DH not happy with equal split of money...

[StampHappy]

I know, another one of these chestnuts... (namechanger btw)

DH and I have just got married and we have a 2.5 year old DD. Up until now our finances have (probably quite unwisely) been separate. When I was on mat leave and working part time I had far less money than DH, so I would pay for a few bits e.g. groceries, and DH would sub me money. Then when I increased my hours I paid for the nursery fees. We never actually worked out what was fair ratio wise and just carried on like this, but I was permanently skint and DH would give me extra money if I needed it. Then when we got engaged a year ago I went full time and we both saved up the same amount per month towards the wedding.

DH's job became unstable during this time and it has now changed twice which has affected our finances, some costs spiralled close to the wedding date which we weren't expecting, and the upshot is that we have some debt to pay off now. I feel uncomfortable about this and want to pay it off asap, but I'm forever being made to feel guilty by DH like the reason I have debt is because of overspending. Whilst there have been unforseen costs that have come up, I don't think I have been irresponsible, though with the hindsight of the final cost of the wedding I would have reigned it in.

That's by the by now though, we are married and we both have debt (roughly the same amount) that we want to get rid of in order to start saving and move house. I have suggested to DH that we sit down work out finances as he was under the impression that he pays far more on bills etc than I do. He earns £15k more than me. Turns out, I pay £1400 on bills (nursery fees and groceries) he pays £1600 on the rest (mortgage, council tax, car etc). His disposable income is therefore more than double mine.

I suggested that we take both our disposable incomes and split it so we have the same, and can therefore pay the same off our debts so we can clear the whole lot in a few months. This would leave us with roughly £500 each to pay for our work travel, mobile phones and other personal bills (this comes to £230 for me). He is not happy at all and says this is a shit amount. This is far more than I have had to myself each month for a whole year (plus I'm the one who buys birthday cards and presents etc). If we leave it as it is, I literally end up with £0 after bills and debt payments. DH ends up with £1000! He's just telling me he'll have a think about it, but I can't see what other solution is fair? We both work the same hours and have equal responsiblity as a parent. I think £500 each is plenty and we are lucky to have it.

I'm so upset and hate having this conversation. Before DH and I got together I was not at all sensible with money and had a huge debt, which thankfully I cleared. But I always sense he doesn't trust me with money, which in turn I suppose makes me more wary of telling him when I have run out. All I want now as a family is to pay off the money and be sensible about this and above all for it to be fair. I'm not sure it does either of us any good if we can't pay it off but I think he feels like this debt is mine and he's being penalised because of it. The only reason I have this debt is because of the expense of the last year and the fact I have had such little money of my own.

What can I suggest that is fair? And yes, I know getting into debt was stupid but it was unexpected and we'll definitely not get ourselves in this position again

Thanks if you have managed to get the end of this essay...

yeah of course clean sheets paying off the debt should be a priority. I didn't totally get the money stuff in the op but I still think 500pcm for each adult is a lot, especially if stamp has only got outgoings of 230 then 270 could be saved or used to reduce the mortgage. I thought the 500 pcm was after debt payments were made?

because we almost lost our house when dh was made redundant we prioritise reducing our mortgage as I'm so scared about what will happen if it happens again. it is our way of saving but I like to have overpayments equivalent to 6months salary. You also need to think about how expensive kids get as they grow up - uniform, school shoes, activities etc. Living with that much disposable income will make it difficult to reduce it later. EG we have 250pcm for dh and 150 for me - his also covers his travel card.

Sorry, yes, I see what you mean, manitz.

You should pay proportionally, in the same proportion as you earn because you are both working full time and have equal childcare responsibility. Sahp is a different scenario.

I do see what you mean Manitz, but there are always things that come up, e.g. petrol for the car (we only do the nursery run but if we go away for the weekend need to fill it), we are going to a wedding next month so need a gift and accommodation, new shoes for DD, weekend trips i.e. swimming so the 270 spare is handy. If I don't use it all I will add it to my debt repayments the following month. We do have savings as well so will continue to add to that when the debt is paid.
I've just spoken to DH and he said 'don't worry we will sort it' after I sent him hamsters comments via email, so fingers crossed when we get a chance to talk we'll sort it out

he sounds like he's open to discussion. Hope it goes well. I was presenting an extreme point of view (which I admit is quite paranoid).

I just wanted to mention about the older kids costing more too as I wasn't aware of it when dd was 2.5. even the amount they eat increases, she's almost on adult portions and we have 3 who are 8,6 and 3. so where before an evening meal might include 2 chops - with bits cut off for dd - we now have to have 4. Same with salmon or a roast. Let alone 250 per term for swimming and more for other clubs. or 3 pairs of shoes (about 100 from clarks). I really didn't think about this stuff at your stage and I think it's worth discussing with your dh (if you need any extra arguments to lend to equal sharing). it might be ok to be unequal now but later things would have to change I think.

It is surely not true that all income to a family is jointly owned LEGALLY.

FWIW, I think the joint account for bill paying with pro rata money from each of you is the fairest. It is also important to have your own money in case things go pear shaped.

Midnightservant, yes, it is true.

That's what marriage is. A pooling of resources. Everything belongs equally to each partner in a marriage.

Do people really not realise this? Seriously, what do people think marriage legally is? It's not living together, it's a legal contract.

I'm not wanting to get intoa poverty contest here, but how do you spend £500 a month on personal stuff? I suspect the definition of 'personal' is maybe different.

If it helps, here is our way of doing things-
DH works, I don't due to a disability, we have two preschool children.
All money (benefits, tax credits, wages) goes into our main account. The cards/chequebook for this stay filed away as money only leaves by standing order/direct debit.
Bills (rent, childcare, utilities, mobile bills, debts, memberships, DHs bus pass (mine is free due to disability) - anything automatic - go out of main account, and a little spare is kept in to cover variations in bills. Every now and again I check online banking and transfer a bit into savings if excess has built up.
Then £100 a week goes into the joint shopping account, which is for anything for the family/house/kids - nappies, food, kids clothes, basic toiletries, days out, etc
Then we get £40 each a week in our personal accounts, for beer, chocolate, magazines, clothes, fancy bubble bath, getting sandwiches or pies instead of making lunch, meals out, etc. I only actually get £30, but that is because I am paying off an old debt and have a fancier mobile phone and memberships going out of the main account.
Occaisionally this money has to go back into the main account to cover an unexpected bill. We also each have a private savings account, I use mine to save up for fancy gadgets etc, dh doesn't use his.

We're not overly strict, there is a lot of little bits of borrowing and buying small purchases with whatever card is to hand, but it helps.

Each married partner has a legal duty to support the other.

If your partner won't support you and you're still living together, you can ask a court to order them to support you. Your ex-partner may have to continue to support you after your marriage has ended if you have made a legal agreement or if there is a court order.

You and your partner can make an agreement that neither of you will support the other.

You are entitled to acquire and to hold any land, property, savings or investments in your own right during marriage. The same is true for your partner. Any property you owned prior to the marriage will usually continue to be regarded as yours. However, if the marriage breaks down, any property owned by you or your partner will be taken into account when arriving at a financial settlement on divorce.

From Advice Guide

If a married couple has a joint bank account, the money is owned jointly regardless of who put it into the account. On the death of one partner, the whole account immediately becomes the property of the other. Debts and overdrafts relating to a joint bank account will be the responsibility of both or either partner, irrespective of who incurred them.

If each partner in a married couple has a separate bank account and one dies, the bank may allow the other partner to withdraw the balance providing the amount is small.

Husbands and wives are taxed independently and each partner can claim a personal allowance.

HerBeX - I don't think it can be possible that the wealth belonging to each of a married couple is jointly owned by definition.

The reason I say this is that when you are married and file for bankruptcy, your creditors have no legal right over any property that belongs individually to your spouse. For example our house, for largely irrelevant historical reasons, is in my wife's name only. When I looked into bankruptcy some years ago (which fortunately I didn't end up needing to follow through on), it emerged that there could be no claim whatsoever against it for that reason.

If familial wealth were genuinely joint-owned by legal definition, then anyone having a legal claim against the assets of a person would have the same claim against the assets of their spouse (since they would be the same "person" in the legal sense of the term). For example if you are partners in a company that is formed as a legal partnership, then you are "jointly and severally liable" for any debts - and if your partner defaults on a loan of a million pounds, his creditors can come after you for it. A marriage is not like that, apparently.

So I suspect it must be more complicated than that.

Yes, you're right, it is a little more complicated. But in principle, all assets are jointly owned, particularly once children come along.

Creditors might not be able to get hold of your wife's house, but you would have a claim on it in the event of divorce depending on other circumstances (for example if you had significantly added to its value by building an extension, being a SAHD etc.)

I just think that one of the advantages of marriage, is that you don't have to put your name on your milk when you put it back in the fridge.