I have had enough - I want to leave after 11 years but cant afford to with DDs and we never married. Dont know what to do.

[lifeswork]

We have been together for 11 years. I moved into his in 2005 when we were both in our early 30s and we have two DDs. He inherited our home in full at a young age before we were together. As such only his name is on the deeds. We had a good life together and have never had to worry about mortgage payments, just bills and family expenses.

We never got married because he was adamant he didn't want to very early on in our relationship. He said he was scared about the consequences if it went wrong. I pushed as it meant a lot to me to be married for our children but he always belittled the whole idea of marriage which has got to me over time. This is a conversation we have had so many times over the years.

The last 12 months his refusal on marriage and also managing finances has broken any feelings I had for him as a partner. We have been arguing more than ever and sometimes he loses his temper/shouts/storms out of the house and will not come back for hours. He is a good dad but I have had enough of feeling like he wont open himself up to be with me forever. I know he loves me still and I have been trying to work on my own feelings without letting him know how I feel.

However he has been asking what is wrong and the other day I told him all. He refused to even consider getting engaged. Said he would always be with me but having witnessed the consequences of divorce amongst his friends/family he still wasn't going to marry. He even refused to put my name on the deeds of the property and he laughed when I said it would make me feel secure. He said it was in his family before me and his will clearly stated that if he died it would be left to the children with me being able to stay for life.

I have had enough. However I am scared about where to go. We have a joint account for bills but the bulk of our salaries goes into our separate accounts. I have a large sum saved up in my account/savings so could get a deposit together for somewhere in the next few months.

However I cant afford to get a mortgage for a house/flat big enough for me and my daughters in the fairly nice area we live now on my own. I would have to move away from the area which would mean moving my children into a different school. I would also have to move away from my family who are local. I don't want to increase the disruption to my children.

We both earn around the same above average salaries and work FT. I have contributed to the house in decorating costs and paid part of the money for an extension to the property - about 10% of the overall cost for upgrading some of the cheaper stuff (fixtures/fittings) he picked out originally. He has more money saved up than me because he doesn't spend much on himself or us. I pay for most of the children's clothes/presents. He pays for their hobbies. We have always been 50:50 on childcare costs. The house is worth around 400k.

Where do I stand or has anyone been in a similar position? As we are not married do I have a claim on the house as I would like our children to stay in the family home. Ive been reading up and it seems like I do not other than for what i have spent in improvements over the years which would only be about £20-30k. I'm so upset by this as I dont see why I shouldn't have the same protections that a wife would have. If we were married I'm guessing the property would have been divided 50:50 or I could stay until the children left school.

What I'm not sure is that as we have children under 18 with him does this change anything about what I am entitled to as an unmarried partner or if i can stay in the house until they have finished school? He has enough in his own savings account that he could buy another place outright.

Please help. If he changed his mind on marriage I would stay but I cant see that happening.

I just wonder what people would say if this was a man writing. "I'm leaving my partner because she won't marry me or include my name in the house deeds because she worries what might happen if we split up (the house has been in her family for some time now). Also, I don't want to move out and leave my children with her. If she included me in the deeds, there wouldn't be a problem".

Your partner - rightly - says that his house is your children's inheritance. Why do you think you should own part of it?

And if my partner gave me an ultimatum - it's your house or me, sign it over to me - I'd tell him where to go pronto, mind you.

I think people are being incredibly harsh here.

I don't know what the answer is. And your situation is difficult. But I wish people would stop saying marriage is just a piece of paper. It's not. Maybe that's wrong but it is how it is. If you want to leave and things are impossible then buy what you can afford. And you could try the courts to see if you are entitled to any money from him re the money you have put into the house. He will have to pay maintenance for your children.

Isn't it normal for people to share assets in a family? The OP is definitely at a disadvantage, and she is vulnerable. If her OH decided tomorrow that he wanted to set up home with a different woman, OP would be out on her ear, presumably with her children too. I don't blame her for feeling anxious about that. In a happy committed relationship one partner should not be dependent on the goodwill of the other, there is a power imbalance.

But it comes down to whether there is anything she can do about it. She should definitely get legal advice though.

It's not exactly sharing assets if the minute the DH signs the house over he will find himself chucked out of his own home that belonged to him before the OP came on the scene. Sorry re-thinking this I feel quite sorry for your partner.

There is a difference between sharing the assets you earn (your salary) and the things you inherit. I wouldn't share something I inherited from my parents with my partner, nor would I expect him to share his inherited property with me.

If this was posted by the OP in reverse and he wanted to be on the deeds or threatened to leave everyone would say let him.

Its his house, you knew that when you moved in and were quite happy to benefit from living rent free. He would be mad to add you to the deeds now as sounds like he would end up with no home.

He has made provision for his children via a will so has ensured that they are catered for. You could have used the money you saved in rent and bought a house and let it but you didnt.

Everything seems to be his fault yet he never promised you marriage and appears to have been quite open. It does sound very money grabbing to demand a share of the house that you have not bought.

Actually, in Spain, where I live, divorces usually work exactly like that: couples splitting up divide the joint assets which were earned during the marriage, but inherited assets are not divided. (And then there is a type of marriage where assets are not shared at all).

I agree with viviennemary. It appears that OP wants to lure her partner into marriage and then screw him over. She wants to keep the kids with her as well.

He will have to pay child support including housing cost - will that help you live closer (I would hope he would want this also)

Will he pay you off with a lump sum from his savings for the money you have invested in the house? I got an ex to do this as I had paid for furniture etc

I really think you need to step back from fixating on this issue. You will be far worse off financially if you split up, and, more importantly, so will your dds.

He was straight with you from the beginning. He told you he didn't want marriage. But you moved into his house and you started a family with him.

He has given you a lifetime interest in the house if he dies. That's your security and proof of his commitment. Yes, he could change his will, and will most likely do so if the relationship ends. Why wouldn't he?

Every time you bring up the subject, you are raising the question of 'What if we split up?' This sounds as if you think it could happen. Hardly likely to reassure him in his doubts about marriage. He says he will always be with you - and you say you know he loves you. But all he hears you saying is 'I want to be married because then I'd get half the house if we split up'.

Perhaps this is a symptom of a disenchantment with the relationship for other reasons on your part. If so, that's another thread. But as far as this issue goes, you'd do much better to step back from the brink and focus on repairing your relationship than continually trying to change his mind.

Wow there are some really horrible comments on this board. If the OP has been good enough to provide her partner with children at considerable physical and emotional cost to herself then why should she not be considered a financial equal by sharing assets?

the OP has been good enough to provide her partner with children at considerable physical and emotional cost to herself

Er, last time I checked, you need TWO PEOPLE to make children. And seein g women as "providing" men with children is, well, very close to regarding women as wombs for hire, or something like that.

By this standard, you could also see her partner as having provided her with children. Plus a rent-free home.

Because, Stumbelina, they are not married. That's the bottom line - like it or not, that's the law as it currently stands.

I am INCENSED with some of your negative comments. Having been in a 16 year relationship, flat out refused to get married, lived together in his owned house and then found out about him screwing other women, i left, upstcked with my two dd and rented another house. OP you are NOT wrong for wanting the commitment of marriage, you invested massively as i did, the child rearing, cooking ,cleaning, just because someone pays the mortgage does not make them superior in the relationship. For gods sake .you have children together, this is not about money ,its about being decent and looking after your family, you have my full support OP x

I can't believe the responses on this thread . OP you have every right to expect that your partner should want to make you feel secure and share everything with you. He sounds like a selfish fuck, do whatever you need to do to deel happy and secure and show your daughters what it is to be a strong, independent woman, not an insecure one who feels vulnerable and unloved

For what it's worth, I'd think a woman, doing what her partner is doing, was a shit, to be honest. People on this thread saying: "What would you say if a man was posting this?" - I'd think just the same.

I've known one or two women who have acted a bit like this, actually. Not many, because the economics are generally tipped the other way. But I've thought they were being crap.

I also really agree with SGB and Ferret that this has a (nasty) power dimension.

I'm actually a wee bit bewildered that anyone would think I'd think differently if it were a woman doing this. Why would it?

I remember one woman I know allowing her SAHP dp "pocket money", and not much at that, because he was "silly with money".

That kind of behaviour looks shit on either sex.

It may have a power dimension, but he didn't deceive her. OP chose this man, knowing that the legal contract of marriage was simply not on the cards. It's fine to choose to cohabit, but you also get the consequences of that choice.

Many of these comments are bizarre.

If the OP had been married for 11 years and her husband didn't want to split the assets on divorce, posters would be up in arms at his selfishness, pointing out that even if he didn't want to pay his share, he is legally obliged to.

The OP is one of those women who find out the hard way that marriage is more than just a bit of paper. She gave her body and risked her life in good faith to bear his children, but he doesn't want to give anything of himself in return.

As it stands, if the OP wants to split, she has to take her children out of their area, away from their schools and their family. How he provides for his kids once he's dead is not the point, he doesn't need the house then. It's what he does for his kids while he's alive that defines if he's a good father or not.

OP, I believe that if you have contributed to home improvements you may be able to claim an interest in the property, or compensation for the money invested, but I think you would need proof on paper. I think you may be able to apply on your children's behalf for a share. But I'm not a lawyer, and obviously it's something you'd need to talk to lawyer about. Maybe try the legal forum?

This bit of your post concerns me:

He has more money saved up than me because he doesn't spend much on himself or us. I pay for most of the children's clothes/presents. He pays for their hobbies.

You say you've both paid equal childcare costs, which is good. But if he doesn't spend money on you and the children, do you end up spending more of your own money on them than he does? Does the money spent in hobbies equate to that spent on clothes and presents?

In short: you need legal advice ASAP.

The op could rent some small place near by for now so the dc can easily stay In their school and also in their current home fifty per cent of the time.

Why should they move away from their dad ? Op believes he is a good dad (tho shouting and storming out doesn't make him a good dad but still... )

Op has no claim on the house at all. Tho should try with a solicitor in case there is anything related to her investment in the property...she might get that amount back if she moves out.... She could negotiate ...

The p will have to pay child maintenance but if they split children fifty fifty there may not be any to pay.

I think SGB and Thecat have it. OP it doesnt sound like the relationship is unbearable do you think could detatch emotionally, purchase an investment property as security for yourself, tighten your finances and continue to co-parent in the existing house for now? I know that sounds cold but surely no more calculating than this man has been.

I feel for you OP as you are in a horrible situation.

On a more general and political level, I think that women have been badly 'mis-sold' the idea that living together is the same/conveys all the advantages of marriage. It brings to mind the paragraph from 'the Women's Room' about the disctinction between 'women's liberation' (tedious for men as it involves sharing the housework) and 'liberated women' (great for men as it means a woman will have sex without expecting the commitment of marriage).....

I can almost put my finger on the time in the mid-late 90's when living together and marriage became synonymous with each other in the press and popular culture. Prior to that there had been a distinction, whether you agreed with it or not... Does anyone recall that slimy celebrity Angus Deayton? He had an affair from his long term partner and I remember at the time a commentator saying 'Well, it is not as if he is actually married' - an outrageous statement, but at the same time so true! If a couple are not married then there is nothing to stop either of them from starting a new relationship or even marrying someone else at anytime - there is nothing between them but children, shared history, shared bills and maybe a shared mortgage. :(

My own story is that I lived with my boyfriend for a number of years in my twenties. He was very keen for us to buy a place together, but I put my foot down because, thank god, I had read a newspaper supplement article about the mess you could be in if you purchased together un-married but then split up. Around that time I also sent him a clear message that I was prepared to move on and walk away (despite really loving him) if we did not get married. We got married about 18 months later.

Would he marry me again if I asked him today? I really doubt it. Why would he? But, our marriage exists, almost as an entity outside ourselves, and although our love has changed and evolved, the marriage is there.

All in all, I married for love.
But (a child, huge income disparity and a significant marital wobble later) I am now glad that I married for the legal protection it conveys.