Would they have a case?

[user1472709746]

I am a SAHM to two preschool aged kids (3 year old and 4 month old). Not married to DP their father. We currently live in a flat owned outright by his family and are not paying rent. This has always been seen as a temporary situation until we got to a better place financially (DP works hard but is not well paid )and could get a mortgage and potentially buy it off them. This will likely be when the kids are in school and I can go back to work.

I have always known I was in a vulnerable position (as I could be asked to leave at anytime) but I considered it a temporary thing that we couldn't avoid so tried not to think about it to much. If we refused their help and rented privately I would have more security obviously as we would have a tenancy agreement but we would need to move to a MUCH smaller flat and have a greatly reduced capacity to save. DP thinks we would be mad to do this.

DPs family have now offered to buy a larger/more suitable for a growing place for us to live in with the same arrangement we have here continuing in the new place. I am very grateful as we could never afford to privately rent these kinds of properties and they are allowing us to raise our young kids in a much nicer home and with a much higher standard of living than we could currently provide for them ourselves.

However the move has caused me to look more seriously at my situation and made it harder to push my lack of security to the back of my mind anymore. I have been playing lots of 'worst case scenario' type fantasies in my mind and can't stop thinking about if we broke up and I have to move out. Would his fam have a case for arguing the kids had to stay in the house without me because its their home?

I have always been their primary caregiver but I can't afford a place like we have now. If we broke up I would be uprooting the kids and taking them to smaller, potentially much more run down, place. Could my DP be made the resident parent if we broke up due to him being allowed too remain in the house and me having to move out and find somewhere else to live?

I have no plans to leave and love DP very much but still can't stop thinking about this scenario and feeling anxious. They have not indicated they would ever try to do this but they are extremely wealthy and could afford an excellent legal team if they did decide to try to keep their grandkids living with their son rather than moving out with me.

Keep your independence op!

You wouldn’t lose your children in a split just because your partners parents owned the house you live in.

I think you should have a tenancy agreement. It's not fair that they should have the right to throw you out at any time. I'd speak to a lawyer about their rights. They certainly have no rights over who would have your baby in a break up, though.

Do you save the equivalent of the rent money?

Why don't you get married?
OR put all the savings you make by not paying rent into your sole name.

You won't lose your children because of their house.

However something you SHOULD be very worried about is that you are a SAHP who isn't married to her partner. In a split, he would owe you very little, you wouldn't get a share of any savings, and you would presumably be out on your own without a CV gap and no rental history and potentially credit history.

To stay at home, you really should be married - even if it's a quick registry office one that you keep secret while you save for the big fancy party ..

@Myheartbelongsto

I want to be more independent and in a year or so we plan on me going back to work. Our older one will be in school by then so we will only have to pay nursery costs for one child. However until then I kind of have to stay reliant on them. They are a nice family and we get on well but you can never know for sure how people will behave and I just feel very vulnerable and dependant on their goodwill.

What rings alarm bells for me in your posts, OP, is that you are a SAHM who is not married to the father of her children, which puts you in a far more vulnerable position than your housing situation, should you split and also that you keep saying 'I', as though you envisage your DP's family throwing YOU out, alone, while your partner and children continue to live in the family flat in your imaginary scenario, why is your DP not by and on your side, whether it's defending you to his parents or packing his and the children's bags alongside you?

Get married, and yes, you should have some form of tenancy agreement.

I’m not sure how much more security you can achieve and in what way other than having a personal exit fund that would allow you to rent on your own. Given that you are not working you would most likely need 6 months advance and or a guarantor. In your position if I had this reserve I would carry on with the no rent scenario and continue to save rather than move on.

Even if you left now you would probably have to rent in your DPs name. So you are back in a vulnerable position.

Getting married only helps in the long term presumably if and when he inherits because your DP doesn’t have any capital and is a low earner.

You won’t lose your children if you split as you would be a priority for housing. But it might not be nice housing.

Is there a reason you aren’t married? This looks like you are bottom of the heap - if you are good enough to bear children, you are good enough to be married?

You are in a very vulnerable position financially and for your future. You would get child maintenance if you did split but nothing else. Nothing else for all that time spent raising the children, no pension share, no property.

@Hollowtalk

We don't have a tenancy agreement because we are not giving them any money. I don't think they would throw me out with no notice they are not bad people. I expect I would be given what they considered a reasonable period of time to find somewhere else but of course you never know.

@Stuckforthefourthtime

Our savings are all joint but yes I appreciate I am in a vulnerable position.

I agree. If your relationship is happy, then get married. The position you're in at the moment, you have absolutely no security. Your partner has as his parents are willing to hand over money to him. You don't have that.

Yes getting married would solve some of the issues

But actually you need to be more independent as a couple - if you both fell out you could be in trouble

By the way it’s not irrelevant that one side in a split can provide certain things like housing - your DP would certainly have an advantage over you in proceedings re child contact. These things aren’t equal, but you’d need to be showing you had adequate housing for your children and an income.

Again, OP, why are you avoiding the marriage question? And why do you consistently post as though you, individually, not your husband or children, would be given notice to leave? Is the relationship in trouble?

I am genuinely grateful for their help. Our first DC was unplanned hence why we weren't in a great position financially. They stepped in to take the pressure of us in the short term which has made life a lot easier for us the last few years. However me and DP have had our ups and downs and it does worry me the position I will be in if we did break up.

Its reassuring to be told that them owning the housing won't mean the kids would automatically stay there in the event of a spilt. That was my main concern.

Like I said, I am planning on going back to work in year when our oldest starts school. I will feel a lot different then because I will know I will have the ability to support myself and my kids but until then it will be a source of anxiety.

@Fishlike

The relationship is good at the moment and we are in love but we have had some lows over the last few years where communication has broken down. We have always worked through it and come out stronger but its not been perfect sailing.

I am saying 'I' because I am imagining a situation where we have broken up so I am single.

If you split and you were to work full time, could you afford to house them and live independently? With child maintenance which I assume would be very little? And split residency?

Because it's probably less about what they would do, and more about what you can do. And the life you wish for the kids.

Are you in a vulnerable position, of course. You don't work, don't pay into a pension, are not married, and don't have your own home, you are reliant on the goodwill of your partner, his parents and some benefits.

It's unlikely in the event of a split his parents will look after you financially. They will simply protect their son, based on what he wishes.

If you don't think thr relarionship will end any time soon, then you may as well go with it to the bigger house, but I would try to develop some form of financial independence as soon as you can.

So say 'let's get married'. It's an obvious step to making yourself less vulnerable, you say you're in love, and you have two children.

@Fishlike

lol, my mother says the same thing to me on a regular basis! The problem is I was very much not interested in marriage before we had kids so it would look very odd to DP now if I suddenly did a 180 changed my mind.

As someone who has now split from their husband I would strongly urge you to get married or at least get your free half hour with a solicitor and do something to safeguard you and your children financially.
Relationship breakdowns do happen and you may be screwed if yours does. You have no income, pension or property to your name.

@Bluntness100

I could afford to house them as I could get support from my family (in the form of a loan) in the short term till I got a job however it would not be as nice as our current home.

The problem is I was very much not interested in marriage before we had kids so it would look very odd to DP now if I suddenly did a 180 changed my mind.

I had not the slightest interest in marriage ever -- I still don't. But my now DH very much wanted to get married, so I agreed, as it meant a lot to him. Two hundred pounds and fifteen minutes at the registry office.

You're not pretending you've suddenly got a passionate desire for a giant white frock, ten bridesmaids in eau de nil and a hotel full of 300 hundred of your closest friends attacking the buffet -- just say it makes financial sense, and provides you with necessary security. Unless he's a total shit, why would he say no?

HOw about then a civil partnership now that they should be open to the opposite sex couples its not a marriage and probably removes some of the things you were anti in the first place

You need to get married it doesn't matter whether your dp is confused about the 180. People change their minds all the time as time goes by.

@Quartz2208

I like the idea of a civil partnership actually. Something to think about.