Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

My friend's new DP wants her to sign away any future claim on their flat

250 replies

Flingmoo · 15/10/2014 23:02

My friend has been with her new partner (first real partner actually) for about 6 months and they are going to move in together. They're currently both renting and he wants to buy a flat in only his name but have her paying 50/50 towards bills/mortgage payments. He's owned a house before but rents now.

Because he's been stung before by a girlfriend taking half the property when they split up, he wants her to sign some kind of "pre nup" style agreement that she will not be entitled to any share of the flat if they split. She was 100% happy to do this until her parents criticised that plan and has now asked me for advice on it (me being married with mortgage and a baby, she assumes I'm some sort of wise sage on relationship issues...!)

In her view, she's always rented anyway, so she doesn't feel she's any worse off by entering into this sort of agreement, to her its no different from renting, where you obviously don't have any property at the end of it.

People of mumsnet, what are your views on this...? Personally I think she should at least be entitled to whatever amount she'll have paid into the property in the event that they split up. Otherwise, if they did ever split up, it'd seem as if he's used her as a lodger to help pay his mortgage!

OP posts:
notinagreatplace · 16/10/2014 12:56

Twinklestein - I don't think the OP and her parents being concerned necessarily means that she's being taken advantage of. A lot of people - and we've seen that in this thread - are, let's face it, quite sexist about this sort of thing and would advise women to protect their assets but feel that men should share theirs. I think, also, the older generation can be more old fashioned and feel that you should be at a sharing finances stage before you move in.

Thinking about it some more, I guess I feel like the ideal solution here would be for both parties to benefit from the new living arrangement - the woman by paying less rent than she currently is (and enabling her to save) and the man by getting some rent. I don't think that's particularly unfair and I don't feel like the benefits should all go one way - her continuing to pay what she currently is but with fewer rights or him paying a full mortgage on his own while sharing the place.

TheRealMaryMillington · 16/10/2014 12:59

I think I would advise my friend to let him set up in the home he is buying for himself first, and move in a few months later if it still seems right.

Then it becomes clearer in everyone's mind what the deal is, financially and emotionally

slithytove · 16/10/2014 13:03

Chelsy - yes you can. Just don't live there. My parents have one.

Twinklestein · 16/10/2014 13:04

'Taken advantage of' is a loaded statement, I used the words 'fair deal'.
I don't know anybody who thinks in the 'sexist' way you characterise and I think the likelihood of that being an issue here is minute. I've not seen that attitudes on this thread either.

Personally, I think the ideal solution is for the OPs friend to pay her own mortgage on her own place.

JohnFarleysRuskin · 16/10/2014 13:06

The relationship has more chance if they are on equal terms: buying together or renting together.

Being the lodging girlfriend has the potential to be a financial disaster in the long term. I wouldn't do it.

Nydj · 16/10/2014 13:10

If she cannot contribute 50% to the deposit then the percentage of the full price at purchase that makes up the deposit should be ring fenced for him in the event of a sale. They should then jointly pay mortgage and bills and in the event that they split up or sell the property, they should split the proceeds after the percentage deposit which should go to him.

magoria · 16/10/2014 13:27

I think it is fair that she pays her share of bills and 'rent' if she lives with him and it should be set up properly to protect them both.

He is liable for all maintenance, repairs, improvements as they are part of the ownership and wouldn't be included in rental.

They keep accurate records of who buys what furnishings etc or he buys them all.

They need a bigger what if chat. What if he or she loses their job. What if they get married. What if they have a child. What if they have lived together for x years.

magoria · 16/10/2014 13:28

I think they would be silly to tie themselves financially after 6 months without having lived together.

JohnFarleysRuskin · 16/10/2014 13:47

What happens, time and time again, is women get into these situations, and then two kids down the line, when they split, they are left with absolutely nothing.

She is either his girlfriend or his lodger - foolish to try to be both.

Chunderella · 16/10/2014 14:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

roland83 · 16/10/2014 15:22

I did this when I was 18 and moving in with my 25yr old boyfriend.

To be fair, I didn't contribute to the mortgage, so it was slightly different as I was a kept woman at first.

Not suprisingly after 8.5yrs together, when we split up I left with nothing but my stuff and had to leave within 24hrs notice due to a bad argument and bad split.

I won't ever do it again as I had no idea I could be kicked out, I was very naive, and I was sleeping on a friends airbed for a week until my flat was ready.

On a side note, it was the best thing that every happened to me as I grew up so much living on my own and realised a few important life lessons.

enriquetheringbearinglizard · 16/10/2014 15:27

What happens, time and time again, is women get into these situations, and then two kids down the line, when they split, they are left with absolutely nothing

That's the kind of thing you read about time and time again here. However

he's been stung before by a girlfriend taking half the property when they split up

I would absolutely expect him to protect his deposit and not to be stung in the event of a relationship breakup, but it hasn't all been phrased that way.

Still no one's explained how he could have fallen foul of an evil ex who put nothing in and yet walked away with half a home? Hmm

Chunderella · 16/10/2014 16:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
Flingmoo · 16/10/2014 16:15

I've found out a little bit more about the ex situation he wants to avoid a repeat of. From what my friend tells me, he simply had a joint mortgage with his ex, and when the relationship ended it was all a bit messy and difficult to sort out, with them both being stuck living together for a while as neither could easily move etc.

It sounds like he doesn't want to be financially tied up with someone again but he is rather soft on my friend and wants to live together. It would be a lot easier if they just rented together until they're ready to commit further, but I can sort of see why he wants to get back on the property ladder ASAP rather than throwing money at a landlord.

Perhaps he doesn't realise that this is not going to be a fair arrangement for my friend in the long term. I told her that she should have a good chat with him before going any further, to make sure it's clear this isn't a permanent arrangement, as it's not fair if he gets to be on the property ladder and she doesn't, simply because he's worried about things not working out. It makes sense for maybe a year or so, but then they should really look at getting a joint mortgage if they're still serious by then.

Fascinating discussion by the way, I've really enjoyed reading everyone's views on this! So glad I've never had these issues with my DH.

OP posts:
OnIlkelyMoorBahtat · 16/10/2014 16:43

Would it be possible for him to buy a flat which he rents out; the rental income pays the mortgage on that, and meanwhile he and your friend rent a place together? (Apologies if that's already been mentioned earlier, have only skimmed the thread.) I know that's what a couple of my friends did.

slithytove · 16/10/2014 16:50

it's not fair if he gets to be on the property ladder and she doesn't

Not sure I agree with this, presumably he has saved for a deposit and worked to get a job to qualify for a mortgage? Seems fair to me.

When your friend does the same, she can get on the property ladder too. And if he charges her less rent than market rates, she will be better off and maybe able to save towards her own deposit. At which point he could sell and they could buy together.

slithytove · 16/10/2014 16:51

I suggested that On and I agree it's a good idea. I was quickly contradicted though! Grin

Twinklestein · 16/10/2014 17:02

Who's to say the OP's friend doesn't have decent job already and enough money saved for a deposit?

The point the OP was making is that right now her friend could get on the property ladder - but her bf is suggesting that instead of that she moves in with him, but he won't agree to a joint mortgage, and if she does contribute to his mortgage she has no right to any equity. It's a bum deal whichever way you look at it.

If he gets a btl and pays rent on another place, he'd be losing money in rent which would be better off contributing to a mortgage.

QueenChrysalis · 16/10/2014 17:05

I can understand why he would be reluctant to commit financially, he'd lose out financially yes, but worse would be having to move out of his home. If he is that desperate to buy he needs to do it alone and consider moving in the girlfriend when he is settled and hopefully they are more committed. Marriage would change everything anyway so I hope anyone in this position considers this (or changing the financial situation) before having children. Renting together is the obvious way forward for another six months or so and this is what we did when my now DH had a big deposit and I had only a few grand. My DH wanted to buy after a year or so together, we got engaged less than a year after meeting anyway. I offered to sign a contract to protect his deposit but he refused, there is no way I'd have risked losing half that amount myself and think he was a little mad for not doing so. In the end we had a few failed purchases and we were married and expecting when we did finally buy.

slithytove · 16/10/2014 17:07

I totally missed that the friend could afford to buy her own place. In which case she should and then could either live there, or live there and offer the bf the same deal, or rent it out and live elsewhere.

Even if she lived with him under his conditions it doenst prevent her getting on the property ladder so again a moot point.

and IMO, it's not a bum deal the way I look at it.

Chaseface · 16/10/2014 17:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

slithytove · 16/10/2014 17:56

I'm lost, how on earth is this bloke barring her from getting on the property ladder?

Twinklestein · 16/10/2014 18:14

Because he's asking her to move in with him, with no joint mortgage, and the mortgage payments she does pay will not go towards any equity for her.

She'd be much better off buying either alone or with a sibling or a friend...

This way she's helping someone else pay their mortgage and not getting on the ladder herself.

WildBillfemale · 16/10/2014 18:23

She needs to get clued up on the law and tell him to eff off.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A COMMON LAW WIFE.
Doesn't matter of she is sleeping with him or sharing their lives, legally she will be a lodger.

Tell her they should either get a joint mortgage and have a solicitor draw up documents to protect whatever portion of money they each put into the property as a deposit in case they split.

OR she should buy a property on her own.

What he suggests means for example if they stay together then split 10 years down the line, he will still have his property with 10 years of the mortgage paid off, helped by her rent contribution.
She will never get the rent contribution back. She will walk away with nothing to show for her 10 years contributions.

I find it sad that so many women are so naive financially in this day and age.

AcrossthePond55 · 16/10/2014 18:34

If friend can afford to buy, then she's foolish not to. Getting on the property ladder is always a good thing and the way prices fluctuate not something to pass on. Maybe they BOTH should buy each their own place and spend alternate weeks Grin

Again, I totally understand the bf wanting to protect his investment. I would want to do the same thing if it were me. Especially if I'd only been with the other party for 6 months! tbh, I probably wouldn't move someone in with me at all at that point. And Lord knows, we've all seen threads where a woman is told not to marry, or to 'ring fence', or take other steps to protect her own home. It's no difference because this time it's a man wanting to protect himself. And there's nothing wrong with him expecting her to contribute something for living there.

As the property owner, I'd want the contribution to be 'earmarked' as something other than rent/mortgage/improvements, maybe for utilities or food. As the 'other party' I'd want it to be low enough so that I could save money to either buy my own place if it doesn't work out or to 'buy in' to give me an interest in the property if we decided to marry. And I would NOT contribute to any improvements, taxes, or other expenses of the property (repairs, etc) if my name is not on the deeds.

Since it seems that this is getting to be an issue with the couple, I'd say they both need to reconsider living together for the time being.