Partner still paying mortgage and child maintenance which is stopping us from buying

[Mammacool84]

Hey there,

hoping I can get some advice or guidance- my partner and I have been together over 4 years we now have a beautiful 3 month old and we are in a rented house. My partner owns a house from a previous relationship where he has two lovely children and pays child maintenance. Thing is I want my little boy to have his own room and a house that is ours but all my partners money is tired up in the house he owns with his ex and he says he can’t sell until his two kids are 18!! But this is stopping us from getting a property which I think is so unfair - I don’t get child maintenance etc why should his ex have maintenance and a massive house???!!! I feel like I am paying for his exs lifestyle and kids - why can’t they downsize so his ex can get a solo mortgage? Any suggestions? Thank you in advance

Or responsible !

Gobsmacking that a woman would chose to get into a relationship with a man who already has 2 young children knowing full well the massive financial responsibility he has already agreed to them, decides to have another child without ensuring he is in a position to keep up that agreement and provide a secure home for the new child, then whines about it and insists his original two children should lose their home as she wants a house like they have for her child!

Do you also have other DC from a previous relationship OP as you mentioned not getting maintenance so why should your DP's ex partner get it? That's disgusting argument btw.

So you're expecting your DP to contribute to a property to house your DC from a previous relationship as well but not his DC from his previous relationship who he had a responsibility to long before you came on the scene?

I hope he keeps his word to his ex partner and you reap what you've sown.

She hasn't said if he pays the whole mortgage. It sounds like it's a joint mortgage on a jointly owned house. People are assuming a lot from very little information.

Where does it say the ex (she) is paying more than 50%? If that's the case, then fair enough.. But the way OP phrased it was DH is paying the whole mortgage and child maintenance. I have no interest in being a step mother, so count me out the running for that. She chose to have kids ultimately we know women have to do majority of the caring and men get the easy ride, but in this case he's doing the financial load and she's doing caring.

Most of the replies here are unkind to say the least.

If this man had been married, the courts would have awarded a fair settlement. That would usually involve the marital home being sold and the assets divided according to need. The ex wife may have ended up with 50 % of more of the equity, but she would be expected to work and provide for her children as well as their father.

As it stands, they have come to what seems an unjust agreement, which means he is going to struggle to buy a home with his current partner until his children are 18.

Ironically, MN is full of advice that women should marry to protect their assets and home if there is a divorce, yet here, the woman is far better off than if she had been married! Simply because she has got her ex to fund her home for another 10+ years.

Yes, mothers can often stay in the marital home with young children, BUT the overall settlement takes into account the father's needs too, for his own future. That could be reduced maintenance and the instruction that his ex finds work.

OP you can't force this man to sell his home (assuming he owns half of it) but you can try to hold onto your own career and build it so that if he walks away, you can support yourself and your child. OR you can try to convince him that he needs to stand up to his ex partner and force a sale (or she takes on the mortgage and buys him out of his half.)

Oh I dunnow. There are posters on here who will claim that it is a fact that the mother of the children has the right to live in the family home until the youngest is eighteen. In fact I saw someone on here recently state that it is “the law.” When we know that’s categorically not the case.

TBH the mortgage depends. In theory he should give up paying the mortgage, make the mother of his children sell the family home, and release his share of the equity now.

But in practice paying the mortgage on a house for another fifteen years is a wise investment, and fifteen years from now, if the house is sold he will have significantly more equity than he will now.

And if he part owns the house, then it’s fair he pay half the mortgage, especially if he wants his kids to live there until they’re 18. And maintenance is separate from that. e still has an obligation to pay towards his children’s upkeep. the mortgage is his property, which he is paying for. It just happens that the children are living in it.

And the OP knew this before she had another child with him. And now she’s claiming that his ex shouldn’t have maintenance because she doesn’t.

After divorce, imo house should be sold and single mortgage should be taken out. He should pay child maintenance, but mortgage is bit much. He's been taken for a ride.

Quite the catch, isn’t he?

Why would you get child maintenance off your partner who still lives with you

Exactly, very well put!

This is why you don't get involved with a man with so much baggage. You don't need to accommodate his other children and he's an idiot for agreeing to pay the mortgage until kids are 18. Stupid and spineless springs to mind.
I was agreeing with you up the last sentence.
Why on earth anyone would get pregnant and have a child with someone who already has young kids and an ex has always been beyond me. Always has been.
Why start a relationship with complicated finances and knowing a chunk of the household income is already spent on maintenance is just daft. It's even more daft to moan about it afterwards.

They aren't divorced. This is a private arrangement they both voluntarily entered into. He is not being "taken for a ride" by facilitating his children to remain in their family home. He will get his share when the house is eventually sold.

This can't be real? You CHOSE to breed with a man with two children and now you want his pre existing children to down grade their lives so that you can own a house?

You should havepicked a a different man!

He is being taken for a ride… paying for a house for 10+ more years when he could get his equity and provide a stable home for all his children.

I meant the whole situation was stupid and spineless. There is literal so much baggage. I wouldn't get involved in a situation like this. They've both been very silly!

Why is everyone being so nasty to the OP?

The truth is that had this man done' the right thing' (in the world of MN) and married his former partner, their house would have been sold and the assets shared. if it was decided in court not to sell it, he could not be tied to paying a huge chunk of or all the mortgage AND maintenance.

Courts work on what is fair.

That means a settlement where each of the couple can have a reasonable standard of living.

It doesn't mean one of them takes everything so the other is left high and dry for 15 years till the kids are 18.

Just to clarify - does he actually pay towards the mortgage and maintenance separately? My friend has a joint home with her ex husband but as one of the children opted to stay with dad when they were divorced she can't force a sale of the house until they are 18yrs so that bits not unusual but she doesn't pay the mortgage payments she just pays maintenance.

I think you're being unrealistic rather than unreasonable. Good on him for following through on his financial obligations towards his children. Unfortunately he has other children so you may need to downsize your plans re housing. A 4 bed is expensive and the children will not be deprived or badly done to sharing while they spend time with dad. At least he's paying towards them which is more than some do!

It's entirely voluntary. They weren't married. She's an ex girlfriend.

Why did you think you having a baby would change this arrangement?

Exactly.

On MN: if you have a man kids, he should pay the mortgage and child maintenance for you!! If he doesn't, he's a waste of space and useless father.

You are being harsh and downright nasty.

using the word 'breed'. FGS!

How many people are there on 2nd marriages and 2nd relationships?
Rather a lot!

You also sound ignorant.

If they had been married it is very unlikely his wife would have hung onto the house after what may have been a short marriage (children are still young.)

She'd have got half.

Get your facts right before lashing out.

There is no way the OPs boyfriend will marry her. There was no wedding for either the current or past girlfriend.

Then you're indirectly paying for the other house.

He shouldn't be paying maintenance on top of the mortgage. Think he needs to get advice to sell so she has to downsize.

OP your issue here seems to be that your DP is happy with this arrangement as he agreed to it in the first place. You obviously aren't. If you've spoken to him and he isn't of a mind to change it. That's the end of it.

If he isn't happy with it, he can obviously get the ball rolling on changing it.

Your ire at his ex partner is completely misplaced as it was an agreement they reached. The only person you need to be frustrated at, is your DP.

There could be a whole raft of reasons why they came to this agreement. In the meantime you need to put things into action yourself. If you can afford a home for you and your child, get started on that.