Am I wrong for not wanting husband as joint tenant?

[MsSheppy]

I don't know if I am being unreasonable here.
Everyone knows how notoriously hard it is to get a tenancy with the council. I fought really hard for years and lived in hostels and B&Bs . I eventually got something. Anyway that was 21 years ago.

Since then, I met and married a man. *(I have 3 children by an ex partner) we've been married almost 5 years.

Anyway a serious incident happened which resulted in us being moved to another property for safety reasons. What we was offered after over a year in emergency accommodation was amazing. We used to live in a flat. Now we have a big house with a garden. I am pointing this out because suddenly now we live in this house he is behaving totally different and practically demanding to be joint tenants. I have refused this because a tenancy can only be passed down once. My children have no chance of realistically getting their own home the way things are with shortages of properties and the cost to buy. He also had a property previously that he got evicted from. So in my eyes a bit of a liability.

Given your history and his, stick to your guns. Kids come first, always!!

What are your wishes if you die? will your children go to live with their father? or would there be a chance they and he would want to stay in the home? I think the answer to that is really important for your decision making. I understand you wanting to protect your children in their home but if he's not going to be their guardian then surely they can't stay in that house anyway?

My housing officer said pretty much the same. And as for his attitude. Yes I think it's quite alarming to be honest. I'm more concerned given that it's only since moving here it's became a massive issue. He never mentioned this at all before. What really got me is in a previous argument he even suggested if he goes I have to as well. Which is absolutely not happening and cannot happen.

As a Housing officer, absolutely don’t put him on the tenancy. I tell all of my customers that off the record when they move in, he then has equal rights to you and as you say it could mean that you aren’t then entitled to any further help if the marriage ended.

Keep the house in your name, I’ve seen it go bad so many times!

Exactly this! This is why I have to put my children first.

Yep totally agree with that advice. I would never ever ad a partner to my tenancy not a hope in hell.

I agree with this ^

OP stick to your guns for your children's sake.

No way would he be joint

" What really got me is in a previous argument he even suggested if he goes I have to as well. Which is absolutely not happening and cannot happen. "

I would laugh in his face, how dare he try to control you like this, knowing your history.

Your husband is not a good man, I would be very seriously looking at divorce, he sounds grasping, greedy and most likely not above manipulating the situation fraudulently for his gain.

Get him out and enjoy your nice big house without him.

Yes, this

They shouldn't even allow this. My ex tried to get on my tenancy but their policy forbode it which was a good thing.

Stand your ground. That home is your children's, not yours, nor his. Reiterate this.

Bristol city council won’t add either. Makes sense when you think about it, especially with children not of the marriage/partnership.

I managed to hold one off for several years. I explained the legality. They've come in recently and a male member of staff assisted them to put him on. Good luck to her and the 3 kids.

I’d tell him you’ll put him on as a householder. That’s what my husband is on as. I can pass my tenancy on in certain circumstances when I die. I have it in writing on my tenancy that if my children and husband are both eligible, and neither may be, it’s complex, I want my children to inherit not him. It can only be inherited once.

It's not about the adults, it's about the kids. If a single dad wanted to keep his tenancy and his OH wanted on, I'd tell him not to.
Agree with this.

I would support any parent embarking on a relationship to protect their children's interests because however nice a new partner/spouse seems, if situations change they are not going to be looking out for the children.

Any time I read about a new partner/spouse who pushes to stack things in their favour over their partner's children it's a lot of red flags to me.

Of course the council wouldn’t rehouse him what sort of world are you living in?

Mm not sure about this tbf OP. If the roles were reversed, it’s a red flag if a man won’t put their wife/partner on a tenancy or mortgage as there’s no secruity. I personally think he should be on the tenancy as a joint tenant but it’s not my flat so it’s your decision.

It’s interesting coming across this thread because I just saw this post on Instagram and it’s so very true.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CuUbFXxoaTX/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

It’s technically not your partners house at all. He’s just living with you. Quite sad really

But then again I do understand wanting to pass the house down to your kids. I guess it’d be different if it was his kids as well!

How old are your children? Are they in their20’s ?

As you are married he has home rights granted to him through the marriage, even without him being on the tenancy agreement. You may want to take some advice from shelter or citizens advice on this, and how it would affect your children succeeding. It is not as simple as other posters have made out.

If you are married, even if your name is not on the tenancy agreement you automatically have a right to stay in the home even after your relationship ends, provided you are still legally married .Your rights are called 'home rights’ and can only be ended by divorce or death.

I thought home rights only applied to owned properties as opposed to social housing?

Given your precarious housing history and your need to provide for your non-shared children, you are absolutely right to want sole ownership of your tenancy. I would not compromise on that.

However, he would be perfectly reasonable to consider this a deal breaker in terms of the marriage. Marriage is an economic partnership, otherwise there is no reason to have your relationship recognized by the government. Sharing housing is part of that package.

in Other words, knowing you had 3 children who you knew would always need to be your financial priority, why on earth did you get married?

He never mentioned this at all before. What really got me is in a previous argument he even suggested if he goes I have to as well.

It's worrying that these conversations are even coming up for him to throw comments in like this. Can you give context to the argument? Is it about the house at all or is it unrelated and he's saying this out of (truthful) anger?

No he is not on the scene at all. That's never going to be an issue. I won't go into that as it's very complicated and a legal matter

We got married because we love each other. We was together for a few years before we got married. This had never been an issue.

Like I said. It seems to have became an issue since being here.

We share every aspect of our life together. He is also on the tenancy agreement just not a joint tenant. If the situation was the other way around I'd totally understand.

Also if we had bought the house. That's totally different. It'd be both of us paying for it and both equally entitled to a share of it if we divorced or either of us died.

Im thinking longterm for the children. We don't own this house. If we did in a worse case scenario it could be sold and dealt with that way. Because this is a council property. If we was both joint tenants and either myself or him died, the surviving person gets the tenancy leaving the children with no home. If it's just me, or him the children will get to stay here regardless.

He is on the tenancy so he will not be thrown out. I was told by my housing officer that if anything were to occur such as a divorce or death. They can help him.