Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Property/DIY

Join our Property forum for renovation, DIY, and house selling advice.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

moving into husband's home, no property of my own

41 replies

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:00

Just wondering how many others out there (this is quite a unique situation I imagine!) got married to someone who already bought their home before you met them but you stay there as a married couple and as a family?
I didn't have a house to sell when I met my husband (had lived with my parents previously) so I just moved in to his home as we were both happy with this arrangement and it seems sensible even now that we have a ds (it's 3 bed).
Now, I was bringing up the topic of deeds and getting my name put on them if anything untoward was to happen, but he thinks this is suspicious. Anyone got any advice on this kind of situation? Or have you been in this situation yourself, currently?

any advice appreciated.thanks.

OP posts:

noddyholder · 17/04/2008 16:05

why does he think its suspicios?

hanaflower · 17/04/2008 16:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsMattie · 17/04/2008 16:07

Why does he think it's suspicious? As his wife, living in the house, you will undoubtedly have some claim over it if you ever split up anyway. I think you need to discuss the matter of putting your name on the mortgage a.s.a.p. Ditto wills.

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:10

we don't have a mortgage the house was all paid off before we even met. he worked alot of OT, in order to pay it off early. he lived off beans and toast and got second hand furniture from family so he didn't waste money on interior decoration etc.
he thinnks its suspicious before i'm mentioning it now we are married. i knew the situation just before tying the knot but didn't really think it was that important as we were/are in love.
our situation is fairly unique, how many couple s are out there wherer only one spouse owned a property and the other didn't?? most couples have a home each when they meet, then they combine the mortgage.

OP posts:

Hassled · 17/04/2008 16:10

I think (and bear in mind I only think this) that as you're married, if he were to get hit by a bus or you were to split up, you'd be fine re security in the house. It would be treated as a joint asset.
If you weren't married it would be a very different story and you would have no automatic rights to either live there or benefit from the sale were you to split/he to die.
What's there to be "suspicious" about? Completey reasonable that you want to know where you stand on this.

Hassled · 17/04/2008 16:12

I think your situation is far from unique - I moved into DP (now DH)'s house and had no assets of my own. We got my name put on the deeds because I wanted some financial security.

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:12

we don't have wills set up but he has stated that i will get the house if he were to die tomorrow, and that i would be well off from that point of view as we don't have a mortgage.i must sound all doom and gloom but i'm not, just thinking on practical terms here.

OP posts:

Stargazer · 17/04/2008 16:14

Think you both need to sort out wills, etc - especially as you have a son. It's important to get this sorted out.

twinsetandpearls · 17/04/2008 16:15

I don't think he should be suspicious, you are married!

My situation was different but comparable, I am not married and dd is from a previous marriage. Dp bought a house for us all to live in as I was not working at the time, and he raised the equity to put down as a deposit. From day one my name was on the deeds, as his request to give dd and I security.

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:15

thanks hassled. I know what you mean. he thinks financially if we were to split up he's be a broken man, he'd have to start from scratch after paying off his house, working hard all his life. so from his point of view, he doesn't want my name on the deeds because he has solely worked to get to where he is now off his own back.
i have also tried putting myself in his situation, imagining if it all went pear shaped, we split up being married, then he would have to legally, half everything. this is why he treats it with suspicion, because he is realistic to know that just before someone is married, doesn't mean it's forever (not that we plan to split up but you never know what's round the corner).

OP posts:

MrsMattie · 17/04/2008 16:16

But now you are married. You have kids together, yes? Why would he be suspicious that you just want to formalise the rights you probably already have over the house?

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:18

mrsmattie, i've no idea. he is suspicious by nature anyway ( i knew this before we got married). he also stated that it costs money for me to get my name on the deeds anyway. so he doesn't want to waste money on formalities when he provides for us as it is. we never go without all of us.

OP posts:

MrsMattie · 17/04/2008 16:20

I wouldn't be happy about it, to be honest.

hanaflower · 17/04/2008 16:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:25

It is starting to get to me a bit because although we are married, and as others have stated, I'd be entitled to half of everything if we split, I just feel things aren't complete.
It's more the point that he is making a big deal of this, when all it is is me having co-ownership of this house, we are already married so having my name on the deeds would make it official.
I just want someone to say that they're in a similar situation and understand that either I'm being unreasonable or he's being unreasonable.

OP posts:

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:27

hanaflower, I know what you mean. he was the one who chose to scrimp and save to get into this situation of having bought the house outright before we met, but now circumstances have changed and he's a family man so he should have my name on the deeds.
i've mentioned a will and life insurance but he says life insurance isn't really necessary because the house is already bought.

OP posts:

barnstaple · 17/04/2008 16:31

Exactly the same situation as I was in. DH had bought the flat outright with money he'd inherited 12 years before we met/married. I never had my name on the deeds and some people thought this a bit strange - perhaps it was. As far as I was concerned, once I had dd there was no question that if dh died the place would be mine legally, and that if we split up it would naturally be divided between us. I had given up my job to look after our dd etc. and legally had as much of a claim as I would have if we'd bought it together. He's not the type to get legalities all sewn up, so we just left it assuming that justice would prevail if necessary.

We sold it a couple of years ago and have bought a house in our joint names.

The only problem I had living in dh's place was that he knew how he wanted it and wouldn't let me change anything/try new arrangement of furniture etc!

bonkerz · 17/04/2008 16:41

we live in the house DH bought before we got tegether, i actually moved from a council house which i gave up to move in with him. My name is not on the mortgage BUT his life insurances and will covers everything if he dies. I think it gets hazy if you think about what will happen if we split up. Dh and i (as silly as it sounds) have discussed what would happen and agreed that becasue he had lived here and paid for 10 years before we met he would have to ensure me and DCs had somewhere else to live in event of divorce. I couldnt take on the mortgage alone and would feel horrid if DH lost his home that he paid into BUT then i know no matter what happens DH would be fair for DCs sake even if he hated me!

Original poster

scottishmum007 · 17/04/2008 16:45

thanks barnstaple, nice to meet someone else who has experienced exactly the same situation. we have intentions of moving out of our 3 bed in order to buy a 4 bed property next year (when we have another baby) but he still thinks even then it should only be in his name because he is the one going out to work to pay for a mortgage, utility bills etc.

you are right, we have the same rights regardless of whether we have our name on the deeds or not, but its just the principle that annoys me. It bothers him that I''ve asked this.
did you ever have any arguments over deeds etc when you were living in DH's home with him?

OP posts:

Freckle · 17/04/2008 16:54

I was in a similar situation when dh and I got married. I did have my own house but lost all my equity in the property crash at the end of the 80s/beginning of the 90s. So effectively I brought nothing to the marriage, asset-wise. The house was in dh's name and we agreed to leave it like that so save the cost of having it transferred into joint names.

When we moved several years later, we simply purchased the new house in our joint names. If your dh makes a fuss about it when you move, then he clearly has some issues about it. Until then I wouldn't worry.

hanaflower · 17/04/2008 17:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Hassled · 17/04/2008 17:15

He does sound just a tad old-fashioned .

I had no qualms about getting my name on the house deeds because a) I earned less than my DH because I spent the rest of my time on childcare duties, while he worked full-time, and b) I did the cost of a cook, cleaner, gardener, nanny, shopping service and administrator sum and looked good value for money as a result. The point is your DH would not have the lifestyle he has, with a family and a home, without your very valuable input. Asking for fairness with what should be joint assets is not unreasonable.

And his Life Insurance line is just wrong - yes, you'd have a mortgage/rent free house to live in, but what would you actually use to pay for food, heating, clothes etc etc?

Sorry if I sound a bit ranty but am getting quite on your behalf!

TheApprentice · 17/04/2008 17:21

I live in Scotland too, and dh and I were advised to get joint ownership of his house (and yes, we did have to pay to change the deeds) because although if he died I would automatically inherit the house, it would take lots of time whilst various legal procedures were going through which might mean money would be tied up and I could be struggling financially until everything was settled. HAving joint ownership means this would not happen, the house would be mine straight away and I would have access to funds etc.

scaryteacher · 17/04/2008 17:43

When we got married in 1986 dh already had a house as he was 25 and in good job and I was 20, and a student. After we got married he put my name on the deeds without being asked, and every subsequent property has been joint names. It's not an issue at all.

We have insurance policies in joint names, and he has some in his name that he took out at uni. Everything is left to the other, and if we both croak at the same time, it all goes to ds.

windygalestoday · 17/04/2008 17:50

when i met my dh he owned 2 house his and next door where his mum lived - he put me in his will as the main beneficiary BUT the house his mum lived in was hers in the event of his death.
He just did it no prompting off me- i have to admit i was surprised when his mum died he paid all his inheritance into our joint account and didnt take any substantial amount just for himself.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread