Don't want shared equity in a property with my bf -- am I unfair and hypocritical?

[changetherecord71]

This is more of a moral scruple/dilemma question than something I'm actively worried about and its not on the immediate horizon... just wonder if I am thinking about this the right way.

I've been with my bf for nearly three years and love him to bits. Have a nearly 11 year old DD from a previous marriage. DD and bf get on well and I would like over time to think about moving in with him. I've always wanted to take this very slowly for DD's sake and not rush it and for a long time thought it might not ever happen. I'd still be fine if it didn't happen.

I'm about to inherit some money, which will be enough to upgrade my flat and hopefully get a bigger place with more bedrooms. The logical step in this scenario would obviously be for me and bf to pool savings and buy a property jointly.

Trouble is I really don't want to share equity in a property or finances with anyone. I lost out in my divorce and its taken me a while to build back up. I'm now reasonably solvent and my flat is in my name only and I love the security this gives me. I want it to be my daughter's inheritance solely and not for anyone else to have a claim on our family home.

On the other hand, if I were planning to cohabit with someone who in this scenario and they didn't want to pool finances with me I imagine I'd be a bit miffed. And I know he wants to buy property rather than chucking money away on rent and that he would struggle to get anything of a decent size where were are (London).

Would it be hypocritical to suggest an arrangement where he paid me rent rather than paying into the mortgage? It sounds a bit mean in some respects but I feel I have to protect myself and my daughter and tbh my biggest fear is having shared finances with someone - I can't think of anything worse than being financially entangled again. I have no reason to think he wouldn't be entirely trustworthy etc and he's good with money so its not him its me, if that makes sense. I just don't want to give up my hard-won freedom.

I believe you're being very wise about this.

I don't think I'd buy a property with him or mingle finances in any way.

He can buy a property if he wants and rent it out.

Is he renting now or staying with family? You might have a trial live in period to see if you like living with him.

I find I don't like the expectations of doing all the housework etc.and the extra mess.

@DateXY

Why do you need to live together? You'll end up being a psuedo wife he'll be much more inclined to take for granted, and your daughter will be forced to share her whole life and home with a man she did not choose. There's no rule that you have to live with a man.

Men generally love living with women (all the better for him if it's an unmarried set-up with no legal commitment if he wants to keep options open/keep his assets ) as it's the best way to get their needs serviced and to get a female to do a lot of the drudgery they would otherwise have to do.

We don't need to live together and we may very well not do. I'm absolutely not on that camp that says you need to live together to consider someone a partner. I'm well aware of the "pseudo wife" syndrome.

I'm still very much undecided as to whether living together would be a good idea. I'd like it eventually for the companionship but the financial element is a big potential downside and I would absolutely not do it if my daughter expressed any negativity about it. It's not on the cards for at least a year anyway, I'm just gaming it.

But for the record marriage would be crazy in these circumstances. I have nothing to gain and everything to lose from marriage.

If he was renting, he would have:

1. Exclusive use of the property
2. Assurance of a stable home for the duration of the AST + court time to evict
3. No repair costs
4. Choice to clean or not bother at all

and much more.

You want to treat him as a lodger, where he won't have any of these things but appear to want to charge him as if he was renting half the place from you. If you really want him to pay, it should be at most lodger rates.

Your proposals all end up with him having no stable, secure home and can be on the streets on a whim. Suppose you fall in love with the postman and decide to force him to leave that afternoon - having as one of your suggestions a 1/3 share of a flat helps him not at all if you decide he cannot stay there (and you would be mad to let him).

I would suggest he keeps his £60k in a S&S ISA cheap global index fund, and pays you a lodgers rate (look at local properties to find costs of renting a single room). You retain full ownership of the property and all mortgage and repair costs.

Findwen

"You want to treat him as a lodger, where he won't have any of these things but appear to want to charge him as if he was renting half the place from you. If you really want him to pay, it should be at most lodger rates."

good points, thanks.

I think you are being very very sensible op.

I have a couple of questions?

What is his suggestion on how you will live together and or pool property resources?
(This might be very telling)

Also, if he works FT with a good salary and is presumably a similar age to you, why has he never been or got in the housing ladder? I find that fairly unusual?

Also, if he works FT with a good salary and is presumably a similar age to you, why has he never been or got in the housing ladder? I find that fairly unusual?

Because mortgage companies will generally only lend you up to 5x your annual income, and he's looking for houses in London.

I mean, I’m sure (correct me if I’m wrong) that the initial pooled resources you had with your ex meant that you could afford a home, whatever that was. And then on divorce that was split.
Buying on ones own is insanely difficult even if you earn well. So he’s in a bind, because he’s not had the advantage you have had initially.
So from a partner point of view, he might see it as, he’s met someone he loves, wants to live with and jointly you can afford somewhere.

If he lives with you and you want no share financially, then you only split bills, your mortgage is yours, his is his.

I’m sure you’re being very sensible etc, but actually you sound a bit as if you want someone around for the here and now, and not for ever. Fine. But as long as he’s fine with that too.

I mean what if you or he got seriously sick tomorrow? Would you dump him because you don’t want an ill dull millstone round your neck.

You talk about life as if it’s a very simple road to travel, and you’ve had a shit time in the past so you won’t let anything disrupt how you think it should go. Life - I would have thought you might have realised by now, is not that simple.

@Hont1986

Also, if he works FT with a good salary and is presumably a similar age to you, why has he never been or got in the housing ladder? I find that fairly unusual?

Because mortgage companies will generally only lend you up to 5x your annual income, and he's looking for houses in London.

Yes, but how come as his age he has only just worked that out?!?

*at his age

I have to agree that if he moves in with you his financial contribution needs to be his share of the bills so 50% council tax and a third of utilities and then a token contribution towards wear and tear on your home so more of lodger rates than renting a room.

If he isn't respectful of fixtures and fittings etc that could be an issue!!

Ideally yes he could do a buy to let elsewhere so ends up with a property elsewhere.

If you lived together 10/20/30 years then perhaps you would feel differently about him also having a small stake in your home or at some point you may downsize and buy together whilst helping your DD buy.

Rent is dead money . If you are committed to this person and want to live with him then you should buy with property designated % wise . As to letting a child make the major decision in this

if my daughter expressed any negativity about it

what are you thinking ? Any ? Really ? May as well sit it out until she moves out then .

Op my father has a partner he’s been with for about 15 years now. They live 15 minutes drive apart and have no plans combine houses. They spend most of their time together but split it between houses. It means inheritance is protected on both sides and also means they each have their own personal space when they need it. I would just do this. It seems exactly what you want. Even if you protect yourself splitting up when living together can still get messy .

Stick with your gut.

No matter how you structure the mortgages / deposits etc YOU will still feel emotionally uncomfortable, compromised and under threat even if it isn’t rational financially.

Once you start feeling like this the resentment will build unconsciously in the RS and erode it by stealth.

You have decided that you and your DDs home situation and finances need to be bomb proof. Why does worrying about him getting on the property ladder concern you and seem to be now driving and undermining your emotional needs?

Review it when your DD is 18 and going off to uni. Teenage years are tricky. Focus on her stability as sounds like she has already had enough instability.

Keep him as a BF until then and review it later. Let him get in with managing his own life. Is he much younger than you or himself come out of a RS with a property because it sounds odd that he doesn’t have a roof over his head by almost 50. Does this concern you?

And this is why I will never live with anyone ever again. My ideal perfect partner will have their own place & be happy to live separate from me forever. I am divorced over 18 years. My children are 18 & 23 and have only lived with me the past 18 years so I wouldn’t bring anyone in to it. My house is my own & will be equally divided between my children. I fought hard for it & I will not risk that for anyone. Even when the kids have moved out, I don’t want anyone else here, I’m too used to this way now and I love it. If I met someone that wanted to live together then it would be a deal breaker for me I think.

@MrsMaizel

Rent is dead money . If you are committed to this person and want to live with him then you should buy with property designated % wise . As to letting a child make the major decision in this

if my daughter expressed any negativity about it

what are you thinking ? Any ? Really ? May as well sit it out until she moves out then .

@MrsMaizel why on earth should a child be forced to live with a man she doesn't want to? It's just as much the child's home as the OP's and the child will always be the most vulnerable one in any of these situations. Would you be happy to have an unrelated man you didn't choose and don't want, move in and live in your own home?

The OP is a mother and is obviously looking out for her child who will be impacted by this sort of decision while she brings her up.

I'd still be fine if it didn't happen.

So he's nice enough but you don't feel that strongly about him. Or manybe you don't feel that confident about him.

The logical step in this scenario would obviously be for me and bf to pool savings and buy a property jointly.

No, the logical next step in this scenario is for you to improve your own home or buy a new better home or invest the money for the future, and to live separately until you both feel ready to make a long-term commitment to each other. There is no shame in not feeling ready to share lives and finances yet. Especially since you've had one very bad experiemce behind you.

Do not get financially entangled with him. Selling bits of your house, being his landlady, buying houses together, all recipes for trouble later on. He is an independent adult who can pay his own rent or get his own mortgage.

If you didn't have DD I would say OK, risk it, things might work out OK and so long as you make a living arrangement that protects you both financially then a split-up wont do too much harm. But you do have DD to think about, being her parent makes you more vulnerable, and she doesn't need to live through another parental split-up that changes her living arrangements. And now you have a marriage behind you and a child with you, you don't need that kind of split-up in your future either. You and DP aren't ready for this.

Wait til you're more confident in your long-term future together. It's OK to do that.

@DateXY any negativity ? Get real - kids will always have something negative to say about a new partner however small . They would much prefer Mummy to them self. However Mummy is also a person in herself who is entitled to a life other than just being Mummy . The OP has many duties towards her child and one of them is to make her realise that an adult will often make decisions that she may not like but there are good reasons for it . From your point of a view a child carries more importance than the adult in this situation and a mother should be subject to all that child's needs until when ? Forever ? She moves out ?

Scrap that word "needs" . Replace with wants .

Tenancy in common : I would advise your bf to see a solicitor of his own before signing anything. If you die the only way your DD could claim her inheritance would be to sell the property. He needs to buy a property in his own name.

Giving a partner a life interest in a property can be problematic.

When they set this up, everyone imagines that they will die at 85 and their partner will die a couple of years later, so then their children can get their share. They understandably don’t want to have their 88 year old bereaved partner to be out on the streets.

But what happens if tragedy strikes and the person writing the will dies at 40? Then their kids might easily have to wait 50 years to get their inheritance. Your kids could spend all their lives in rented properties waiting for their mums former partner to die so they can get the money she left them.

Any of course nearly all these bereaved men will marry again very quickly. So your kids get to be raised by granny / auntie watching their mums former partner, his new wife and her kids live in a home that’s half theirs.

Would it be hypocritical to suggest an arrangement where he paid me rent rather than paying into the mortgage?

I do think this is hypocritical when you’ve already said he doesn’t want to throw away money on rent.

If I was him and was looking to build up equity in a property, I wouldn’t be impressed with being in a relationship with someone who wants to have their own nest egg, charge me for living in it, but I will get no investment at the end!

I don’t think you should be living together.

@Alsonification

And this is why I will never live with anyone ever again. My ideal perfect partner will have their own place & be happy to live separate from me forever. I am divorced over 18 years. My children are 18 & 23 and have only lived with me the past 18 years so I wouldn’t bring anyone in to it. My house is my own & will be equally divided between my children. I fought hard for it & I will not risk that for anyone. Even when the kids have moved out, I don’t want anyone else here, I’m too used to this way now and I love it. If I met someone that wanted to live together then it would be a deal breaker for me I think.

Me too!!

My house is my security - I fought hard to get some money after my divorce, saved hard, got some money from my parents - I would never put all that at risk.

Posts like this really bring out the hypocrisy of mumsnet.
Imagine a woman posting about how her DP wants her to pay rent towards his mortgage, how he doesn't want to marry her, how he doesn't want her to have a share, how when he gets old she'll be no good for sex and will be boring.

Tbh OP I find your comment about old men especially sour as if a man was to comment on how when his girlfriend is elderly, he'll dump her because she's no good for sex and will be boring and he can go far without her, he,'d be called all sorts of name on mumsnet and they'd be encouraging the girlfriend to leave him.

I'm shocked at the amount of women cheering you on. I understand you want to don't want those ties and want your assets to be safe - that's all well and good.
But i really hope you have told him all this and your reasonings - especially the part about leaving him when he's old because he'll be boring

@Sundown29dn

Yeah well your comments might make sense if the OP didn’t have a child to support and wants recovering from a previous divorce.

But she does so they don’t.

And because men earn more than women .

And because very few men take maternity leave and go part time to bring up their kids.

And because women do then majority of childcare, wifework and housework ON TOP OF paid work.

But when all these things change then, yes, your post will make sense. And things will be totally identical between men and women.

Oh and I forgot to say, welcome to Mumsnet @Sundown29dn. Though I’m surprised you have decided to join today as you find us all so hypocritical.