the suite looks a bit shabby and buys a new one, his backside will be parked on it as well as OPs. It wouldn't if he weren't living there. He'll also be much better placed to ascertain if OP is causing the sort of damage that would lead to deductions from deposit since he's actually living in the property. And as OP will have no rights, he'll be able to boot her out as soon as that becomes an issue, should he so choose, rather than having to give the appropriate notice and potentially go through an expensive eviction process.

So yes, a much more beneficial arrangement than it would be if he were a landlord.

SarahUnderwood · 21/03/2016 16:54

Apologies if I misread this but I thought this was all being spelled out in the living together agreement thingy? And if DP is living there, he's going to be motivated to make the place look great and in great working order, whereas landlords only want their money and aim to spend the minimum possible on upkeep.
Two sides to every coin...

sablepoot · 21/03/2016 16:56

I think if you look at the overall savings from the pair of you cohabiting and split them between you that might be fairer.

So instead halving all the bills, add up the extra amounts that you being there adds (so 25% council tax, probably non of service charge, and for the utilities, deduct the standing charge from gas, electrical and water(if metered, otherwise exclude water) and then split the remainder 50:50.

Then take your rent saving (and any bills you save, if any arent included in your rent) and subtract the extra bill costs. This is the total saving that you as a couple make by co-habiting. Split that in two and keep half each.

It means you should pay him half your current rent less half the excess bills to be fair, rather than half your rent plus half the bills as he is proposing.

SarahUnderwood · 21/03/2016 16:59

Did we ever get to the bottom of DPs outgoings on the loan? What is he paying a month please OP (sorry if said already but couldnt see it).

Shutthatdoor · 21/03/2016 17:01

Did we ever get to the bottom of DPs outgoings on the loan? What is he paying a month please OP (sorry if said already but couldnt see it).

Nope. Repeatedly asked but not answered.

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 17:14

What's the answer OP to his loan + service charges monthly payments and what is he suggesting you pay monthly?
Hit us with some facts!

sablepoot · 21/03/2016 17:28

My last para earlier was wrong (mixed up my negatives), you should pay half the rent PLUS half the extra costs of the bills, and then you are each better off by the same amount. You could do this as and when the bills arrive, but you shouldn't pay any portion of any bills that would have been incurred if he had been there alone.

HarlotBronte · 21/03/2016 17:32

And if DP is living there, he's going to be motivated to make the place look great and in great working order

That doesn't necessarily follow, not at all. Some owner occupiers are willing to put up with quite low standards because they'd rather save the money. And as I said, any money DP does choose to spend on maintaining the property will be money he benefits from in a way he wouldn't if he wasn't living there. As for the cohabitation agreement, the primary purpose of that seems to be for OP not to be able to have any claim in the event of a split. There are indeed two sides to every coin, which is why I mentioned OP saving money, but the things you mention are features of DPs 'side' not hers.

Thatswhytheycallittheblues · 21/03/2016 17:39

If they live together as equals, they have an equal responsibility to share the costs of upkeep (a cost for OP and DP) and the hassle of dealing with contractors (a pain for OP and DP).
If he is what you are calling a landlord, the cost and the pain is DP's alone (that's a very underrated pleasure of being a tenant!).
And I agree with your point on the cohabitation doc but think it can also address other issues that makes things clear for both of them in writing in advance which is a mature way of doing things and prevents problems down the line.

ElderlyKoreanLady · 21/03/2016 17:54

Personally, the arrangement I'd go for (whether the home owner or the non-owning partner) would be that the costs of living there would be split down the middle. In this case, that includes the loan rather than a mortgage. And an agreement would be signed stating that a) the non-owner has no claim to the property, b) the owner is responsible for property maintenance which should be completed in a reasonable time frame, and c) the situation should be reviewed upon an accepted marriage proposal, a pregnancy or at the agreement of both parties.

HarlotBronte · 21/03/2016 18:02

Depending on what you mean by 'upkeep' DP would need to be careful about splitting the costs with OP, as he doesn't want her to have a share in the property at this point. Not an issue if you're talking about a lick of paint when they decide they don't like the living room any more, very much an issue if you mean paying towards renovating the roof. So I don't think that arrangement is on the table at this point, as it's clearly not what DP wants.

I would want any cohabitation agreement to build in something about looking again in perhaps 12 or 18 months. It's arguably ok to be paying something in the early days, while they're still establishing if this will work, but the long run would be different.

Out2pasture · 21/03/2016 18:05

Again, representing the parents who paid for the home, and the son. What is the OP's right to the property? Has the rent idea been suggested by lawyers protecting the family interest.

Swipe left for the next trending thread