Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Partner doesn’t want to marry me/share finances

305 replies

MinaJ · 04/09/2023 17:14

Hello all, I am hoping for some advice please :).

My partner of 1 year wants me to move in with him but only wants me to pay bills for the future onwards. He is building his own house and wants to ensure sole ownership of it which includes paying the mortgage himself. He said to me that “it’s his house but our home”. He wants me to have an opinion on designs etc. but no financial input whatsoever (except bills). He is determined to keep our finances clean cut and said that himself.

He won’t marry me or even negotiate a civil partnership with a prenup as he says prenups are not legal, just highly persuasive. But he wants children (now - even though we aren’t even living together yet!). I’ve said I need time.

I love him, and I know he loves me. He said he is fully committed to me and by wanting to start a family with me is him showing that commitment - but I can’t tell if I’m being naive entering this future with him without any offer of other security. Inevitably I’m going to invest in the house in some ways - and our children, and as a result I’m losing the opportunity to invest in my own assets. Should the worst happen and things go wrong, I would have little rights and could even end up homeless, surely? I don’t even want to think like that but I’m feeling forced to because he is obviously being cautious himself.

He earns a lot more than me and has a lot of assets (land), so I understand he is being protecting his investments. I’m not on a terrible wage (£40,000) so it’s not like I’m financially dependent. What can I do to protect my own self and security in this scenario? Has anyone been in a similar situation? I’d be grateful for any sharing of experiences.

OP posts:
TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 13:40

Rainbowqueeen · 05/09/2023 12:28

@TooManyClouds there are a tonne of expenses that come with renting out a house that the OP would incur solely. Plus if the relationship ends she has to find somewhere to live, she can’t just kick her own tenant out. So she is still taking a massive hit that he isn’t.

Op this guy is not it. There is no commitment in having DC together. Commitment is sharing assets and finances. He wants DC now to trap you.

I would walk away

She can evict a tenant if she needs to occupy the property herself. The expenses are not that high given she is not a higher-rate taxpayer.

Alternatively she can save into stocks and shares ISAs and invest into a global tracker. Over the last ten years this has yielded roughly 10% growth per year with average inflation over that period of 3%, so 7% real-terms growth. Then if she ever needs to buy a property she will have plenty of money for a deposit.

Separate finances are fine, and she can choose to wait until she is in a more secure financial position with higher earnings and a significant amount saved prior to conceiving (which would be wise anyway to see if the relationship will last long term given they have only been together for a year). For me, this would be much too early in the relationship to consider moving in together let alone children. But if she moves in with him rent-free so is effectively in the position that lots of adult children are in where their parents help them out massively to enable them to save a deposit by living with them and paying only a small amount towards bills so they can save most of their earnings. He's hardly stitching her up by offering her a rent free place to live!

The only reason it becomes a problem is if they decide to have children without her having ensured she is also in a strong financial position first or she gives up or downgrades her career to do so. This is a choice.

If people want separate finances they also have to accept that the other partner won't make decisions that will disadvantage them financially, and therefore in terms of children he will either need to pick up his share of the childcare/ housework etc OR fund this himself with a nanny/ housekeeper.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a setup where people don't entangle themselves financially, but the balance has to be equal so both parties have the same opportunity to improve their own financial situation. The assumption that a woman must always be financially dependent on a man and the lower earner and the main carer is so out of date and presumably any man demanding financial equality will understand that the other side of the coin is that all areas of domestic life also have to be shared equally.

Have you discussed this with him, OP? Clearly if he doesn't say that obviously, this goes without saying, or you sense any resistance to the idea, then he is taking the piss. But if he just wants an equal relationship where both people work full time and provide financial for themselves and their children, and both people share childcare and household tasks then I don't see what is wrong with that? This is the normal setup in many of the happiest countries in the world e.g. many Scandinavian ones. Incidentally such countries also happen to score some of the highest scores for child mental health and happiness.

CallistaFlockfart · 05/09/2023 13:49

Run for the hills.
He's selfish and doesn't want an equal partnership. You would be putting yourself and any children in a vulnerable position if you move in without marriage and you're not on the deeds/mortgage.

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 14:52

Why would this be indicating he doesn't want an equal partnership? What it seems to imply is the opposite: that he does want an equal partnership with the adults not financially dependent on each other.

OP do you have any reason to suspect that if you have children he would expect you to behave as equals financially, but not do an equal share of parenting or housework?

IMO it's very important to live with somebody for a while before even contemplating children and you can't ascertain what he is like with taking responsibility for domestic things like housework prior to doing so for some time. And it's early to even be thinking about cohabiting after just one year of dating. Is there a particular reason why there's such a rush to be thinking about such things? In the first year of dating usually people are focused on having fun and getting to know each other better not serious plans like this for the future. If anything the red flag is that there's discussion about children when you still barely know each other!

gamerchick · 05/09/2023 14:55

Brood mare comes to mind like.

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 15:08

Anotherparkingthread · 05/09/2023 01:13

The general advice on here for single women with assets is just that, allow your partner to contribute to the running costs of the household but do not compromise your home or your future and make your partner fully informed that you are unwilling to share assets. Marriage is also not often advised on here if it doesn't benefit the woman.

Your partner has done nothing wrong, in fact I'd say he's being very sensible and I can see most relationships looking like this in the future.

I build my own house and I'd be damned if I'd let anybody take a portion, it's been a labour of love and I wouldn't risk losing it over some relationship which may not work out.

If you did wish to proceed with the relationship you would need to protect yourself in some ways eg if you lived at his house without mortgage or rent contribution you could pay the money you would have spent on that into one of your own accounts each month to build savings. You would also need an agreement on costs of raising children eg who pays childcare when you return to work and what's a fair contribution, eg is 50.50 right or whether or not he pays more as the higher earner. Working that out before getting pregnant would be the only way. He sounds sensible and financially level headed so would likely be happy to discuss how it would work. I think most people enter these situations with wishy washy promises and expectations, and then up dumbfoudned when they cant get their spouses to uphold the agreement. If you cant come to a fair arrangement then having children together isn't an option and the relationship is over.

As I say, I think most relationships will look like this in the future, especially as less people want to get married, more men and women decide to protect their own assets.

Some people will tell you this is unromantic, they say that as a flimsy defence for an airy fairy relationship ideal that isnt built to cope with the real world. Disney relayionships dont exist. Marriage itself is a contract. Romance is fine but expectation and obligation should be arranged before anything else especially now the world has moved on from draconian times and women are often in powerful positions at work, or at least capable of earning their own money. If the arrangement of marriage doesn't suit one party financially then there's nothing to say a different agreeable arrangement cant be decided.

Exactly.

Lastchancechica · 05/09/2023 15:11

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 13:40

She can evict a tenant if she needs to occupy the property herself. The expenses are not that high given she is not a higher-rate taxpayer.

Alternatively she can save into stocks and shares ISAs and invest into a global tracker. Over the last ten years this has yielded roughly 10% growth per year with average inflation over that period of 3%, so 7% real-terms growth. Then if she ever needs to buy a property she will have plenty of money for a deposit.

Separate finances are fine, and she can choose to wait until she is in a more secure financial position with higher earnings and a significant amount saved prior to conceiving (which would be wise anyway to see if the relationship will last long term given they have only been together for a year). For me, this would be much too early in the relationship to consider moving in together let alone children. But if she moves in with him rent-free so is effectively in the position that lots of adult children are in where their parents help them out massively to enable them to save a deposit by living with them and paying only a small amount towards bills so they can save most of their earnings. He's hardly stitching her up by offering her a rent free place to live!

The only reason it becomes a problem is if they decide to have children without her having ensured she is also in a strong financial position first or she gives up or downgrades her career to do so. This is a choice.

If people want separate finances they also have to accept that the other partner won't make decisions that will disadvantage them financially, and therefore in terms of children he will either need to pick up his share of the childcare/ housework etc OR fund this himself with a nanny/ housekeeper.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a setup where people don't entangle themselves financially, but the balance has to be equal so both parties have the same opportunity to improve their own financial situation. The assumption that a woman must always be financially dependent on a man and the lower earner and the main carer is so out of date and presumably any man demanding financial equality will understand that the other side of the coin is that all areas of domestic life also have to be shared equally.

Have you discussed this with him, OP? Clearly if he doesn't say that obviously, this goes without saying, or you sense any resistance to the idea, then he is taking the piss. But if he just wants an equal relationship where both people work full time and provide financial for themselves and their children, and both people share childcare and household tasks then I don't see what is wrong with that? This is the normal setup in many of the happiest countries in the world e.g. many Scandinavian ones. Incidentally such countries also happen to score some of the highest scores for child mental health and happiness.

Show quote history

You can not mitigate for severely disabled children, extensive child heath problems, poor health and illness and a Million other issues that are a normal part of life that will require the other parent to step up and take care of things.

If you get into sharing a life and worse still children with a man that only wants to invest on his own terms, you are putting yourself AND your children in an incredibly vulnerable position. In real life and not Scandinavian movies, men up and leave without a word all of the time. Marriage is protective legally and financially from just kicking you out on the street kids and all. Nothing to stop him.

I implore women to not involve themselves with men like this.

Crazycrazylady · 05/09/2023 15:42

Honestly you are no where ready to have kids here but in the mean time you could buy your own property and use the money you will save on rent to pay that mortgage.

Crazycrazylady · 05/09/2023 15:45

AllosaurusMum · 04/09/2023 17:36

He’s not wrong. He’s doing exactly what everyone on this board advises women with assets to do. If divorce laws were better, like premarital property/savings were excluded then it would be different. But it makes no sense for someone with assets to marry someone without.
why can’t you buy your own house and let it out?

Agree totally with this. You'll be living rent free so should in theory be able to invest in a property for yourself .

Codlingmoths · 05/09/2023 15:53

I would consider the living together bit IF AND ONLY IF : 1. it meant that I could save more than I could with my current living arrangements to build a deposit of my own, and 2. We split the housekeeping. Literally. Not he occasionally contributed. He would have to cook up delicious healthy meals a couple of times a week, clean the kitchen, work the Hoover and do washing. Do not become his unpaid housekeeper.

don’t have a baby with stingy mcstingeface. He would be one of those men who expect their life to be unchanged, and your financial security would be severely compromised. Repeat after me- I won’t have babies with any man who doesn’t want to stand up in front of our friends and families and commit to me.
him: a baby is a much bigger commitment, it’s all we need!
you: a baby is certainly a bigger commitment for me than you, but it’s not all I need. I need the rest of it too.

him: you know how much I love you!
you: well, yes. Not enough to announce it in front of our friends and family, it seems.

ItsNotRocketSalad · 05/09/2023 16:14

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 11:55

Leaving him if he doesn't!

Women need to ensure they can be financially independent. Marriage is really little protection against not doing so in most circumstances anyway. The protection is ensuring your own financial security as an individual, developing your own earning power and assets and ensuring that if the relationship broke down you are capable of supporting your children alone to have a decent standard of living, if needed.

Show quote history

So he doesn't pull his weight and the OP leaves him. She's now a single mother on one income, supplemented by a pittance in child maintenance (if any - plenty of men manage not to pay a penny) and responsible for childcare probably 12 days out of 14. She'd be better off single and never having moved in with him in the first place. Your solution isn't a solution.

Parky04 · 05/09/2023 16:19

I think it's safe to say, she will move in with him, have his children, remain unmarried, and the kids will have his surname. He will also give her a pittance in allowance when she stays at home to look after the kids.

Lastchancechica · 05/09/2023 16:20

Parky04 · 05/09/2023 16:19

I think it's safe to say, she will move in with him, have his children, remain unmarried, and the kids will have his surname. He will also give her a pittance in allowance when she stays at home to look after the kids.

Happy ever after until he runs off with the PA and she finds herself homeless with 3kids.

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 16:55

You can not mitigate for severely disabled children, extensive child heath problems, poor health and illness and a Million other issues that are a normal part of life that will require the other parent to step up and take care of things.

If you get into sharing a life and worse still children with a man that only wants to invest on his own terms, you are putting yourself AND your children in an incredibly vulnerable position. In real life and not Scandinavian movies, men up and leave without a word all of the time. Marriage is protective legally and financially from just kicking you out on the street kids and all. Nothing to stop him.

I implore women to not involve themselves with men like this.

Nothing to stop a woman doing that, either? Many women also want to protect their assets and income and pensions by not marrying. Many women have been massively harmed financially by marriage. It's perfectly possible to draw up legally binding contracts on how such situations would be managed financially that would actually offer more protection than marriage with its antiquated laws. This whole argument seems to smack of sexism to me; that somehow women aren't capable of providing for themselves and being an equal partner in a relationship.

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 16:57

So he doesn't pull his weight and the OP leaves him. She's now a single mother on one income, supplemented by a pittance in child maintenance (if any - plenty of men manage not to pay a penny) and responsible for childcare probably 12 days out of 14. She'd be better off single and never having moved in with him in the first place. Your solution isn't a solution.

If she leaves him she doesn't have to agree to have the children more than 50/50. How can he force her to?

MargotBamborough · 05/09/2023 17:00

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 16:57

So he doesn't pull his weight and the OP leaves him. She's now a single mother on one income, supplemented by a pittance in child maintenance (if any - plenty of men manage not to pay a penny) and responsible for childcare probably 12 days out of 14. She'd be better off single and never having moved in with him in the first place. Your solution isn't a solution.

If she leaves him she doesn't have to agree to have the children more than 50/50. How can he force her to?

How can she force him to have them 50% of the time?

More importantly, if someone has already made it clear that they're not a team player, why would you bring children into a situation where this type of outcome is likely?

Sarvanga38 · 05/09/2023 17:00

Well obviously don't rush in to having children with him, ensure you keep your financial independence, maybe get yourself a but-to-let - but when someone is making the huge personal commitment of building their own house, I can see why they wouldn't want to lay themselves open to a partner of just a year having any sort of claim on it.

Obviously he's given you a good heads up here and it may be that he is just going to be selfish the core, but just a year in I wouldn't think this is a throw the towel in moment if all else was good.

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 17:03

How can she force him to have them 50% of the time?

If she left then he can't physically make her take them more than she wants to?

More importantly, if someone has already made it clear that they're not a team player, why would you bring children into a situation where this type of outcome is likely?

How is it "not being a team player" not wanting to sign half of your assets over to someone else? I'd think someone who expected that in order to join the team was a bit manipulative, tbh.

This is all getting rather hypothetical though. I mean, they've only been dating for a year! Why are children and marriage even being discussed? 🚩

Original poster
MinaJ · 05/09/2023 17:11

Thank you everyone for all of your honest replies and views. I know my situation is not okay, otherwise I wouldn’t be posting on here. I was expecting confirmation of my concerns but hoped for a balanced view - so thanks to those who did give a different perspective as well.

I hope I can shed more light on what you’ve all asked:

He does all of the cooking at current, but I do all of the travelling to his, and if I did move in with him, I’d be having to travel 3 x as much to work.

Childcare hasn’t been discussed.

I can afford to buy my house, but was waiting to invest with someone.

We are both in our thirties, so possibly he’s thinking about biological time.

I agree a year isn’t long enough, and I’ve communicated that to him. It’s he who wants children now, not me. I’m reluctant to do so without security - which is why I’m reaching out for other people’s opinions.

He won’t double barrel and wants the children’s name in his name but I’ve been clear it’ll be in mine.

He suggested we act like a married couple and I change my name to his by deed poll so we’re a family. Again, not so sure.

To those who have chastised me for not replying quickly, I have my reasons. First, there are so many replies and I am overwhelmed by them. I am trying to digest a very emotional crossroad in my life by reading them and it’s not easy to just join in on a conversation about my life. I am a full time worker so cannot be online all the time either. I have been having breakdowns over this matter, and receiving unkind remarks from people hasn’t felt very helpful. Please be more considerate to those asking for support, we are all human beings. I am sure someone will attack this message now, but I won’t respond.

Thanks to those who have genuinely helped so far.

OP posts:
Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/09/2023 17:11

They've only been dating for a year! Why are children and marriage even being discussed?

Marriage isn't being discussed by him, except to say quite honestly that he doesn't want it, and the caveats around having children have already been amply covered

As to what his overall appeal is, let's not kid ourselves that "He earns a lot more than me and has a lot of assets" aren't a major pull for a lot of women

TooManyClouds · 05/09/2023 17:15

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/09/2023 17:11

They've only been dating for a year! Why are children and marriage even being discussed?

Marriage isn't being discussed by him, except to say quite honestly that he doesn't want it, and the caveats around having children have already been amply covered

As to what his overall appeal is, let's not kid ourselves that "He earns a lot more than me and has a lot of assets" aren't a major pull for a lot of women

Sadly this still seems to be the case so frequently.

blablabla123 · 05/09/2023 17:15

No way.

He can tell you his needs all he wants. Equally you can tell him yours - marriage before kids and property both names to ensure security and stability for you to risk your independence having kids. Non negotiable.

Original poster
MinaJ · 05/09/2023 17:17

I would also like to stress that I did offer a prenuptial. I don’t want his assets or his house - but I do want to make sure my own investments are protected post-living together, as inevitably I will invest in the house and our children. But without any legal binding, it’ll be difficult for me to claim or prove the costs I’ve put in. Also, as some have said, he’ll be earning the profits from the value of the house that I’ll be contributing money to. I’ll lose on the value by not investing into my own house (would profits rise as much from a rented house?)

OP posts:
Feverly · 05/09/2023 17:17

’He suggested we act like a married couple and I change my name to his’ what a clown he is. I’d be deeply insulted for a man to think I was stupid enough to agree to such nonsense. Go out and enjoy life, there’s blokes out there who are fit to marry and reproduce with, this one is not.

makeminealargeoneagain · 05/09/2023 17:21

It seems to me that he wants everything on his terms. Children will have his name and you change yours to his my deed poll as they'll be no marriage. I think I'd call it a day as there is very little give on his behalf but lots of taking. It will only get worse. I'd see if you can buy yourself a home that makes your daily commute doable for you. I think I'd throw this one back and look for somebody who wanted a loving and sharing partnership. It's a big decision for you, but it could leave you very vulnerable financially in the future. Your older self will probably thank you for making the tough call now x

MaybeanothertimeNotReally · 05/09/2023 17:22

MinaJ · 05/09/2023 17:17

I would also like to stress that I did offer a prenuptial. I don’t want his assets or his house - but I do want to make sure my own investments are protected post-living together, as inevitably I will invest in the house and our children. But without any legal binding, it’ll be difficult for me to claim or prove the costs I’ve put in. Also, as some have said, he’ll be earning the profits from the value of the house that I’ll be contributing money to. I’ll lose on the value by not investing into my own house (would profits rise as much from a rented house?)

Edited

I don't say this very often on mnet or in RL but I suggest that you dump and run. You have a lot to lose and nothing to gain by being in a 'relationship' with this man.