AIBU to think £200 month takes the piss

[budelle]

Partner wants to move in, he has offered to pay £200 month. He earns roughly £500 a week and has sold his house with his ex. I'm a single mom and would lose my tax credits £480 month. Obviously I would be able to work more to compensate as he would help with childcare. Just seems very imbalanced, what would you do?

What @Gudbrand said.

@budelle - how much would it cost him to house himself in your locality? Rent, utilities, council tax?

In other words, how much would he be able to save for himself if he moved in with you instead........ and paid, say, £700, never mind £200....

Secondly, do you truly believe that him moving in with you would create a viable family unit, with him being a proper stepfather and role model for your children? IIRC, your youngest is only 6, so you want to be sure that this is right for them too.

According to the OP the DP has sold the house he had with his ex. I guess that means he's not currently investing in any property. You said that:

There is a difference between the son and the life partner.
The son is contributing to the household - food and part of the bills. The rest of the money he earns can be saved so that at some point he has enough to move out and establish a life on his own or with his own partner.

Why shouldn't the DP be able to make some savings in case this new relationship goes wrong and he ends up needing to find a place of his own? The alternative is that he becomes a joint owner of the OP's property, and contributes towards her mortgage.

@YorkshireDude

Fairness is charging people according to ability to pay. And the main factor in ability to pay is how much someone earns. I'm not saying this partner should not pay more than 200 a month, but I do think that he shouldn't be expected to pay more than his fair share.

So you agree that it's utterly ludicrous for an adult, who has presumably spent 15+ years in the big bad world, to think his contribution should be just £50 a week? Glad to hear it.

You clearly missed where by him moving in stops any benefits she receives, so she’s massively misses out. If you don’t want to take on others children, don’t get involved, simple!

He has probably invested in a few dinners and lunches as a loss leader.

Thank you for putting all my convoluted thought processes on this so succinctly @Sweepingeyelashes

@budelle - I'm sorry how much this thought must sting - but your thread title suggests that you already have some healthy scepticism in place.

May I ask again - how long have you known this tightwad man, & has he lived independently since leaving his last relationship/selling his house?

Fairness is charging people according to ability to pay. And the main factor in ability to pay is how much someone earns.

OK then - a fair starting point for this man is he would need to initially cough up the £480 OP would immediately lose from her monthly income for the privilege of having a cocklodger letting him move in. Meaning that any "fair split" would need to be worked out on top of that cash loss to OP.

I'm not saying this partner should not pay more than 200 a month, but I do think that he shouldn't be expected to pay more than his fair share. And fair share can only really be based on earnings. As far as I'm aware the OP hasn't mentioned what her DC earns, but if they're making as much as DP then I don't really see how she can expect DP to pay more than DC.

Whether you see the difference between an adult partner & an as yet unfledged son isn't OP's problem @YorkshireDude - but if it's such a puzzler to you, see @Gudbrand's explanatory post.
There! - now you don't have to worry your pretty little head any more about the private financial arrangements a woman makes with her own son, or WTF connection it has to any separate arrangement she might choose to make with a partner.

Absolutely NOT. He's not even offering to make up what you will lose!!

And bullshit to 'help with childcare'. You cannot rely on him to provide childcare. And think about where you'll be if he decides he 'just can't' and you're faced with trying to find new, paid childcare.

Listen I'm not telling you NOT to move him in. Well, OK, I am telling you not to. But the bottom line is that you should change NOTHING about your life arrangements (childcare, transportation, work) and allow NOTHING to be taken away from your income or added to your expenses that he does not 'replenish' £ for £.

IF you decide to let him move in, you need to start off with him paying at least half of the household expenses, and that includes food, utilities, repairs etc. ALL of them. You can always 'step down' if you end up feeling he is 'overpaying'.

The issue of him paying part of the mortgage is, I understand, a tricky thing. Some have said it has no legal 'meaning', others have said it can give him a 'foot in the door'. Best you find out how it is where you live. And if you are advised by a competent authority (not MN or canvassing your friends) that paying part of the mortgage does not entitle him to 'home/tenancy rights' then he needs to pay part of that, too.

My feeling is to make it as financially 'unattractive' as possible to help weed out the cocklodgers. Cocklodgers aren't always poor or financially 'needy'. Some of them just want something for next to nothing to save their own pennies and pounds for themselves. And someone who makes 500 a week and only wants to pay 200 a month has the makings of one helluva cocklodger!!

No. We would need to know DC's earnings to know what is a fair monthly contribution for DC and DP.

I do think that both DC and DP have a legitimate reason for preferential treatment. Neither is currently paying a mortgage, so both need to set some money aside. And as I said previously, the alternative is that DP becomes joint owner and starts contributing to the mortgage.

Being an 'adult partner' has absolutely no connection to someone's ability to earn and contribute to a household budget. I'm sure there are plenty of people fresh out of college or Uni who earn more than people who have spent 15+ years in unskilled and semi-skilled occupations. Quite possibly the OP's 'unfledged son' earns more than DP.

Fairness means paying according to earnings, but without knowing DC's earnings we can't judge what is fair for DC and DP to contribute to the household budget.

@Sweepingeyelashes

Beautifully succinct.

I too bet he has adopted a temporary demeanour of generosity as an investment in his new cheap as chips home that he has invited himself into.

He's mad about the OP.

I bet he is.

No one is as in love as a man looking for a cheap place to stay with a naive woman.

I hope to God the OP listens to her her gut.

Nope. Fairness is charging people according to ability to pay. And the main factor in ability to pay is how much someone earns

In which case the OP should be paying much less than the DP into the communal pot because she works part time (presumably to facilitate childcare) and would lose out on 480 pounds a month tax credits. Therefore her ability to pay is less than that of the DP's, who is apparently earning around 2100 per month.

Neither is currently paying a mortgage, so both need to set some money aside
The DP will still have a shit ton of money to set aside even if the poor dear has to pay more than 200 a month. Presumably he has some savings from the sale of the property with his ex. He can add to those. There will be plenty left over.

Wondering if @YorkshireDude is the DP!

@budelle I'd be interested to know where your DP is currently living and how much he is paying towards that. Is he living alone or living cheaply with friends or relatives?

LOL! No, I'm not the DP. I'm single, and these kinds of threads are enough to put me off anything more than FWB!

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think the OP said what she earns. So far all we know is DP's earnings, DC's monthly contribution, and DP's proposed monthly contribution. We can't know what is truly fair as there is too much information missing.

And if the DP has savings and this is a long term relationship, it probably makes sense for him to become a joint owner and use his savings and earnings to pay off the OP's mortgage.

Judging by most of the posts here, the majority of mumsnetters probably think his usual residence is under a rock!

Sounds like a cocklodger. Some men do take the piss. Male friend of mine lives in a houseshare paying £450 a month, all bills in and he's always trying to scrounge money off me. My utility bills were £200 alone this month.

Being an 'adult partner' has absolutely no connection to someone's ability to earn and contribute to a household budget.

Any 'adult partner' who does not currently live with you AND does not have the ability to earn and contribute to the household budget should not be such a cheeky fucker as to invite themselves into that household @YorkshireDude

This cheeky fucker, however, CAN afford to contribute, yet is offering a measly £200/month. The cheeky fuckerdom stands - whether the OP's son pays £0 or £2000/month. It is irrelevant.

If you are still unable to see that, can you keep it to yourself, or at least not tag me about your boring but strangely ... illuminating ... obsession with OP's son again? You're coming across like a stag wanting to lock horns with a buck. Over a doe's turf! - & I'm bored of it now.

If you are still unable to see that, can you keep it to yourself, or at least not tag me about your boring but strangely ... illuminating ... obsession with OP's son again?

Says the person who tagged me!

I can see we'll never agree, so I shall wish you a good day and leave you in peace.

Those in favour of the DP paying more should be aware that if the DP pays too much, then despite not being listed as a joint owner of the property and being unmarried, a court may deem his contributions to have relevance if the relationship were to break down in the future. In that case, paying more than his dues for bills and food could give him a foothold for making a claim in the future. In fact, even something like helping to redecorate could give him a claim on the property, as he would have added value by investing time and effort on the property.

Interesting to note which PP simply don't consider that as an option for the OP.

After all - A Man Has Requested Facilitation.
It MUST be up to OP to satisfy him, while swooning in gratitude for her loss of income.

How are you doing @budelle ?

Despite all the noise of inter-PP sniping (guilty as charged), have you found answers that suit you, or strengthen your resolve?

Double yep @lameasahorse. And every time there's a row about money - or the oddly nebulous "childcare so you can work more hours to replace the lost £480" - this partner can whinge ... "but your son only pays £200!"

It's a recipe for disaster, (for OP - her b/f would be cushty) & I suspect she isn't confirming vital background info like duration of relationship or what independent living arrangements he's previously managed, because she knows it confirms what she already suspects about her cheapskate wannabe cocklodger bloke.

£200 isn't on. That's a token gesture that you would expect from an adult child still living at home.

Next time he mentions it I would just laugh and say £200 what really? That doesn't even cover the utility bills as we are currently without adding another person into the mix.

I'd throw this one back.

So after taking into account the £120 a week you'd loose in benefits he'd only be giving you £80 a week.

Nope He doesn't move it