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?

My daughter was in a similar situation. She had a much smaller deposit than her (ex) partner. I advised to get a contract sorted out for fairness to him. It just makes sense. It's what I would do!

Probably echoing everyone else, but he is not being unreasonable wanting the declaration of trust to protect your separate deposits, but you do need to speak to solicitor about the ramifications of not being named on the mortgage. I got a declaration of trust when I paid the full deposit on the house I bought with my husband and I'm so glad I did. It was his mum's idea.

I don't actually think him not wanting to rent again when he's got a mortgage is particularly dodgy OP, but nonetheless I still wouldn't be investing what sounds like your nest egg in a property with someone you've never lived with before.

Another one adding to the voice that he is either lying or naive or has received bad advice. It is reasonable that he would want to protect his money but the lying bothers me. As a pp said if you did split up and weren't on the mortgage / deeds presumably you would be easier to chuck out?

I was put on dhs mortgage when I was a temp on a very unstable income and I have unmarried stay at home mum friends in relationships who are on mortgages / deeds because their partner wants their contribution acknowledged (even though it is childcare rather than a financial contribution). That doesn't mean that my friends would walk away with 50% of the house having paid nothing but it does mean they have come up with agreements that both parties agree would be fair and reasonable in the event of a split.

My partners ex and DP ring-fenced their deposits contractually as she has help from family and her stake was significantly more than his. When they split 14 years later they each got back their original deposits and were supposed to split the equity. What ended up happening in reality though was the equity was placed into their joint account and his ex emptied it and fucked off and bought another house.

Just be very careful.

If you're not on the mortgage, and not part owner...then if you split up he doesn't have to sell the house, which is the only way you'd have to get your cash back. You're giving him £25,000. OK if that's fine with you, but you need to know that that's what you're doing.

This is perfectly reasonable for you to be on the morgage But it's not just the equity back you put in . You need to ensure any future increased equity is split along the same share lines. Myself and my fiancé are in the same position due to differing finances and have agreed a similar equity split based on how much we are putting into the property.

sleep why would the solicitors put the original deposit amounts into each separate account then put the rest in a joint account?! That makes no sense. When me and my ex split up about 15 years ago, probably More, our shares of the profit was out into our own accounts, not our joint account as because we had split that was put on hold by the bank????

Still having an active joint account and the solicitors putting the money into that and her emptying it sounds like a ridiculous fuck up.

Count I don’t know actually, it’s a good question. They broke up quite amicably and they still had the joint bank account and he trusted her. So I guess he didn’t think that had to happen, but he was wrong. He did claw some of the money back legally but not all.

He now refuses to have a joint bank account so it’s left a lasting effect. Even though we’ve been together 7 years, are engaged and have two kids I don’t think he’ll ever fully trust me.

You mos definitely need to be on the deeds.

And any "contract" needs to stipulate that you will receive your proportionate amount of any increase in the value of the house if it is sold.

You need to be so careful when parting with large lumps of money. I bought a house with my sister, and let her organise everything. I put in £38,000 deposit, she put in less (can't remember how much). It didn't work out, we fought like cats and dogs, so sold the house three years later for £30,000 more than we paid for it. I got back only my original deposit, and no matter how many times she explained it I still couldn't understand where the extra £30,000 went. It was something (she said vaguely) to do with the type of mortgage she'd arranged, it was an endowment policy which meant it rolled over to her next property. All I know is I was about £25,000 worse off than I should have been.

This is your nest egg, be smarter than I was!

I know I'm just echoing others but absolutley do not put in 25k if you are not going on the deeds !!!

If you split up you can't force a sale of the house as its not yours how will you get your 25k??

You need to draw up a legal agreement where in the event of a split you each take your original deposit and then share the equity 50/50 .

If he's not trying to pull something then hel have no problem with doing this !

This is all kinds of wrong. This man is taking from you and protecting yourself. If he wanted to be with uou and marry you he would not do this.

The mortgage and house should be in both names. You can protect your deposits but any equity should be shared. The fact he's not taken this to shared equity proves he is trying to ensure he owns it and future profits from it.

I'm sorry but you've got a problem on your hands.

Still gurning to myself and feeling wronged 😁 The other thing that pissed me off was realising that when I thought I was paying down the mortgage I was actually paying into her endowment policy. I still can't figure out how endowment policies were ever allowed by the financial overseers, they were a fucking scam.

Juells I'd seek legal advice in that one. I think she is pulling the wool over your eyes. She owes you money one way or the other - even if somehow it did roll over-the-top which is doubtful in itself unless she asked for it to be

Don't know where the random top came from

I have unmarried stay at home mum friends in relationships who are on mortgages / deeds because their partner wants their contribution acknowledged (even though it is childcare rather than a financial contribution). That doesn't mean that my friends would walk away with 50% of the house having paid nothing

Actually if they weren't married they would. It is only when you get married they look at who put in what. If they own the house jointly and are on the mortgage jointly then they have 50% of the equity

Christ Juells. Your sister is a prize bitch! Even if you couldn’t access the £10k you paid into her endowment, I don’t understand how you didn’t get the 15k profit minus fees. Did she arrange the solicitor as well? As a pp said, you may have recourse as that sounds strange and potentially bloody dodgy. And how did the lender allow you to have a joint mortgage but an endowment just in her name?

Juells I'd seek legal advice in that one.

Water under the bridge now. My other sister was just here and we were discussing it, I realised it worked out for the best in the end - if I'd had more money I wouldn't have bought the house I'm in now, I'd have looked at more expensive neighbourhoods. I was able to build a granny flat which I rent out, and I wouldn't have survived without that income.

None of which solves the OP's problem. She needs to protect herself, no matter how nice her partner is. Relationships can fail.

She really isn't a bitch. She arranged the mortgage because she was the one with the steady employment record and income, and didn't realise the implications of an endowment policy when she took it out. It matured a few years ago and wasn't enough to cover what she owed, she'd had to top up for several years before when she saw the shortfall looming. They really were crap mortgages, that shouldn't have been foisted on anyone.

Oh I see. I take it back then. From your initial post it sounded as though she had pulled a fast one and did it deliberately.

It makes sense, he needs to protect his input, you need to protect yours - but if you split and he keeps the house, you should get back what you put in, increased by the same % that the house value has increased by, because if you owned the house jointly, that is what you would get (and both take the proportionate hit if the value decreases).

I had something similar with my ex though we did own together, the mortgage was in both names but my 'income' was not used to assess it as I was self-employed. We owned as tenants in common with equal shares, but I had paid in full for my share, so only he actually paid the mortgage and we had an agreement to say he would do that (though legally I was responsible if he didn't, I knew that) and that when we split I got my 50% before any mortgage was paid off.

"If you are on the mortgage you will have insurance that will most likely pay off the balance." - well, you'll only have insurance if you take out insurance (it would be life insurance and would need to be on both of them). Not sure what 'most likely' means, you have to actually make an active decisions and do that.

He can make a will leaving the property, or a share of it, or a life interest in it, to the OP, but she can do nothing to stop him making a new will at any time.