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).

No marriage doesn't entitle you to someone's money. You are generally entitled to whats built during the marriage. No one's telling you to think about love. What kind of saying is you do not have as much money as your partner yet. You feel entitled to his money. The problem isn't that you want to have a shed financial future. It's that you think that marriage means you suddenly have entitlement to everything. He's earned accrue, or his family has given him even before you met what you're saying doesn't make any sense. And it reads like you think because you are going to get married. He suddenly owes you financial security. What we're saying is, actually that's not what a relationship is. That would be prostitution, it's not an exchange of money. It's a relationship where you want to build something you cannot when you do not offer that have a demand that someone gives you something that you cannot give back to them in any way shape or form. You're the person making this about money and you don't have any In context to your partner, which is why this is so weird

Honestly, if you were a gold digger, this would make more sense. But in no way shake or form, do you come across? Like a gold digger, you're just taking the exact same position. They would, and then arguing it from a point of logic. It doesn't make any sense. Do you understand what I'm saying? What you're saying in the spirit of it makes sense, but the way it's coming across, you sound like not just a goal digger, but an entitled one. He doesn't owe you any money. He doesn't have to commit to making sure that for the rest of your life, you have got a certain amount of money from his own stack of money. What you should be. Doing is planning a future together where you work out what your life looks like. And you have a conversation about finance. The problem is the entitlement, also, what you're saying is, so you're only going to focus on dating people that have more money than you, because you don't want to date anyone that has less money than you. I don't understand it.How can you in your head?Have that opinion that what you're saying is right?It doesn't make sense to me.It's like very very unaware

Well I think you sound really sensible and intellegent OP. You see time and time again the mess some women will get themselves into because 'love'. The concept of being in love AND keeping a clear head seems to be alien to so many on here its scary.

I dont think you could ever be happy in this situation, I think you should buy your own place as soon as possible.

Thiiiiis. You said that he'd be unhappy if you left, but that being married to you would be even worse? I don't think he loves you. I think if he did, he would risk losing some of his money theoretically one day in the future, in order to be with you. LOTS of men are happy to keep a woman around who he's more or less happy with, as long as there's no downside. Then marry their next girlfriend immediately.
That's one possibility, the other is that he's hoarding wealth because that's what his family does. But rich families who hoard wealth are usually trying to pass it down to their kids. He's got his values confused because he's hoarding wealth but for nobody but himself. And he'll end up as an old rich guy alone with his possessions.

The concept that you're entitled to someone else's money is what is crazy. It's literally insane to me. The ope isn't having a standard if she wanted to get married and have kids. And he didn't want to and they've been together for 5 years. And she, in the beginning of the relationship, had said she wanted that. Then, that would be unfair. I don't think anyone's reading what she's writing. She has from the beginning, said she doesn't want children. She does not wanna get married and she doesn't want to share finances. Now that she's moved in maybe had more understanding of exactly how much money he has. And has now said she wants to get married. She wants to have children and she needs to share his finances. Of course. This is a red flag to him. It would be a red flag to anybody, but it's not because of what she's doing. It's because of what she's saying it doesn't make any sense and it looks predatory, but I don't know if that's her actual intention. It more like a communication problem.Why I don't understand why people are insisting that your relationship has to end it.Honest to god feels like a conversation.

I think two things. One he was badly burnt by his first wife. Two he's under his parents thumb still. They're protecting their money and his.

Just keep saving and go if you want to.

It feels like you're reading someone else's comments. By your definition, anyone who wants to get married and share finances is just predatory and entitled. I have always known how much money him and his family have, we've always talked honestly about our finances. My partner literally just has a house and his parents give him money for the renovations and he'll inherit a third of his parents' house when they pass. He's not filthy rich. It was my idea to protect his asset in the cohabitation agreement, he did not even know it's legal for me to claim beneficial interest in it if I claimed I contributed even if I wasn't on the deed.

I have also said time and time again that my partner owes me nothing and has every right to want what he wants. He's perfectly logical and reasonable. At no point have I asked to be joint tenants or to be a beneficiary to his pension. I've asked for marriage - meaning, we'll be building wealth together, not separately. Meaning, finances are shared. If we married now and divorced in 5 years time, under no circumstances would I have any right to the house even though it was a marital home since I can provide housing for myself, he bought it before marriage, and it was a short marriage. If I had 5 children with him as a stay at home mother, was permanently disabled and we were married for 30 years, then it would be a different story.

You've made up imaginary conversations between me and my partner and now accusing me of prostitution in another comment. It's so utterly uncalled for.

"The problem is the entitlement, also, what you're saying is, so you're only going to focus on dating people that have more money than you, because you don't want to date anyone that has less money than you. "

Please find a quote of where I said this.

You are arguing against a strawman you've built up yourself. I don't think there's any benefit to me to engage with you any further since you're arguing with your own imagination.

Like over you're not reading my posts or you're just not able to understand what I'm saying. I am saying exactly what you're saying. I do not think that you are a prostitute or a goal digger, and I did not say that I am saying the way that you have communicated what your problem is. It comes across like you're saying you're entitled to his money. But actually, when you read carefully what you're saying, you are not saying that what I'm saying is, I think you've had a communication issue? That's all? I do not think this is a different in values. I think that the way that this topic has been approached is potentially. What the issue is You and your partner should just go for the joint therapy

OP is determined to be a martyr. She is, as she keeps telling us, perfectly capable of housing herself, saving, and building her own pension. She wouldn’t want his assets if they split, she says! And yet she will blow up the relationship because he won’t marry her and theoretically share his money (and vice versa, tbf). Madness.

I think I'm not even in a rudeway. This might be like if English potentially is not op's first language, it genuinely may just be a communication issue. As in, I think I can understand what she's saying. But I don't think that she understands how it comes across. And that's all, especially if her boyfriend, is not from the same background that she is. This feels like a communication issue.

Because she sees it as a sign that he doesn't truly love her, and she's probably right.

She seems to have a lot of very deep-rooted issues with money, so equating money and love would not be surprising.

She has also said that she doesn’t think marrying for love is sensible.

Money and love are linked, though. Mean with money, mean with love. It's not "you must shower me with expensive gifts if you love me", but if you love someone, you share what you have, and not just in a "but I can pluck it away if I wish" way.

Most certainly you do if you plan to have children and the woman will be taking most of the hit of that.

He did say he'd agree to marriage if we decided to have children, but he's clearly unhappy about the idea. Since he's said it he never brought it up again, neither the topic of children nor marriage. Every time I talked to him about kids since then, he's entirely neutral, doesn't say anything positive or negative, kind of just listens to me and nods.

I told him it really looks to me he does not want children, but he says that doesn't seem right. He did say perhaps he only wants children a little bit, but not enough to actually commit to having one. I think it's possible my partner wants children, just not with me and that's why he's having a hard time articulating it. I brought it up once and he got incredibly upset over me saying it. I think he just saw it as me trying to hurt him rather than an actual concern of mine.

He was very into the idea of kids just before I told him I need a civil partnership beforehand. He was reading parenting books, cooking more to take on the load when the baby comes, reading parenting forums. He has not done any of it since the civil partnership question.

And yes, I do know many many cases of men saying they don't want children and then hopping off to have kids and marriage with someone else. I also don't think most of them do it intentionally.

You don't get everything you want in life, unfortunately. It's not fair, but it's also nobody's fault.

He's running your clock down, OP, and he feels just fine about it because he figures you've got agency and you wouldn't stick around if you weren't happy. That whole "can't always get what you want, must be reasonable, must compromise, nothing is perfect, mustn't be selfish" stuff... it's not wrong exactly, but women do it far more than men do and it's a hiding to heartbreak when it's only you doing it, as it seems to be here.

If you really aren't that bothered about kids then you could at least pursue real love, which I don't think you've got here. At any rate, while I agree nobody wants to feel they forced someone into marriage, you can offer him the choice of commitment or you walking; that's not force, it's you deciding this situation isn't working for you and he can also decide what means most to him. Sometimes that's what it takes for a man to really understand what he would lose and what he truly wants. If he would rather let you go than commit to you, that's probably better than a life with someone who doesn't truly care. Actions speak louder than words and in my experience, men do commit when they truly love the woman. Couldn't count the number of men from my uni days who thought marriage was a trap, a waste of time, etc, then met the woman they did not want to lose...

I never said I did not want any of his assets if we were to split. I would want the safety of his assets (precisely because I would want access to them) if we had children. Since I don't own property, I want to know I won't be left homeless or having to scrape by if I end up a single mother having spent my savings in my children. Without children, I want to share finances still, because I want to plan for the future as a unit, not as individuals. I want protections in case of unforeseen circumstances like disability, I want a commitment that we will look after each other. Most of all, I want him to want it too, and if he doesn't, then it has no appeal to me.

I'm sorry, but I am not you and I don't want the same things as you do. What would seem like a perfectly happy and wonderful relationship to you, does not have to be a wonderful relationship for me.

Would you consider putting your savings towards owning part of his house so you both have a joint share of your home? You can then start saving again towards future commitments for your Mum.

Ok, it’s not a wonderful relationship for you. Are you going to end it then?

I want to share finances still, because I want to plan for the future as a unit, not as individuals.

That's the core of it. That's how it should be. That's why finances matter. As you say, it might not even be divorce or death, but disability. This is so often twisted to "gold digger, you just want jewels and sables", but it's not like that at all. You're building a life and home and maybe a family together. You are supposed to be a team. You can't do that when every decision is based on "but will it mean you might get money in the future?".

If he doesn't value the benefits of having you there, he can live without you there.

I do think he loves me, I don't doubt that at all. I don't think you have to share finances with someone if you love them, one does not beget the other.

It's just that I want to live a different live to him. I want a family unit, I want to share, I want him to share, I want to build wealth together, but I can only do that in the safety of marriage because if I do that now and he leaves me, I'll be the loosing party since I have way less capital. Financially, it's much better for me not to share at all right now.

And he would stand to lose if he agreed. Because he has way more capital than me, he's risking losing some of it in a divorce especially if children are involved. So of course he would not want that. Plus, he doesn't actually need to do any financial planing or budgeting because he has nothing to plan for, he's sorted. So, essentially, what I'm offering is no value and all risk. Of course he doesn't want it.

I don't think he thinks like that because he doesn't love me, he's just prudent same as me. I'm sure if we had similar levels of wealth we'd be very compatible of this issue.

I am going to buy my own place and move out. Grieve the relationship I thought we might have and see if we can be companions rather than life partners. Probably not, but maybe we could.

I'll see if I can shift my thinking on this, but I need my own place to do that. He'll have his place and I'll have mine like before, it was much easier then.

I have brought this up a few times and floated the idea of us buying a place together. He always sounds receptive to it, but then never brings it up or offers it or sets a timeline for it. I think his version would be that he's completely ok with the idea and I shouldn't think he doesn't want it.

But I told him I need to know if this is a possibility for us before the end of he tax year because if it's not, I don't want to lose out on the LISA bonus. He doesn't say anything concrete to that. Says his preference would be that I stay with him in his home and don't think about moving out, but he doesn't think it's his place to tell me what to do with my money.

I must also say I don't particularly like this house, it's quite dingy, and I did not chose it. I'm wary of losing my FTB benefits to buy into a property I would have not bought. And obviously he wouldn't sell it and buy a new property with me now because he'd lose a tonne of money this way.

So, essentially, I don't really have anything concrete to work with. Seems like the most prudent option is just to buy my own place and forget about trying to plan out finances together.

It's not his wealth though, it's his parents primarily.

You seem to be focusing on something he's getting for free when you should be focussing on your own financial goals

You can't lose your identity when getting into a relationship. Pointless working as a team if you're not in a place to do so

Well, maybe he loves you, but if he'd rather lose you than commit to a shared financial life, home and family together that gives you protection, you'll know what he loves more.