I’d really appreciate some outside perspectives on a situation I’m in.
Background:
My partner and I bought a house together 5 years ago. We agreed ownership based on contributions: him 60%, me 40%, and split bills the same way. This was formalised in a deed of trust. He earned about 5x my salary at the time (both FT).
A year later, he sold his business, paid off the mortgage without agreeing it with me, and told me that meant he now owned 90% and I 10%. This hasn’t been legally formalised. I kept paying bills as before (in hindsight a dumb move but I was having MH issues at the time).
He then gave up work without consulting me (non-compete clause for 2 years) and has lived off investments. Earlier this year he said money was tight, so I agreed to pay 50% of bills.
And now:
We’re in couples counselling for reasons other but including this. I’ve raised that my ownership split is much lower than my bill split, and I think that should be reflected.
He says I should pay more because of “usage” (I have 1 child here 50% of the time; he has 2 EOW). But he’s home 100% of the time as he doesn’t work, while I work on site most days. I feel this usage arguement is ridiculous.
He also says when he goes back to work (April), he won’t earn as much as before.
Neither of us want to marry or have plans to ever.
We both own other properties (his empty, mine rented). I’ve suggested pulling my share of our house out and moving back to my place, but he resists—says he can’t buy me out and living apart would end us.
I feel really unhappy and betrayed by how decisions were made without me, yet I’m bearing the brunt financially. I've aired those concerns and nothing has changed so I now need to make some decisions. I’d love to hear what others think— none of this feels like a relationship to me. What is fair in this scenario and what would you do in my position? Thanks!