When a partnership isn't a partnership...

[notonthebandwagon]

My OH an I have been together a little over 3 years. I have an autistic child from a previous relationship and we have a child together. I stay at home to look after child 2 and we home educate child 1 which we both feel is in child 1's best interests.

We have been looking at buying a bigger house. The one we are currently in was bought over 10 years ago by OH. I want to go on the deeds for the new house. OH did not react well to this. I pointed out that we are in a partnership, have a child together and I work just as hard as he does - he sees this as unfair because I've only been with him 3 years. I see it as I have a right to security just as much as he does.

Am I being unreasonable?

So, what were your plans for the financial security of your children?

In respect to what, Vivacia? If you mean as a couple we planned for me to start an OU degree in the next couple of years and then as soon as was feasible for me to go out to work while doin the degree and juggling childcare.

In respect that you could afford to live as a single person (and presumably mum of one).

And then obviously get a better job on the back of the degree so we could afford university for the kids.

When I was a single parent I was doing a TA course to try to fit around child 1s needs (that was before it became apparent that he had more needs than the average child).

Well then in that case he is profiting by your staying at home - so you deserve some security. He can't have his cake and eat it too. This way he preserves his earning capacity, his pension and his property. What about you?

I'm not being very clear. I mean, when you and your partner decided to have a second child, what were the financial arrangements? If you couldn't have afforded a second child without him, what made you (both) think you could afford to provide for a second child together?

No I'm afraid you're not, Vivacia. We can afford to have 2 children. - I would never have considered having a second child as a single parent...I'm confused as to why you think I would?

I think since you aren't married you need to speak to him about putting you in to his will so you and the kids have that safety and then you both need to compromise and find a way of giving you more financial security for the future.

Well, you might have been able to afford having two children as a single parent, I think this because it's true for many people. However, you knew you could afford two children with your partner, so presumably you had conversations to give you this belief. How did your partner see this as a fact if it didn't include giving you some financial security? For example, me and DP are not married, but we have wills, a joint account, shared family finances etc (neither of believe in marriage).

We don't have a join account. He has his which his wages go into and I have mine where the child benefit goes. I used his account for groceries and things for the kids and us and the child benefit disappears on things generally for the household and kids.

Child 2 wasn't planned but we can afford a second child - he couldn't do his job that he does now and look after the children. I provide that.

He clearly doesn't want to share his assets with you. Your best bet is to take legal advice and see what you are entitled to.

Have you checked whether you would qualify for tax credits if you both worked and your income was consequently reduced? That might be a better option for you. He earns what - £25k?

If he won't put you on the deeds would there be a way to put your mutual child's name on them with you as trustee? At least that way you know that your child's interests in the home are preserved.

I know I'm probably old fashioned but I'm always a bit of someone who won't marry a partner with whom he/she shares a home and a child.

He won't be willing to leave his position for a part time job - he worked hard for his qualifications and enjoys hit job.

A quick search on the legal angle because I thought that living together partners had rights
In your situation OP, this is in both the existing home and any new one, should the relationship break down "you can ask a court to transfer the property into your name. The court will only do this if it decides it is in the best interests of your children. It is usually done for a limited period, for example, until your youngest child is 18 years old."

Off the Citizens Advice website. Oh, and even if you don't have children you still have an opportunity to show "beneficial interest"

I think these laws are in place to help the likes of you!

So your partner is happy to have you as the mother of his child but won't put you on the deeds? All that says to me is that he doesn't see his long term future with you. I know PP have said he bought the current home and therefore has paid more, but if you're life partners does that matter? I would be so disappointed if my partner and father of my child said that.
Might be best to investigate your options if he's not willing to budge.

It does sound as though he considers you more as a combination of servant and pet than as a partner. He gets to control the money and own the roof over your head and have the power to take those things away from you if you're disobedient or unsatisfactory.

For your own peace of mind I would suggest you have a chat with a solicitor without telling this man until you have all the information necessary, then you can decide what to do - whether you will leave him if he won't make any concessions towards your security, or whether there is a way to frame your request so that he sees reason and takes you seriously.

I just asked him if he would give up his job so we could juggle jobs between us - he said he wasn't prepared to.

What would be a reasonable agreement for you?

50% of growth in property value since you started contributing to the household?

and/or 50% of value or property to house his child until he is 18?

and/or staying in the property until his child is 18 and then splitting the growth in property value from when you started contributing until you sell up when his child is 18?

It would depend I suppose on the timing of our separation if it happened. Probably the third I suppose.

This may sound old fashioned but this just demonstrates how important it is to get married before having kids. Those who don't believe in marriage but are committed to being a family, legal arrangements should be discussed and put in place before children.
If dc2 was unplanned then maybe this is all more than oh had bargained for, as he didn't choose to have a dc with you. He can, however, choose not to marry you or share his assets with you. He may, however, agree to adding his dc's name to the deed as a trustee, as someone has already suggested.
As soon as your dc's are in school, start a career and look after number 1.

Lucy he did choose to have child 2 with me. I'm not going to go into specifics because someone might recognise me here but it was ultimately his choice - I gave him one - 2 actually.

Just reread my post and it sounded harsh. I appreciate that being a sahm is valuable and you are right about the comparison you made with his mum. I also agree that you need some security. He's just not the guy to give it to you and you will have to get it yourself. Be strong and resourceful and you'll find a way.

I just asked him if he would give up his job so we could juggle jobs between us - he said he wasn't prepared to.

Indeed. He at least isn't willing to risk his financial security for the sake of someone else, even his own child. I suggest you take a leaf out of his book. This kind of relationship where the power is so skewed can work out fine when both partners are committed to it. When they aren't, it leaves the one with less power extremely exposed. Time to protect yourself - he isn't going to.