Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Property/DIY

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

Would you pay 50% of your take home on a mortgage?

19 replies

tarataratarugh · 08/06/2025 19:08

Considering buying a flat with my dp. He earns more than me. We are going to split the cost of the house 50/50. My salary will likely go up in next couple of years.

If we bought the house, my half of the mortgage (& house bills) would be about £1,750 a month. My take home is £3,500 a month. We live in a very very expensive part of the country.

Is this crazy?

OP posts:
Fupoffyagrasshole · 08/06/2025 19:11

I pay more than half of mine on the mortgage! 65ish percent. (It wasn’t so bad a few years ago but then the interest rates went up and it was suddenly super high)

its going back down a little again now though (phew)

we manage and rent would actually be way more for a similar house in our area.

Savoretti · 08/06/2025 19:12

It really depends what other expenses you have - travel, car, food, any loans. In general I would think £1750 is enough to live on

EleventyThree · 08/06/2025 19:12

What if interest rates went up by a few percent? Could you still continue to afford the mortgage?

EmeraldRoulette · 08/06/2025 19:14

I did it, and I think most people who live alone have probably done it.

i'm not sure what I would think about it if I was living with someone else though. If it's based on both of you doing that and one of you loses your job, then you've got to sub the other one. Which could be super expensive.

Noshowlomo · 08/06/2025 19:14

So you’d still have £1750 of your own money after you paid bills and mortgage? Do you have any other mega bills like childcare?
£1750 spare after bills is amazing for most people, so yeah I’d do it.

Namechange285 · 08/06/2025 19:15

Personally I wouldn’t - too risky if rates go up significantly. Obviously a personal choice though depending how much risk you’re willing to take

Kosenrufugirl · 08/06/2025 19:16

Go for it would be my advice. Rates are coming down

tarataratarugh · 08/06/2025 19:21

No kids - and not in the pipeline for at least another five years.

OP posts:
Lolapusht · 08/06/2025 19:26

Not sure I agree with 50:50 if you earn less. How much of a discrepancy?

How will the property be owned?

How much of a deposit are you each putting in? Will you ring fence your individual deposits?

Do you think you’ll get married and do you both want children? If you’re going to have kids but in the future, now is a good time to discuss how it’s going to work financially. Will you still be expected to contribute 50:50 or will he be happy funding you when you’re “not working”? This conversation will also be a good time to suss out how much parenting/housework he’ll be expecting to do when you have children. I wouldn’t have married my DH if I’d known he was a modern day 1950s man who left all the childcare & housework to me. Very good at supporting women he works with to make sure they’re treated fairly. Me, not so much.

Are you going to have fully joint finances or keep things separate?

You don’t always get to choose when you get pregnant. Will you be able to afford this house on a single wage?

How much do you have in savings?

Advocodo · 08/06/2025 19:55

I would do it. £1,750 to me is plenty to pay for non essentials a month.

Ouzz · 08/06/2025 20:32

If you’re splitting the house 50:50 I’d go for it. A few years paying heavily off a mortgage will set you up well for the future (whether you stay together or not).

Yes you could argue if you earn less, that you should pay less, but then you’d share less of the property which I don’t think is in your best interest.

Profpudding · 08/06/2025 20:52

I would providing I could get a five-year fix so that you know the interest rates won’t go up and you won’t be landed in the mud
Presumably you’re not planning children for the next five years either to give yourselves a good start

Thethingswedoforlove · 08/06/2025 21:06

Absolutely

Chewbecca · 08/06/2025 21:11

Mortgage AND bills for 1750, leaving 1750 for fun and savings?
That's fine IMO.

thestudio · 08/06/2025 21:25

You should split the costs in proportion with your means.

Otherwise women are disadvantaged. This is true even before the complication of children because statistically men are over-represented in high paid jobs.

Men who nitpick about this are not good bets in the long term, guaranteed.

CarpetKnees · 08/06/2025 22:31

You do realise, what you will be left with after housing and bills, is the total income some people have a month ?

Reading the title, I was going to say 'It depends on your income'.
Having read the OP, then of course I would.
Not really an issue.

I bought my first property on my own and was paying WAY more than 50% in net income on my mortgage, and had WAY less than (the equivalent of) that left over.

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 08/06/2025 22:43

That sounds fine and I
Presume cheaper than rent in
Your expensive area

Funnyduck60 · 09/06/2025 15:46

In the mid 80s our mortgage took 70% of our income. Nearly broke us. I am one of the super lucky boomers who had it SO easy!

OtiMama · 09/06/2025 16:31

I do pay half of my wage for bills and mortgage, although my 50% is less than your wage (as in I earn less than you), so I have less to spend but it's still fine.

We are the same as you, go 50/50, my husband earns more than me but I like to pay my way so pay 50% of the main costs and then he pays more for some other things/savings for us to spend on a new house, car etc. It's whatever works for you!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page