If you were married to me, would this bother you?

[PeachesMcLean]

DH and I are about to get a joint mortgage for the first time. We're really lucky in that my mum has given us a huge sum towards the new house. She's made it quite clear that this will come off the Will when she eventually goes and I know she's only got that money because of when my dad died (and his hard work in saving it). It's actually one fifth of the value of the new house so a fair chunk!

Now, I've suggested this next bit to DH before and he's joked about me making him sign a "post nup" (instead of a pre-nup) but it's come to the crunch now and I need to decide whether to push it:

My plan is to get him to sign to be a Tenant in Common so that should we split up, the first fifth of the house is mine and we then split the rest. Whilst I don't Really think he's about to run off with someone else, I don't want to run the risk that if he did do that, he'd get half of my mum's money. I guess in the back of my mind I am aware that DH has been irresponsible with money in the past and I don't want to think that he could get this.

Am I Evil Wifey?

It's a very common thing to do amongst my friends/family, but they live in the continent, where it is legally more binding. I understand it isn't in the UK (unfortunately, otherwise I would have!!)

I don't think it's too late to change it. We didn't agree out tenants in common thing until a few days before exchange, I think. I think you're being very wise to think about ring fencing the money.

Whether you hold the property as joint tenants or tenants in common has nothing to do with the purchase. It only become relevant (I think) when your solicitor registers your ownership of the property after the sale has gone through. So there is no reason for it to hold up the sale and it can be done once you have completed. I would check it with your solicitor - it has been a long time since I had to study conveyancing so I may be wrong or things may have changed...

What age are you Peaches?
When dh and I first got together - I had £60k from my dad's inheritance. Some of which I put into our first property. I was also earning a lot more than him.
But that was 10 years ago and over the years things have balanced out. Dh sold his bachelor flat and has been earning more than I have for the past couple of years.
His parents are still alive as is my mum - so their will be their money to deal with in the next 20 years or so.
So if you are young enough (?) iykwim - things could all turn around over the next 10 years or so and be more equal.

DO IT peach.

Not read the whole thread but my solicitor advised me to do what you are suggesting when my DH and i bought our first house together (he was renting and I owned my house outright).

Oh God. Ok I will talk to the solicitor and see what he says. I'm just such a scaredy wuss cat that anything which avoids stressing DH out (easily harrassed) is the easy option at the moment.

What does interest me though, is the number of comments about equal earning on this thread, as though it makes a difference. As in: if I was earning a lot less than DH I would somehow be contributing less to the partnership and therefore this money from my mum would make up for that (and should therefore be shared equally if we were to split up). Or at least, that's what I infer from some of the comments. Have I misinterpreted?

Personally I just think that if someone stays at home to bring up the family, it's still an equal, but different, contribution and that should be respected on divorce. Maybe it isn't what happens in practice. What I'm talking about here, is a gift to offspring, which should be protected should the other half go off and do something they shouldn't. And the logical conclusion is therefore that I would also agree that if the gift was to the husband, and the SAHM wife went off and had an affair, thereby ending the marriage, the wife still shouldn't benefit from that gift after the divorce. (She should certainly benefit from his financial contribution from working, she works albeit in the house, he benefits from her bringng up his kids.) Anyway, I'm whaffling again, and this is all hypothetical in our case as I work full time and earn the same as DH. It's also worth noting that our current house and mortgage is in my name only (I bought it not long after we met) but since he's always contributed equally I wouldn't dream of taking an unequal share of the equity we've made on it. Even if he did run off with some floozy.

God, I'm making him out to be some kind of philanderer aren't I? He's not at all you know. Untrustworthy with a credit card but not with other women.

Peaches, I see what you mean, but in my case I was saying that you really have to think of yourself in these situations. I think it is easier for a man as generally their earning capabilities are unaffected by the family situation. That in turn means they have better careers, pensions etc. This in the long run means that men financially are better off as they have made less sacrifices long after a divorce. You do say that in your situation that is not the case which is good.
With regard to the view of if you are earning less you are contributing less that is not what is being said I think it is if you are earning less you need to protect yourself more. As Xenia is always pointing out once the kids have left the home the sacrifices you have made for them will mean that you are worse off in terms of careers, salarys etc. You cannot get those years back and so you will be financially disadvantaged for the rest of your life. Admittedly as you say this may not apply to you but I think for the time being ring fence your mothers gift and maybe at some point in the future you can split the ownership jointly.

Peaches: Have you thought about putting the house in your mum's name?

(BGD swoons at Morningpaper post......)
Not a good idea as the mother could evict them out of the house if she so wished or if she met someone else, remarried and died that house could pass over to new husband etc.
Also from the mortgage point of view mortgage companies like the title deeds to be in the same name as the mortgage

And if the house is in her name, wouldn't it be considered part of her estate when she dies? She'd be apoplectic at the thought of more money going to the tax man!

Biggitdad, you're right of course and very reasonable. I do need to talk to the solicitor.

What about your mum putting a second charge on the house??, for one fifth of its value - that way, she would retain a right on sale to one fifth of the proceeds ( which she could give back to you if you did divorce, and would be exempt from any divorce settlement)

You need to arrange the ownership of the house as tenants in common,with you owning, one fifth,plus 50% of the rest. Sensible to split your estate anyway as a way of mitigating IHT, so you can then draw up effective discretionary will trusts.

Speak to a solicitor now.It is not too late. It is protecting your childrens financial future with money that came from your family. Do it

I have had similar issues with my dh, who has basically spent and spent until there was no more. But I'm not sure it stands up anyway if it is the matrimonial home. It certainly didn't make any difference when we were seperating that I had paid for our home. He still got half of the equity, because we have shared care of the children, and in a divorce situation where there are kids that's all the court thinks about. I would definately get advice - it's really good to know where you stand and what the possibilities are.