DP and financial situation

[Whatifitallgoesright]

i need some help re the financial situation between my DP and me please. Together in house 14 years. 11 yr old child. DP bought house on his own, i moved in shortly after. He is main earner, quite stressful job. I started back work when child 5. WOH admin, approx 23-25hrs p/w, just over basic, for DP's. flexible etc. Lasted 5 yrs now im self-employed 20+hours. Similar pay. I do all childcare, housework, shopping, cooking (apart from occasionally weekends he'll cook.) Hes never had to take time off work for child holidays/illness.

All bills and mortgage (Im not on that yet) go out of his account which i dont see. i dont how much money he has. It was £35k a few years ago but business goes up and down. There are dividends and hes acted up for last year. My pay goes on food/household/child/own small bills/travel/clothes etc.

He is very kind and generous. He would never have a problem with anything i bought. We had couples counselling earlier this year and it was agreed id go on mortgage as i was feeling like i had no ownership of my home, i felt low-value etc. I said why not shared ownership, id certainly be happy to have less but nothings even happened about that.

Previously hes offered to copy his statement into a spreadsheet so i can see it each month but Id have to keep reminding him. Sometimes i feel like a child as this is the amount of the household financial situation my Dad would allow me to know growing up!

I still feel like im not an equal partner. He still makes me feel like this isnt an issue. So am I a princess (he supports me and I don't have to worry about bills) or is he controlling or somewhere in the middle we can meet?

You just need to call the mortgage lender and ask for an appointment to add yourself on the mortgage. You and dp (with most lenders) will fill in a new mortgage application on the phone, be credit searched and approved as a couple. The mortgage offer will be posted out to you and the solicitor you choose to do a transfer of equity (adding you on), this will cost around £400/500. You will then be put on the title deeds and be joint And severally liable for the debt. This does mean if he, as the main earner does a bunk, dies etc you are FULLY liable for the entire debt. Because you are financially linked any missed payments etc will affect your credit and vice versa. He will have to make the initial call To the lender and then he may be able to give authority for you to talk on behalf of you both.

Or you can get married, about the same cost and you will have claim over marital assets on divorce/death. This may also mean you are entitled to one another’s pension funds as a spouse on death. Plus some Assets can pass to one another avoiding some inheritance tax.

You can of course do both

www.gov.uk/guidance/sdlt-transferring-ownership-of-land-or-property

To check if you would have to pay stamp duty on the Transfer of equity

Or @Authenticcelestialmusic OP and her DP could just sign a declaration of trust to formalise how much of any house equity is shared should they split up. Job done for the house

Where do women get the ridiculous idea that getting married is "anti-feminist"? What's anti-feminist is putting yourself in a position where you are doing all the work of a wife and getting none of the financial protection. If you are bearing and raising a man's children and bearing all the associated costs to your health, your body, and your career, you owe it to yourself to demand the financial protection and commitment from your partner that marriage provides. Asking for anything less makes you a sucker.

If you don't plan to have children, then by all means don't get married. But having children and doing unpaid domestic labor while unmarried is the very antithesis of feminism.

@Whatifitallgoesright

He has asked me to marry him. It's just not something I've ever wanted or needed. I've always had a feminist antipathy towards marriage although I know wise birds on here will tell me that's outdated nonsense.

Whatever your antipathy towards marriage might be, it isn't feminist.

There's literally nothing feminist about declining the best legal and financial protection on offer to you when you've limited your earnings because of caring responsibilities. The precise opposite, in fact. Patriarchy loves nothing more than women taking on all these risks and a disproportionate share of unpaid caring labour without even the imperfect protection the law provides through the marriage contract. And it was your choice! You didn't even get hoodwinked. You doused yourself in patriarchy, voluntarily.

Get married, as soon as possible, or consider a CP if that might be more acceptable to you. Legally they're virtually identical. But do one. Discuss it with DP immediately and begin the arrangements tomorrow.

There's literally nothing feminist about declining the best legal and financial protection on offer to you when you've limited your earnings because of caring responsibilities. The precise opposite, in fact. Patriarchy loves nothing more than women taking on all these risks and a disproportionate share of unpaid caring labour without even the imperfect protection the law provides through the marriage contract. And it was your choice! You didn't even get hoodwinked. You doused yourself in patriarchy, voluntarily.

This is so well put, I totally agree.

Dont be foolish...my OH and I were together for 20 yrs and when he was diagnosed with cancer we realised there could be implications if he died if we awere not married, around his flat and pension etc and tax associated with it. So we go married the day before he had major surgery. We do have a joint mortgage and we are currently sorting out wills. You can state your a feminist but if he has a pension and has named someone else as the beneficiary there is nothing you can do about it being your not married. If he leaves your not entitled either to the house and you may spend thousands on court . Protect yourself, get yourself named on the deeds of the house and get bloody married. Getting married has changed zilch for me, i havent changed my name but it makes the will easier and pensions etc

I am the main earner in my family, and do the same with my partner, if I'm being honest.

It's not malicious, but as I manage all the bills and big purchases, i just handle/manage it.

But my partner does know how much money I have in savings. But rightly or wrongly, I only told them after 3 years of being together the true figure!

Isanyholeagoal
The OP says her DP bought a house by himself and she moved in ‘shortly after’. She then refers to mortgage payments going out of his account, and she has been with him 14 years. Child rearing for at least 11. I therefore surmise that he had taken out a mortgage before she moved in (Shortly afterwards) but the majority of the years that he has been making payments into a house in his name are years when she was financially contributing or had stopped or reduced her own income to care for their joint children and look after house and home.

So yes, I think she has very much given up her own financial security and supported him to buy a house that is his.

Actually a well informed feminist WOULD get married because they would recognise that in a patriarchal and misogynistic world such as we live in it provides a little protection for you and your child when the relationship ends (they all end eventually, not just separation/Divorce but death too)

For your feminist protestations you're vulnerable in the usual way for the usual reasons - you're only working part time (because if you worked full time YOUR wage wouldn't be "worth earning"?)

Why haven't you taken him up on his offers for more transparency? Why isn't the money all in one pot?

That is what would be equal and fair surely ?

Marry him and sort the finances so they're joint and transparent

@LiveFromHome

I've always had a feminist antipathy towards marriage

But no feminist antipathy towards doing all of the childcare, housework, shopping, cooking, child holidays/illness?

Well done, yay for you and your feminist antipathy! It's got you totally dependent on a man who has blatantly ignored your clearly stated (in front of a counsellor) request to be added to the mortgage/deeds of the house, knowing it makes you feel "low value".

You've really done a number on yourself here.

Exactly. All these modern "feminist" types are laughable. She's actually put herself in a WORSE position than a 1950s housewife. At least the housewife had the protections of marriage.

They also fail to recognise that women back then were in a worse situation being unmarried than married, where children and household situations were involved (which if she engaged her brain she would recognise is actually still the case!)

There are so many so called feminists out there who are seemingly intent on relinquishing their own and their children's rights in order to suit the desires of men to avoid commitment and have everything on their terms.

I think my brain has exploded at the irreconcilable conflict between ‘My feminist stance means I don’t want to get married’ and ‘I voluntarily not only became dependent on a man so I could have a baby, and chose to stay dependent by dropping the career but also do all the housework and life admin for us.’
Brain. Explode. I’m a feminist. I’m happily married, so have a legal basis to my relationship to a man who shares all equity with me, gets up with children in the morning, does the washing meal planning cooking drop off school comms etc as do I.

I'm a feminist. BECAUSE I am a feminist, I insisted my partner and I got married once we had a child and we agreed it would be me that would reduce my working hours to ensure that I was - in law and financially - still my husband's equal. That I was protected as part of a partnership rather than a dependent.

I did not, and never would, change my name.

We had a ceremony which had vows that we both found acceptable, with talk of sharing and partnering and friendship, nothing about giving myself to him.

We only had 45 guests. It was the best day of my life, despite my initial view that it was a formality.

I think you need to think about your position here. Fair enough, don't get married if you don't want to. But you could have a civil partnership now? Or seek advice from a lawyer on some kind of written agreement if you split?

Look at all the threads on here of women whose husbands have cleared off and left them with nothing. Legally, right now, you have no economic recognition of the work you do in this partnership and you need to resolve that for your own independence and peace of mind.

It's also not just about what happens if he does the dirty and leaves.... what about death?
We got married partly because we realised (after we'd had a child), that if my OH died suddenly, and because the rest of his family had already pre deceased him, his aunt would be the one who had access to his money, his pension, and the right/responsibility to organise his funeral etc - not me! That did not sit well. I didn't want her being the one called by doctors if there was a life support machine type decision to be made, instead of me - his life partner and mother of his child

I agree with the general majority here but something else struck me.

He asked you to marry him, and you said no. Maybe he’s now dragging his feet around the other stuff because he thinks you’re no longer fully committed to the relationship?

(Depends on the context of the ‘will you marry me?/no’ convo)

You have no financial security op. None, nada, nothing. If you split up you could end up with absolutely nothing and still have to provide for the dc. If your dh is self employed, I doubt you'd even get much child maintenance too. Not to mention how on earth will you survive in the long term when you come to retire?

That's not feminism, that's being stupid.

Either get married or insist you are an equal partnership.

@NastyBlouse

I agree with the general majority here but something else struck me.

He asked you to marry him, and you said no. Maybe he’s now dragging his feet around the other stuff because he thinks you’re no longer fully committed to the relationship?

(Depends on the context of the ‘will you marry me?/no’ convo)

That's an interesting point. OP do you think this might be what's happened?