Separate finances when one partner has more wealth

[FancyMauveHare]

My partner and I are coming up on 5 years together but have only recently started living together. We are in our 30s.

When I met him I was not interested in living with a partner and he was recently divorced and didn't fancy that either. It worked well for us, we both had largely the same lifestyle and both were renting studios not far from each other.

My reasons for living in a gritty studio was saving for a deposit. I have no family wealth and have not received any financial help from family since I was a teenager.

He has now bought a house outright and is receiving monthly payments of £1-3K from parents to renovate it. We have a contract to say he has to give me several months notice if he wants me to move out and I have no beneficial interest in the house, he's solely responsible for all house expenses and we are jointly responsible for utilities only.

I have always been a proponent of separate finances in my 20s, but I've also never been in a life partnership before. I am becoming uneasy with the very obvious wealth disparity between us. My partner is as frugal same as me, so our spending (minus the renovations) is largely the same, however, my financial planning is predicated on having to financially support both my parents when they are elderly and being the only person I can rely on financially in case of an emergency. He has never had to financially plan anything - he says he always lived below his means and that's enough.

Living in a house that's not mine makes me feel uneasy. He says he wants me to feel like it's my home, but I don't feel like it. I don't feel like it's my place to be deciding on decorations even though he consults me because I don't want to be the reason he chooses the more expensive option. I don't feel like investing my own money because the house is not mine. I don't want to be living like this in 10 years time.

My partner says if my budget ever not allows me to afford something (like a holiday), he'll just pay for me. But most likely thing is that I just won't accept it. I think it would create a weird power dynamic.

Does anybody have any advice and tips on how to navigate wealth disparity between unmarried partners? (Marriage is not an option as he does not want to be married again).

OP, I agree that both of you are not unreasonable in their thinking regarding marriage and financial sharing based on what both of you have experienced in the past. Both of you want to protect yourselves from getting into the positions that you were scarred before. That said, it is incredibly sad that you cannot live up to the expectations of you dreams of having a family unit with someone you love. I suggest that you write down clearly the more realistic future (no children, no marriage, no financial sharing, no family unit, partner is actually friend with benefit/housemate, no same life style with boyfriend, living in a house you that you don't own/belong, sharing a life now but maybe not the future, and more) and then assess if you are able to make peace with that? Your boyfriend must be lovely in many ways that keeps you around and there are many other positives in this future too, like no children, no messy tangle of finances, no long term commitments, go as you please, little responsibility for your boyfriend, possible emotional/financial support etc. If you can adjust your expectations and think of him as an addition to your life but with no great attachments to, i.e. more like a friend, housemate, a companion as you said, this might work. However, If it is too painful to grieve for your expected future, you may need to consider this is not the future for you and maybe leave for good. As for him, let him know how you think and let him do his assessment himself. I hope you well.

I always imagined the support to be housing. As in, I have a house that belongs to me which means if I decide to leave my job for a year to move to my home country temporarily, I have a home to come back to.

I understand I'm from a different culture and supporting in-laws might be seen as excessive in the UK, but where I'm from it's the norm. If my partner needed me to pay the mortgage as he's quit his job to provide care for his dying mother, I cannot imagine I would ever have a problem with it. In fact, I want to make it possible for him to do so. To my mind this is not different than leaving the workforce to look after your children.

The problem should be that you aren’t on the property ladder.
My friend has just split with her partner of almost 30 years, she has 2 months to move out of HIS 700k house, she is almost 69 years old.

Look at it this way, if you're a guest, it's the host's job to make you comfortable. You won't be expected to sort your own bedding in the guest room and cook a nice dinner for the two of you. But it feels like this is what he expects.

If he wants me to be more involved with the house, he needs to make it explicit, not just expect me to insert myself. How do I even know he wants me involved if I'm not invited? I'm not his wife, it's not my house, I cannot imagine talking to the tradsmen as if I have decision making power. Seems absurd to me. Like showing up to your friend's house to be involved in their business.

If someone offers to pay for my dinner, I will chose a cheap option, I will never go for a thing I actually want if it's on the expensive side. So, if I ever agreed for my partner to pay for my half of the holiday expenses, I wouldn't be able to relax. And then I'd feel like I owe him and must pay him back at least somehow.

These are my values, I don't need therapy to change them. Some people have different values and that's ok, they're just not mine.

The reason I say this isn't that I don't want my own home. I do and I have a 10% deposit for something acceptable. It's just that my preference would be to be sharing a home with him as a family. Buying a BTL property as was suggested doesn't fix that.

@FancyMauveHare Buying a BTL property won’t make you feel more at home in his home, but I doubt paying rent will either. Short of him putting the house in your joint names (which it doesn’t sound like he’ll do), you either have to make the best of the situation or break up. At least if you have a BTL property you’ll be on the ladder and have some security if things don’t work out.

Are you in the U.K.? Would make sense to get legal advice, should he die before you would you be evicted etc?

But they are only your values unless and until he marries you, at which point you will be happy for his money to be your money and vice versa?

Of course marriage can change things legally regarding assets, pensions and so on, but it doesn’t automatically confer an obligation to share money day-to-day. In any case you’ve set out your own solid position re savings and income, so it’s hard to see why you can’t just pay for your own holidays.

Yes, I'm in the UK and I have been living here since I was 18. If he died, his will states I can stay in the house for 6 months. So, realistically I'd have to rent as I don't think it's likely I'll find a suitable house and buy it. But I do have means to do both, so it's not a problem.

I don't think I've ever said I can't pay for my own holidays. What I said was this - because of our differences in wealth there will come a point where I won't be able to afford something (e.g. a holiday) because I have to build my own capital rather than spend. My partner then said that's ok, he'll just pay for it.

I understand not all married couples share money day-to-day and budget accordingly, but this is how I would want to do it.

I cannot be in a life partnership with someone where we have separate goals and budgets and if he can afford something I can't, he can gift it to me. This creates a power dynamic I am not comfortable with. If we married and all our money was shared, I'd want to set shared savings/travelling/investment/childcare goals as a unit. And yes, then it wouldn't be him paying me for what I can't afford, it'd be what we can and cannot afford.

I'm not saying everyone should want this, not even my boyfriend. This is just what I want, this is not a moral judgement on other people's lives.

I think I'd rather just buy my own home and live in it rather than carry on living in his home long-term. If I'm not a wife, I don't particularly fancy acting like one. I'll accept his offer on long-term companionship, but this means I get to have more freedoms than I have now. I'll start looking for properties now and move out when something suitable comes along.

This has always been the plan really, to see what it's like to live together before we make any decisions on deeds, marriage, children, etc. Now we know he likes the arrangement of no shared finances, no shared planning, but cohabitation in a house in his sole name, but I don't. I want a family unit, but he doesn't.

It's upsetting, but ultimately, he doesn't owe me anything and I don't owe him anything either. He's not obliged to marry me and I'm not obliged to accept life-partner responsibilities and expectations with no life-partner security.

I think I'm entering the acceptance stage of grief .

Yeah I think your relationship will fizzle out tbh. I can't imagine a couple living together and then one moves out because they realise there's no long term commitment there, and that not resulting in a breakup!

@FancyMauveHare How long have you been living together in his house? The flip is it may sound like you’re threatening to leave him unless you get rights to 1/2 his assets, especially if you haven’t really given his place a chance to feel like home. That shouldn’t stop you from doing what you want to do but I can see how he might view that negatively.

Yes, there's essentially no drawbacks for him to live the way we live now, and there would be no drawbacks for me if I didn't want a life partnership. He is absolutely prioritising his asset over having a family, but even though it's painful for me, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Doesn't make him evil to not want a family, not everyone does.

I do wish he came to this conclusions earlier before we already decided to start trying soon, because it's been a very painful process for me, but I guess sometimes you just don't know until it stares you in the face. I do think it's wrong of him to expect me to act like a wife when I'm not one, so I am hoping he won't take offence at me wanting to just save up some money and move out into my own property.

I am hoping he won't take offence at me wanting to just save up some money and move out into my own property.

Who cares if he does? He's prioritising his security above everything with no risks to himself so who cares if he gets pissy about you protecting yourself the only way you can?

We've been living together a few months. Before then he pretty much lived in my studio - going to mine after work, leaving mine to go to work. His flat was basically storage. I didn't ask him to marry me or else. He told me he would never marry me. Not just now, never.

We were planning to have a child together and were planning to start trying next month. I said we need to get a civil partnership first. We discussed it at length previously. He said he was ok with it and it's probably the best option, but he wanted to see if there could be a decent cohabitation agreement we could draw up instead. Then I told him I'll only be ok with a civil partnership or marriage and he panicked.

After days of talking, he admitted he never wants to be married again.

I don't think any of it can be interpreted as me leaving him because he won't sign off half his house to me.

Is it unreasonable for a woman to want marriage and children?

@FancyMauveHare It’s not unreasonable but it’s the timing.

I think you’ve both been flip flopping on what you are okay with/ what you want, not just him. As you said before, you were okay with split finances, now you’re not. You must have been okay with trying for a baby unmarried at some point or else you wouldn’t have been planning to start trying next month?

It’s just a shame you didn’t come to an agreement on all this before you moved in. Now he may feel in a bit of a bind because you have the cohabitation agreement, and you’ve moved in, so there’s more pressure on him to accept what you want.

There are obvious advantages to you living with him, such as not paying mortgage/ rent and being able to save, and splitting bills so I don’t think it’s unreasonable for him to think this arrangement would work for you too.

I did say we both changed our minds about finances, marriage, and children. But still, I was never ok trying for a baby next month with no marriage/civil partnership. Some months ago we decided to start trying in April. We didn't just decide it now. At first, we decided to wait 6 months, then I started getting panicky about my age and we shortened it to 3 months. Before this decision we were discussing it for 6 months and I have always said if there would be a child I probably would want marriage, and he agreed it was fine.

What I did not know is that it's not "probably" for me, that it's a negotiable. And he did not know then he was categorically against it either.

I don't see why me moving out puts him in any kind of a bind though? He's only losing half of his utilities being paid and will have to buy his own white goods. Having the cohabitation agreement will make all of this easier, not harder. We already agreed how stuff will be divided in case we end the agreement, that's what our agreement is. That his house is his, I get 3 months of notice before he asks me to move out, and that everything in our names is ours and everything that's shared is 50/50. The agreement exists precisely for this purpose, not to make leaving more difficult.

I don't recall ever saying my partner was unreasonable in any of this. What am I saying though is that we want different things.

He's not a bad person for not wanting a family but it's a shame he told you he did want a family before realising he'd have to commit to you properly before doing that. That's why I think he's messed you around. And there's a chance you'll leave him over this, but at least he'll have his asset. Asset ain't no comfort if you're all alone! Sad situation, sad man.

I don't think you're right for each other. Huge wealth disparities and separate finances do not make sense when you have children.

I'm sure he feels like I messed him about too because I said previously I did not want to share finances. So I guess we're even.

I also don't think you necessarily have to be alone if you're childfree and unmarried. I know women who have been single all their lives and they are very happy, busy, and fulfilled.

And it is definitely better to have an asset and no live-in girlfriend than half the asset and a family you don't want! And I certainly would find an asset quite comforting if I had to be alone 😂

Yeah. I’d like to hear his ex’s version as it might differ in subtle but significant ways from his version.

completely agree with you that the financially weaker partner needs the security of marriage before having children.

Marriage is never advantageous for the financially stronger partner so the question is whether they trust you enough to get married to you anyway in order to have children.

from what you have written, it doesn’t seem as if he does so this may not be the right relationship for you if you do want children.

better to know that now than later. All the best.

Don’t do it. Leave and find someone you can build and be more compatible with. I’m stuck in a similar situation, but with 3 kids (unmarried). It gets harder not easier. His house will never feel like your home. If they want to treat you like a lodger from the beginning, it never changes.

You could get a civil partnership, or there are other ways for you and he to have all the legal protections of marriage without actually being married - if that's what the sticking point is here. If it's that he doesn't want you to have those legal protections, then that's a much bigger issue.

There's no way to have the same legal protections as what a civil partnership/marriage can provide. We only ever discussed a civil partnership, never a marriage. Yes, there could be a will and a cohabitation agreement but it's not a replacement of a family law court at your disposal if things really go south.

But either way, my partner's issue is sharing finances. With marriage/civil partnership finances are shared, and that's the thing he does not want. The issue is not the institution itself, it's the actual legal implications he does not want.