Are my expectations in how we split finances valid?

[Ru25]

Hi there,

Me and my partner are both divorced, been together nearly 6 years. We both have our own homes but are in very different financial circumstances. He owns his home now with no mortgage and also has another property with rental income. I have a large mortgage and high monthly payments. Our houses are worth about the same. The idea is to sell our houses and buy somewhere bigger that will house his two older kids and my younger child. However the sticking point is that he would just want to continue his financial situation, no mortgage and for me to continue with my current set up with my mortgage. Therefore live together and him have loads disposable income and me not have much at all...I'm not after his money but I feel like if we are building a life together we should be looking at finances as a team and working out how we could be more equal. He can ring fence whatever he puts in if anything was to go wrong but we should be looking to build a future together. His idea just feels like room mates and actually I;d be worse off due to the cost of moving/another stamp duty to pay etc...He would be living in a much nicer larger house for nothing...anyway interested in peoples thoughts on this as quite complicated/ Thanks

Surely the house is bigger than they both want though?
The only reason for the extra space is the respective partners children, which applies to them both.
If he wanted a bigger house surely he would already be living in it? What does he get out of a bigger house with the extra room used by OP’s child?

How is she contradicting herself? This man wants her to take on more debt so that they can move to a bigger, more expensive place. So he is expecting the OP to subsidise his lifestyle. If he cared a jot for the OP he would at least suggest that they buy somewhere that would result in the OP having smaller mortgage payments than she has now.

So they could combine (and ring fence) whatever equity they have now, buy a place of a similar value together, and the OP could (although I wouldn’t) take on the mortgage payments which would be smaller than she currently pays, which would give her more disposable income than she has now as well.

But that’s not what he wants to do is it? He wants a single mother to take on more debt and more worry, ultimately ending up with less disposable income and financial security than she has now, so that he can live in a fancier house. If that’s love then I must be missing something.

She mentioned him rinfencing his deposit then sharing 50/50 so if they own 50/50 but he also ringfences his deposit that would be paid out first then any remaining equity would be 50/50 that's why I'm trying to establish exactly.

Thanks, yes that’s how I feel

Yes that was my initial suggestion but he said no. I would also have a deposit I would ring fence just smaller

But you’re saying you didn’t want his money but then agreeing with posts that suggest him not sharing half of his money means he isn’t a real partner!

If you were the one coming into this with more money I think there’s no way you would be taking on a mortgage to cover the cost of your partner and his kids moving in with you.

Thanks for understanding and articulating how I feel.

I’m not asking him to share his money with me, he ultimately keeps what he puts in. I think your missing the point

And yes I would try to support more if I was in a more fortunate position. While still looking after what I put in. I’ve supported more in the past with trips away, food and drinks at my house, him staying at my house more when I’ve had more than him,

Ok so both ringfence deposits but is the portion you are paying for via mortgage not ringfenced for you?

Do not jeopardise yours and your child’s financial and emotional security for this man @Ru25. Any person who wants a single mother with a young child to take on more debt for their desires does not have your best interests at heart. And do not underestimate the significance of resentment setting in if you were to move in together and you would see him living a merry life while you’re struggling. The fact that you have supported more with trips, food and drink at your house also says a hell of a lot.

This man is quite literally taking money out of your child’s future so that you can subsidise him already. Buying a house together will just make things worse. Stay in your home that is 100% yours and nobody can take away from you, and stop spending any additional money on him. Take all that money and save/invest it for your child. You’ll be amazed by how quickly it grows without you spending money on this man. And every time he wants to come to your house and eat your food that you have no doubt cooked, use your facilities etc etc. give him a bill. If he wants to act like your relationship is a simple business transaction then you need to do the same. Do not spend more time or comparative money on him than he does on you.

I would want the same as him if I were him. If you look at the expense of living in a larger house but splitting the cost 50/50 you mmight find that it’s cheaper than paying 100% of the costs of your current house.

if you can’t afford or don’t wont to pay the moving costs then you can decline to move in together but I don’t think it’s right to want him to subsidise you too much. He has kids who are probably his first priority.

I think the partner is mostly not being unreasonable. There's no way I would pay mortgage interest for a mortgage I didn't need. If the partner is protecting his deposit, that's fine, but that's his share of the ownership plus his share of any increase in value. OP owns the other 50% plus share of increase in market value. A few points where I think he's being unreasonable - expecting OP to currently pay 50% of all their dating costs when he has much more disposable income. That's stingy and in that situation I would treat the other person regularly, not expect them to cough up 50%. Also he's unreasonable insisting that your house budget should exceed your current combined property values - that is clearly not a compromise that is okay for the OP and it sounds like he's being very pushy about that. Given the financial disparit and ages of children, I would expect him to pay a greater share of household running costs, at least initially. I think your idea of pooling everything is a bit much OP - it's not appropriate. Does he show commitment to you in any other ways?

I think you should stay as you are, it’s far simpler, plus if you split up in the future, it would be expensive to split up assets and buy another property.
If you split the household bills, it would still be more expensive in a bigger property, he would needs more bedroom in the house, his adult children would eat more than your child etc and they’d be more house to clean/ laundry etc which you might be expected to do.
You might find it very hard to afford 50/50 holidays and days out so I would keep it as it is.

It sounds like you're in different places in terms of life experience which maybe what's driving his opinions. I think given that and the age difference between his and your kids that you stay put, and keep your independence such as it is.

I wouldn't move if I was expected to cover the moving costs and mortgage on my own. That definitely doesn't seem fair. You're better staying where you are. You could be really petty and say he's got 2 children yet you've only got one so pro rata the bills but for a couple who are meant to love each other and be planning a joint future what he's proposing isn't right.

Why would moving costs only be paid by the OP?

You both have your own children. You are being naive about build a life together in your situation. I think building a life together and putting everything only works for the first marriage. Afterwards, especially both have kids, just co-habitats.

Right but you are not married, he's your DP. That means that you have a very different set up. There will be no automatic rights of inheritance etc.
Have you asked him what he's concerned about

Your partner doesn’t sound like the sort to compromise, he wants a bigger property so your mortgage would be higher than the one you have now. He likes to stay at yours, eat your food, use your electricity etc but expects you to split 50/50 when you go out or for holidays. It’s already unequal now so imagine living together and getting him to pay his share of the household bills, he’d expect you to pay 50/50 and pocket the % he should really be paying, once his adult dc move out he won’t have any qualms about making you pay more even though the house has extra bedrooms. He’s dangling a carrot but it’s not in your best interest.

But he is already being a hypocrite here because the OP says that she pays more when they go out and spends more on food etc. as he stays at her house more. It sounds like he’s just a user to me. The OP is already spending more money and time on him than he is on her, and he wants her to take on more debt and I’ll bet anything she will be expected to do more of the domestic labour as well.

This (and I can’t understand why moving costs and stamp duty would all fall to the OP either).

OP, I really hope you will reflect and admit to yourself that he's tight, mean and will not change.
I think you would find yourself penniless and stuck with him unable to keep up with big food and utility bills for 3 adults.

My friend has two student sons who lived with her but headed off to Australia post graduation.
She said her electric is less than a third as is her food bill.
She cannot believe the increase in her spending.
1 litre of milk compared to 6 for the endless bowls of late night cereals being just one item.
Endless protein at every meal.
Happily eating 4 breast of chicken between dinner and a late night sandwich!

As for expecting them to move out?
Sure if you live rurally, however if you are in a good spot with transport etc.,.they may remain at home well into their 20's.
Where else will they have access to a constantly packed fridge and freezer?

Don't be one of those women who mourns her lovely quiet tidy little home that she lived happily in to blend with a mean man with older kids.

Oh and even the lovely teens tend to dominate the house with their schedules, lifts, needs.

So different from where you are at.
Don't do it.
Your daughter will be lost in that new set up.

He’d be lording it over you that without him, you wouldn’t be living in said property and expect you to not only be paying out more per month but be cleaning up after him and his adult DC. Once they move out he’d expect you to pay 2/3’s of bills. You’d be wistfully thinking back to the days when it was just you and DC in your own property.

So he really is expecting to get a share of the mortgage you pay. So his deposit is ring fenced but the split isn50/50

first of blended families should never buy as joint tenants - becuase the share automatically passed to the other. Tenants in common means it can pass to the children.

@Ru25 I would say this to his with your deposit and the amount of mortgage you want this is your budget so say it’s 300k you are no willing to put more towards it and that is non negotiable

you would prefer to own as tenants in common so happy for him to take his 500k and own 62.5% of the house or if he wants to have more than an 800k house to get a tenants in common mortgage to reflect ownership to make up the difference.

so if he wants a 1 million house and share the mortgage than he owns it 70% to reflect the shared contribution.

you are happy to get financial and legal advice together and separately to ensure all of this and that your respective shares go to your individual children rather than each other. And to make sure the above works.

Anything else isn’t possible for you and it is the only way you will do it.