when couples arent married, why should the house be in both of their names...

[woahthere]

My sister is in a long term relationship with her boyfriend who is the Father of their child. He has 2 children from a previous marriage.
The house is his, he bought it before they got together, however, she has lived in it with him for 7 years and paid equally for 5. The past 2 he has paid more because she had baby and was then on maternity leave, however, she buys all shopping, looks after the house, arranges trips out with the children and does all the cooking etc. It didnt used to matter to much to her, but only because she never thought about it before...but she now feels entitled to be equal in every aspect of the relationship and would like to have her name on the deeds to the house.
She has asked him but he went completely ballisitic at her and said that she was planning on leaving him. She has of course said shes not and tried to explain why it was important, but he wasnt having it, he thinks its all some big conspiracy. The way i see it is that its really disrespectful of him to feel like this about her and not think that she is worth the same. He thinks that because he is the one going and working, that he shouldnt have to share. He also mentioned to her that it wasnt fair because he put 20,000 deposit down to which she replied that she didnt mind agreeing that he could keep that if anything happened. He also thinks that because they have a baby together that is all the commitment they need because if anything happened it would all go to her anyway, but I dont think this is necessarily true.

I think he is being an ass about it and my sister is so upset with him that she really is starting to leave him. How can she put it to him that it is important, and why without him getting defensive. Can someone tell me all really valid reasons why it is important in a way that wont get his back up. Legal information would be helpful. All I know is that when I had to leave my ex, we werent married, we had 2 children and I was entitled to diddly squat and literally had to start again whilst he lived it up...I would hate for her to have to go through the same if anything happened.

Can she show that she contributed to the mortgage, in an equal way, for all that time?

She can either persuade him to get married - and if he's complaining that this is all about her planning to leave him, then 'well let's get married instead then!' shoud shut him up - or she can persuade him to get her name on the deeds and to start to be on the mortgage too, and they can be tennants in common, with a deed of covenant stating whiat proportion of the house belongs to each party.

They also need wills - NOT DIY ones from the post office, the situation is too complicated for that.

As I said upthread, she should not be paying part of a mortgage that she is not on. if he is expecting her to do this, then he needs to give her a share of the house.

Regarding his ex wife, he does not need to make provision for her, whatever she is entitled to will be written down legally. If they have had a clean break settlement, then she will not be entitled to anything further.

I made a will for about £60-£70, so it doesnt cost much. I agree that if your sister is taken onto the house, then they should have an agreement stating that he gets whatever equity is in the house now at this date and they share the increase in value from the point onwards from when she is on a joint mortgage

scarephyliss I do not understand why people have children with someone when they are in such a precarious position as this.

I think there are many reasons for it. When she first got together with her boyfriend he had had a hard time sorting money out with his ex and lost a lot, so she wouldnt have felt in a position to say anything, especially in a new relationship when she financially bought nothing to the table and he had the house already...would seem a bit cheeky to say something at that point. Then after several years and knowing that his ex had screwed him over money wise...she wouldnt have wanted to say anything.

Sometimes, these things just slip along and you dont think about them because life is happening. When she had the baby I think she assumed it wouldnt matter because they were committed...which may seem naiive to you or some others, but actually is quite a common misconception. For a while after, she said she wouldnt mind him keeping everything if they split up, because Im sure she was never thinking in those terms...but it wasnt until she had it pointed out to her what could happen in the eventuality of his death that she realised that it really was important.

I think she also thought that one day he would ask her to marry him perhaps.

She's not stupid, she just didnt know, and there is a difference. It is a precarious position and she knows that now, because she is older and wiser and has more to think about than just herself. Hope that helps you understand.

I really hope I educate my daughter's to think more carefully than your sister. It is very dangerous to have kids with someone and not have got married or got very good wills drawn up.

Friends of mine have suddenly woken up when their DP has been just about to do a "possibly" risky activity (Sail across theAtlantic, Rock Climbing, learn to Fly); in each case they did a "quickie" marriage as it was the simplest and cheapest option.

I am educating all my children to never be financially dependant on someone else

Feckbox - life isn't always that simple, unless you mean to make sure they have proper legal safeguards?

OP, I don't think your sis is stupid - I know it's easy to let things slip - I just get so sad and frustrated at the number of people, usually women, who end up in this kind of position. Because it always ends up looking so predictable in hindsight. And what your sister said about not wanting anything in case of a split - it drives me nuts that women are so conditioned to be self-sacrificial and unassertive that they will end up needlessly taking huge financial hits. It doesn't do anybody any good.

The other thing that makes me sad in this kind of situation is that there was obviously no kind of forward planning going on for the DCs' sake. I think it's pretty poor of your sister's H not to have given all of this some thought and protected his existing DC's future interest in the property when your sister moved in and started contributing to the mortgage. What kind of parent doesn't do this? If he was in a state with money then he should have been doubly worried about protecting their future. Or if he believed that their interest in it was secure, then it was just fundamentally selfish to have assumed that she would happily contribute to the equity without ever getting anything back.

It isn't just about wills.

Why should a woman have paid into a mortgage for 5 years and yet not have a pro rata share of the equity? Why should she jeopardise her own financial independence by taking time to bring up his children and not have a stake in the household income during those years?

Women and men may not need to be financially idependent in that they always earn towards the joint household effort, but they need to have the same 'protection of assets'.

"Then after several years and knowing that his ex had screwed him over money wise...she wouldnt have wanted to say anything."

His ex "screwed him over money wise"?

And you DSis wanted to seem nicer than the evil ex who took her legal due, so she allowed this man to financially fuck her over?

She's been had.

It's the oldest trick in the misogynist's book, and it's obvious from his reaction that he will make sure no woman will ever get her filthy hands on "his" money again.

She has been very foolish.

how helpful AThingInYourLife. Sometimes people make mistakes, she was just too trusting and her boyfriend was being a prat. As I said, she is older and wiser now. I have posted on relationships haven't I? Not AIBU where people are supposed to be rude!? . She is trying to sort it out now, and I really appreciate all the excellent information i have been given.

He can't put her on the deeds unless she's on the mortgage. I assume there is one as he put £20,000 down. Is she in a position to re mortgage with him? She'll need an income and a very very good credit history.

"She has asked him but he went completely ballisitic at her and said that she was planning on leaving him. She has of course said shes not and tried to explain why it was important, but he wasnt having it, he thinks its all some big conspiracy."

All the legal and practical information you have is worth nothing without a clear understanding of the kind of man she's dealing with.

He has spent their entire relationship making her feel she couldn't ask for basic fairness in financial matters.

He knows she is vulnerable financially because he has put her there to suit himself.

If she continues to appease him as she has been, he will continue to take the piss out of her.

sorry if it has been covered - has she actually been paying half the mortgage?

Hi lisaro , I am on the deeds to our house, but not on the mortgage so it is possible.
Feckbox, she has not been directly paying half the mortgage, but for 6 years before they had the baby she gave him the money for half the mortgage, and she paid for other stuff such as the shopping and taking his children out and buying all the Christmas/birthday presents. I have tried talking to her about it again, I think shes a bit emotionally shocked at the moment so shes leaving it for a little while for him to calm down and then hopefully he will have had time to think about it. By hook or by crook though, I will not let her let this rest!

OP - you have just described exactly the situation that many, many women get into, I first heard it described years ago in an interview with Merryn Somerset Webb, who wrote this book www.amazon.co.uk/Love-Not-Enough-Smart-Womans/dp/0007235194 "Love Is Not Enough: A Smart Woman's Guide to Money"

Glad that your DSis has woken up to it, she should get legal advice.

So she gave him the money for half the mortgage for 6 years, looked after the stepkids (you said upthread that the sister has them. Is he actually around when his children are there.) and buys ALL the xmas and bday pressies. Is that for his family as well as hers?
Sorry but im with A Thing on this.
He wants all the smooth and none of the rough.
hes treating her like a lodger who just happens to have had his child.

AThingInYourLife
He knows she is vulnerable financially because he has put her there to suit himself.

Really, looks to me like she's put herself there...
I'd have suggested that they rent that place out, and then rent somewhere together that they can both jointly afford.

We don't know from the OP how much equity he's got in the house; we do know she brought nothing financial to the relationship.

If she's on the deeds.../married to him, may look to him that she's lining up a nice little capital windfall.

He's said no, and... she's thinking about leaving.

I think they should make a proper agreement as to the split from any sale of the house... but he may well wonder if they split, who'll end up with the house... mind you, he has existing children living there...

Oh, she's allowed herself to be put there.

But has basically bagged himself a free nanny who fucks him that he can ditch at no cost to himself and enormous cost to her.

The fact that she didn't come into the relationship with money doesn't make that OK.

WOW onemorechap!!!! You crazy! When people start a relationship, they dont always analyse the money. It was not easy for my sister to move in with a man who already had children, she really rose to the task of being a good step mum and being after his money was/is the last thing on her mind. People are so cynical its unbelievable! Do you really think it would have been best from his point of view to sell the house...that his children are happy in, to go and rent one just to please his new girlfriend? i think the children may have been a bit upset by that one dont you?!

She has thought about leaving but isnt and if she did it wouldnt be so she can get any money, he's not got that much!

onemorechap, I totally get what you are saying

Oh dear. I think she really does need to see a solicitor and some idea of what her options are. If they split up he could presumably throw her out of the house at any time.

He's not a prat. He's deliberately manoeuvred her into a very vulnerable position - willing to have kids with her but not willing to give her any financial commitment whatsoever. How can you do that to your partner and mother of your child?

One of my best friends was bemoaning yesterday how 4 years post split with a man she was with 22 years and 3 DC she is struggling for money while he is very well placed. Thankfully she did get half the proceeds of their house.

OP your sister will have some legal claim on the house unless she signed a Deed of Trust when she moved in which you havent mentioned. How much that will amount to I dont know.

I do see how women end up in these situations, you have a baby either assuming at some point marriage will follow or actually just give no thought to the fact the relationship may break down. Also when in love you just blindly think X or Y will always see you and your DC right etc.

Hands up I was one such woman. I was uninterested in marriage to say the least and when I had DS still wasnt keen. Luckily I began to think of it in terms of DS and accepted XH marriage proposal a few months later. To be honest though it was all wrapped up in love and what was right for DS and nothing to do with protecting myself as a mother.

In fairness XH has been even handed about finance since he left but I thank god we were married because it didnt give him much choice and I will certainly be having a talk with DD about the whole subject before she is so in love someone she cant be told anything.

OP I would encourage your sister to focus on the in the event of her DPs death side of things with him and make a joint trip to the solicitors so an impartial and legal view will be given. There is no reason why he should object to that.

woahthere

Hey, follow your name!

I said: may look to him that she's lining up a nice little capital windfall

but he may well wonder if they split, who'll end up with the house... mind you, he has existing children living there...

Me? I wouldn't have had children without being married.
Makes the children secure much more easily.

If you choose otherwise, you do have problems coming down the track.

She probably can't. He's more determined to protect his assets as he sees it.

I left my ex because of a similar level of intransigence. He seemed to believe that every single sacrifice for parenthood should be mine.

I would advise my daughter never to have a child with somebody unless is married. You're screwed otherwise.

If she has contributed to the house then she is entitled to have her name on the title deeds. Her position sounds very worrying. She would have no right to remain in the house if anything happened to him or if they split up.