Advice please

[sashaandchloesmum]

Hi, I have been living with my boyfriend for 2 years, we are getting married at Christmas. We are both out of long term relationships, I was with my ex for 7 years and he was married, he's been divorced for 7 years. His ex wife left him, and went to live over 100 miles away with their kids. He is a great Dad and sees the kids most weekends (they sleep overnight) and most of the school holidays, involving him travelling miles. Anyway, it turns out he agreed to be a guarantor for her so she could rent a flat over there 5 years ago and this is still ongoing now. I appreciate he needed to do this to secure a decent home for his kids when they are with their Mum, but it niggles me that this is still happening. To be fair, he has never hidden this from me and in fairness to her she has never defaulted on the payments, but surely she should now be standing on her own two feet. He pays his child maintenance without fail. I have spoken to him about the impact this could have on us, and he says that although he would like to not do it anymore, it would potentially cause grief between him and her and he doesn't want her to loose the flat, which I completely agree with, however I wonder how long this will now go on for. Am I right to be niggled by this?

I don't see how it affects you. She hasn't defaulted and it was to get a home for his children.

Hy is it an issue? She hasn't defaulted or cost him any money. What's the problem? Why cause problems between them when things seem fine? When you marry someone with children there will always be contact and things to work out with the ex, I know, I am a stepmum. Sometimes it bugs you but if it's nothing unreasonable then you have to let it go.

I think it's a nice thing to do and you should support it. He's providing a home for his children. And their mother, obviously, but they live with her and she looks after them.

Yeah, I see all of that, but the fact is if she does default for whatever reason, he will be liable for it.

Has no impact financially whatsoever at the moment, but we all know how quickly things can change, so if she defaults (for any reason) we will be liable for it all. I get why he did it initially, but surely she shouldn't still be relying on him all these years on?

I see what you're saying, but she seems to be playing fair - she hasn't put a foot wrong in five years... If things changed and she couldn't afford to house her children and was at risk of losing her home surely you as a couple would want to help them anyway and not see his children homeless?

Oh of course, we would help them in a heartbeat, all I'm saying is that if she defaults we have to pay and potentially risk our credit rating. I could understand if he did it for the first couple of years, to help her get straight, but is it reasonable that he is her guarantor for potentially the next ten years, and have the risk hanging over our heads, he does already provide his own house for the kids, and pays maintenance to his ex.

There's no way I'd like this. Initially it was probably the right thing to have done and involved just the two of them. However once your married it involves you as well. I agree she should be making alternative arrangements now.

This is none of your business!
How are "we" liable if she defaults? He is liable. Not you. It would only affect his credit rating if he failed to make payments after being called upon to do so.
It is for him to decide if he can afford to cover the rent if she defaults. If he can, there is no risk - and certainly no risk to YOU!
If his own circumstances change and he would not be able to guarantee the payment, that is when he should stop being a guarantor.
He's not giving her any money!
It's security for his kids!
I absolutely do not see your problem, and find your comments about her standing on her own two feet deeply patronising. Are you standing on yours, I wonder?

I agree this could be a very serious problem indeed and I myself would think very carefully before becoming a guarantor.

I once had tenants who not only defaulted on payments, but also mistreated the house plus there was interest in the missed payments and additional costs for chasing the money which were added to the initial missed payments. It all adds up to far more than most people imagine and the guarantors agreement is to cover any debts due under the tenancy agreement, not just rent.

Having said all of that about the potential liabilities, in this case I can understand that there is a wish to provide security for the children and that's the job of a parent. If that's the best way he can do this then I think it admirable that he's doing that. Shows you've got yourself a good man there