DP wants us to sign a contract similar to pre-nup before mortgage?

[ConfusedGirlfriend]

Hi,

Myself and my DP have been together for 3 years. He owns a flat and I currently rent. We are finally both in a financial position to buy a property together.

He has a regular job with a steady income. I am self-employed and have a 5 year old, so I will not be able to go on a joint-mortgage with the bank as I am considered high risk with a fluctuating income etc. Therefore, the mortgage will be in just his name. He is putting £60k towards the house, I am putting £25k towards the house.

Today he mentioned that he thinks the house should be all in his name and we should sign a contract that states he has put in £60k and I have put in £25k, so if we break up we will both get our respective amounts back. I was a little put out by this as he should know that in any case I would never take his money that he put in, but I can see the sensibility behind it.

However, upon speaking to my family earlier, they think this is wrong and both of our names should be on the house equally. They think that the idea of a contract doesn't make sense if we are meant to be in a committed partnership with one another. My mum in particular argued to what extent this 'contract' would extend to - when we buy furniture together, a new car, holidays?

What do you think?

Say yes to the doc - but only when he pays you commercial rates for domestic services and anything else he's getting. That's fair.

He won't like it much; funny that.

I would try and avoid doing what Bluedog has suggested because you’ll get a much smaller amount of the equity if you split up than just ring fencing your deposits and doing 50/50 on the profit. If the house goes down in price, you’d have to take an equal percentage off of your deposits in the event of negative equity. So why would you agree not to do the same with the profit? You both need the others money to make this purchase work so you should both benefit equally despite the initial outlay.

And I should add, if you’re both paying 50/50 for the mortgage, you’d basically be paying off his mortgage all over again! Bet your bf would love this as a “compromise solution”!

You should be on the mortgage you are putting money in and paying into it monthly! The fact he has told you you cant be isnt true, So hes either lieing or unaware, Your self employed earnings should also help with your mortgage calculation.
I wouldnt buy a house with someone like that personally, I understand to make the mortgage as tenants in common but only as you arent married and there are no children. Regardless you should most definitely be on the deeds.

You have 25K to put down on a mortgage as a SM with a child?

Put it into your own. Then you always have a roof over your head for you and your child.

Relationships are never security.

I speak as a SM myself with a 26-year-old DS. dad fucked off at 6 months and has never paid a dime

doesn't make sense if we are meant to be in a committed partnership with one another.

So called committed partnerships change and collapse every day.
It's all over mumsnet too!

Your parents are from another generation and obviously live in a fairy tale. and they lived happily ever after

Your first obligation is to your child, not the latest "catch".

To be honest I would say if your putting £25,000 towards the deposit you want your name on the deeds, if he says no then I would seriously re think the relationship it seems he already thinks the relationship isn’t going to go the distance by what he’s saying.

It killed my relationship, as even though initially it was ' in my best interests' I knew that my then dp wasn't all in and didn't have my back

This essentially. Everything about that OP screamed that OP's partner is trying to pull a fast one to me. I must just be a big ol' cynic

I'm would want an agreement drawn up to protect my money in this situation. TBH in the event of a split, if you get your deposit plus half the equality you're already into a winner.

You should def barely be in the deeds. No question.

Parklives
But in the same token your stbxh can’t have it both ways, half of the marital home plus all of the rental property. That’s doing a what’s yours is mine and what’s mine is mine. You either respect the finances that you brought to the marriage or you don’t. And for that, I’d say the judge will decide if it gets acrimonious.

NO, NO and NO. Get some independent advice. I agree to ring fence your deposits as a percentage however if you are not on the mortgage then you simply do not pay it and split bills only. He is having a laugh.

It sounds like you don't actually live together yet? I'd generally suggest renting with someone for a short period, even just six months, before making the commitment of buying a house- it's a lot of money to sink with someone you don't know if you'll actually like living with!

That aside, I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with owning the house in a way that reflects your contributions to the deposit. It isn't an intrinsically dodgy arrangement. Two things, however, are dodgy. The first is the idea that your equity in the event of a split shouldn't have any reflection of the change in price. The second is the bullshit about you not being able to be on the mortgage. Both of those things are a worry.

He won't rent with me first as he says he already has a mortgage so refuses to rent ever again.

Thank you to everyone for your advice, it's a lot to take in but I clearly need to seek some financial independent advice. I want to believe that he genuinely didn't think I could be added to the mortgage. You are right in what you have been saying and I will not be moving anywhere that I don't have a stake in.

ConfusedGirlfriend

that's a good decision

You may or may not be able to 'go on the mortgage' depending on the specific income criteria of the chosen lender. If you're contributing to the repayments, find a lender which will accept both of you as clients
I have never heard that any mortgage companies would not put someone on the mortgage because there income was below par.

I earned £0 when we bought and later remortgaged there was never a question that I wasn't on the mortgage. I had to be because I would also be on the deeds. What would happen in the ops case if dp didn't pay the mortgage but they couldn't repossess the house because someone not on the mortgage actually owned a percentage of the place

It would be very naive of you to give him the benefit of the doubt re. whether you could be put on the mortgage

Please do your own research. This guy sounds dodgy to me.

Tenancy in common: both your reflective shares are represented in the title deed. Both investments will go up, or down with house. Your investment will be preserved, and his. It’s quick to do, and inexpensive. Solves the problem, preserves both your shares. You could, if so desired, divide the mortgage accordingly too, as the shares will remain the same. It would be a tad unfair for you to pay fifty fifty and the shares not to increase with time as the mortgage is paid off.

Many lenders will not allow you to reside in the house if you have contributed a deposit but are not on the mortgage.

Please see a broker alone, don’t mention it to him, get your facts together.

Can you afford to buy alone? If so seriously consider it.

Good decision

Hi OP.

I work as a conveyancer. Please do not put forward a large sum of money without securing yourself on the mortgage.

The lender places a charge over your property and as such has to ensure that every person with a legal right to that property is covered under that charge meaning you cannot be named on the title deeds without being named on the mortgage.

I would STRONGLY advise speaking with your mortgage broker yourself to get yourself named on the mortgage.

I deal with clients regularly who have misunderstood certain processes without solid advice so perhaps your partner has not lied intentionally but it is up to you to ensure that whatever he is telling you is true. Having a mortgage before doesn't make you a professional on the subject.

Whilst I don't see the problem in your partner wanting some form of trust deed to secure the deposit he is putting forward, you also have the right to ensure you are protected as well which starts with speaking to your mortgage broker and solicitor yourself to discuss your options.

Whilst buying a house with your partner is romantic and exciting you have to step back as well and see it for what it is - a huge financial commitment for you BOTH. There's nothing wrong with making sure it's done properly.

I'd also be curious to find out what agreement has actually been made with the lender as usually in circumstances where the whole deposit is not being supplied by the mortgagee it would class as a gifted deposit for which they usually require confirmation that the person gifting the said deposit will have no legal interest in the property or live in it.

Most mortgage companies will not allow you to contribute to a house purchase unless you say any money involved is a "gift" without any ties or expectation of you paying it back.

Hi op, I find it quite strange that he won't rent with you. It's definitely a red flag and I would never buy a property with someone that I hadn't lived with first. You could find that you're completely incompatible housemates. Personally I think that he may be using you to get a bigger mortgage.

Mangopr1 has very sensible advice. It's a little worrying that he's acting like he's already seen a mortgage advisor without you there. I would insist on you making a joint application. If he won't consider that, then do not buy a house with him until you are married. If you get a less than enthusiastic response to explaining that intention to him then it may be time to reconsider the relationship.

No comment at all on the seriousness of your relationship OP, truly, but 3 years is not a great deal of time together relative to the rest of your lives ( if it ever became that), therefore I think the concept of seriously considering the implications of where his own, and your money is going, would be very wise for both of you, however it should be fairly done and you should both leave satisfied with what is legally put in place. I would not allow my DP to wedge me into a decision with an amount as huge as 25 k, but equally nor would i accept it if he implied my motives were that "if i really loved him and was committed then i would". You would be way better off keeping conversations about commitment separate to ones about practical or legal matters.
If the situation were reversed would most people really put in 60k to their partners 25k and then stick them on the deeds to the house without wishing to protect their own investment if it all went wrong.

OP to echo other posters - you can go on the joint mortgage as self employed, and should do so, particularly if you wish to be on the deeds to the house.His preference of sole title deeds and mortgage with your money as partial deposit is v. dubious and i wouldn't contemplate that. The fairest and safest course of action is joint mortgage, both names on the title deeds, and absolutely have a solicitor draw up agreements releasing back to your your 25k if you sell, and his 65k back to him, as well as how to divide accrued equity in the event of a sale if you so wish. This is especially true if you are unmarried. Life doesn't always turn out the way we planned. In no circumstances would i put in 25k to a property someone else legally owned. You are at a bit of a stalemate in the regard until you have visited a solicitor/mortgage advisor together.
Is the issue that he will be contributing significantly more to the mortgage payments than you and therefore feels any equity going forward should therefore be his?
Nobody here knows his true motives tbh, clearly he has reservations about this which need to be resolved adequately before you commit to exchanging any money. i'm not sure that needs to be personal, or that your mum needs to take offence on your behalf (though it is natural that she would want the most beneficial situation for you) - how you and your DP divide your finances is your own business and the only required agreement needs to be between you and him, not her.

If you did break up, of course you would divide up items like all people do and probably by who bought what or what is who's etc anyway. Try not to make it a comment on your value when it may not be.

If you suspect he is not really in it for the long haul and you want that, then don't put your life savings on the line or buy a property together yet until that has been discussed. There is some practicality to his argument however, and that is protecting investments,but it needs to go both ways. You need to BOTH sit down with a solicitor or mortgage advisor and receive accurate options that you both are happy with and proceed from there. Knowledge is power in these situations!