Stepkids rooms' question

[cantstopstressing]

DP and I have been together for nearly a decide. He and his two kids, now agreed 16 and 14. moved in with us about 4 years ago. I live with my two DSs, 11 and 9, in my house which I owned with my ex before I met DP. DSCs moved in, taking a room each, one of which was my office. DP earns a lot less than me and contributes only a couple of £100 each month in rent (which is £2,700 in total). DSCs spend 50% of their time with us and 50% with their mum and have a room each at both houses.

My question is, given that DSD is 17 this year, how long is it reasonable to have to provide her with her own room, especially given that she has her own room at her mum's. I work from home a lot and really need my office back. I am wondering for how long the 50/50 split is tenable once kids are past 16 and have their own lives. Obviously DP will want her to keep a room for as long as possible but, given that it's my job that pays 90% of the mortgage, I really need to take back my office. Also, in London where space/rooms are a premium, it seems really excessive to have a room in both houses (mum and dad) which are only used 50 of the time. Even if I don't use the room as an office, I would like to consider using it for an au-pair for my older kids.

DSC are children.
Even at 28 they will be the children of their father.
The unconditional part of the parent child relationship is missing here. I don't deny that there may be issues with the DP but put yourself into the shoes of one of the step children......

Newname so are we now saying that at 28 it would be unreasonable not to have a bedroom reserved for each child, provided by OP?

I think 28 is very different to early teens. Even children in care theoretically are meant to be looked after until early 20s now. (I know it doesn't happen but the research is there to explain why it's a need).
As lots of people have said this is a much wider issue than the room. This is about not being wanted. That's quite a burden to grow up with and will likely shape that young woman's life outlook, her mental well-being, her relationships.
Much kinder to draw a line under the relationship and let the partner sort out his relationship with his DC, even if that means his children live with their mum. That way the situation is a lot clearer and easier for everyone to understand.

It feels like the burden of the non relationship has been placed at ops door.
Surely sometimes these things don't work out, sometimes sc won't accept a new family, step parents dont make the effort or parents don't work at the new family.

Lots of possible reasons. But yes if it's not working by now, doubtful things will change.

As lots of people have said this is a much wider issue than the room. This is about not being wanted. That's quite a burden to grow up with and will likely shape that young woman's life outlook, her mental well-being, her relationships.
Yes, but why is this OP's doing. All relationships are reciprocal & OP's dp has fueled OP's weariness & frustration at this situation by moving in to her house, paying minimum outgoings & getting rooms for his dc that he's not actually contributing to! He's the one to 'blame' in all this imo.
Many on here have said that lower earning women do this all the time & that may be so. But, generally speaking a lower income woman would be assisting with childcare & doing most of the housework (which is a massive contribution) - not because she's lower income but because that's what's expected of women in a family & most women do this by default - men don't (generally speaking) & it would seem that OP's dp definitely doesn't. Ergo - he's making no contribution to the running of this 'family' (& nor do his dc so it seems) so it's no wonder Op isn't feeling joyously blended!
Also - you can be sure if a man needed his office space back, especially if he were the higher earner & the family were depending on his income he would be facilitated & the kids who didn't live there ft would be told to get on with it.

I dont disagree with you Magda, but surely better for the OP to name her feelings rather than try and patch something together to maintain current status quo.

Why doesn’t she share with her brother and you put a room divider in. They can share but it’s not recommended. But if they aren’t there all the time then it should be fine? I share with my siblings when I would go and see my dad. It was only for a night or two

So, he was in a one bed flat, before he moved in with you......his kids at that point didn't come 50% of the time.....

....at what point did they change to 50% and why (and was it so he could avoid paying maintenance which means he's taking both you and his ex for a mug!)?
When they came before and it was not 50%, what were the sleeping arrangements?

Re the payments to you, yes, draw up a cohabitation agreement. If he says no because he wants payments he makes to buy himself equity then you know full well why he's living with you and it's not love!

They are obviously very happy with the living arrangements as they get a lovely big house, nice room each.

Which their dad would be unable to provide on his own.

You're carrying him financially...I don't think either gender should heavily dependent in a blended family situation.

If he breaks up with you because of it, he'll find himself in a much smaller place with the DC unlikely to sleep over anymore.

If I was one of his kids, I wouldn't feel my dad was a decent role model, if he had to depend on his DP/GF to provide suitable accommodation for me.

It sounds like you've had enough of this relationship. I don't blame you tbh.

But, generally speaking a lower income woman would be assisting with childcare & doing most of the housework (which is a massive contribution)
And who says this man doesn't? There is also a difference between a lower income due to working PT hours and lower income still working FT.

The issue is that what should have been discussed when moving together wasn't, and that usually happens when it suits, at the time both parties. The question is if he had a flat before, what has he done with the equity from it?

As for the suggestion of him being nothing but a lodger, how incredibly insulting. So insulting that even the law doesn't recognize legally a partner being a lodger.

It's also really sad to consider that the only benefit a party brings into a family is money, followed by childcare and housework. There is so much more in a relationship than this. One of my colleagues who earns very good money is in a very similar situation to OP. Her OH is self-employed around a hobby of his. She supports him and his children almost solely. One colleague once asked why she would do it as it sounded she was being used. She responded that her husband was her rock, was always there for her emotionally, made her feel good and worthy, was always there to listen to her, and had been there for her in times when things were very different and many men would have walked out. That and other reasons she wasn't going to expand on!

The fact that OP doesn't consider her household as a family says it all really, that and the fact that she thinks that if she mentions the room, it would likely lead to a break up insinuate that there is a lot more to the situation than what was shared. It doesn't sound like a healthy and fulfilling relationship.

Tell him that it is not working for you.

And then let him come up with a solution.

If you like it, good. If not, kick him to the curb.

@Dontdisturbmenow I specifically stressed that women tend to do this because they're women - it's nothing to do with being lower income, I only used that description as people are saying that lower income women live with higher earning men all the time.
And, the op said that dp doesn't assist with childcare & also mentioned that housekeeping by all three is lacking.

They both work FT, they both have two children, so why should he be doing more childcare and housework just because he happens to have a job that earns less?

As said, to me it is more about availability to do these things and therefore hours worked than the size of the income.

The issue is that for all puporses, she is indeed treating her partner of 10 years and his children as lodgers and nothing else, and it annoys her that she knows that if she makes this clear so that she can do what she wants with her house, her OH will not respond to it kindly and pick up his things and go because he clearly sees himself as a bit more worthy than a lodger.

Sounds like you're being royally screwed over. What if your partner's kids want to move in permanently? I wouldn't have much respect for a man who couldn't house his own kids.

How did it come about that he and they moved in? Was it his idea (I'm betting i wasn't yours).

I wouldn't have much respect for a man who couldn't house his own kids
Really? Do you have no respect for all those single mums who rely on HB to house their kids or does your lack of respect only applies to fathers?

If he hadn't met OP, maybe he would have had to sell his property and then wait to be rehouse by the local authority like many single parents in London have to do.

OP has a big house following divorce. For all we know, she would never have been able to afford to buy the house in the first place if it hadn't been for her ex's income at the time. Maybe OP's partner was only left with a small one bed flat because his ex wife got to keep the nice large family home.

We don't know any of it, but it's so easy to judge him because well, he is a father so how dare him not earning big money !

They both work FT, they both have two children, so why should he be doing more childcare and housework just because he happens to have a job that earns less?
That's not what I'm saying - you're missing the entire point of my post. What I'm saying is that according to OP he's not pulling ANY weight domestically - this has NOTHING to do with the fact that he's earning less than her & EVERYTHING to do with the fact that HE & his dc are the ones behaving like lodgers!!!!
If I had my kids 50/50 & I moved in with a man who was an rp there is
A) no way I wouldn't contribute to the smooth running of the house,
B) no way I'd let my kids leave dirty dishes around the place,
C) no way I'd expect my oh to give up a needed work space just so one of my older dc's could use the space 50% of the time, &
D) no way I'd not make an official financial contribution no matter what my income.
Yes op says she doesn't want this because she's worried about him having claim on the house - if you feel like that about a partner after a decade then they are obviously giving you a good reason to feel this way!

09:40dontdisturbmenow ffs where did i say anything about benefits? Renting and being in receipt of benefits is a perfectly acceptable way of housing your kids. I don't know who's ruffled your feathers but there's no need to take it out on me.

We have a setup in our home that is slightly different but relevant to this discussion I think. I earn significantly more than my DH and we both came to the marriage with mortgages.

I moved to a house big enough for all of us and it's mortgaged in my name only. DH rents his house out and has his mortgage in his name only to keep the investment.

He pays me £650 a month as his contribution to bills, utilities, council tax etc, it goes into a joint account and we pay for food and meals out from this. I pay £200 a month more than him as my earnings are higher. Spare sits there for car repairs, insurance, kids ad hoc expenses etc.

I then normally pay for holidays and any top ups to the joint account if we need to. If we need work done on this house I pay for it and if he needs work on his he pays. This way if we ever were to divorce, we'd both have maintained our own property in our name and ones equity in that. I have a large house with limited pension as I started late, he has a small house with a fabulous pension so I hope any separation would be relatively hands off in terms of negotiations.

We both feel that our input is fair based on our earnings. Your setup doesn't seem fair at all. Regardless of his income he should be contributing more for his kids being around. I know that when I lived alone my expenses were significantly less. Energy bills cheaper, less food to buy, single persons council tax discount etc. Fruit juice and toilet rolls vanish in this house at a rate of knots for a start!

@pinkyredrose, I've only responded to the point you've made and chose not to expand on. In the case of OP, she agreed to them moving in her house and for him to pay whatever he is paying for 4 years. Surely if she thought he was using her for free accommodation, she had ample occasions to tell him this didn't work for her after all.

This thread wasn't started because OP wants to get rid of them all but because she wants that room back for herself, so somehow he must be doing something that she is happy to live with him.

Dolly, very similar set-up to mine, but the big difference is that you it seems and I are married, so ultimately, it doesn't matter whose names are on the deeds of your assets, in the instance of a divorce, there will be no my or your house. You wouldn't be able to throw him out because through marriage, he can claim that it is as much his residence as yours.

In the case of OP, her OH has no rights at all and could indeed end up homeless tomorrow. This is less right than a spouse or a tenant.

OP's dp has fueled OP's weariness & frustration at this situation by moving in to her house, paying minimum outgoings & getting rooms for his dc that he's not actually contributing to!

Why is this his fault? She let him move in? She agreed to him paying minimum outgoings? She has stood by for years and, seemingly at least, not made any fuss or comment about it? Or is the OP just some kind of passive bystander in her own life?

I wouldn't have much respect for a man who couldn't house his own kids

This is pretty unpleasant. There are thousands of families out there struggling who rely on cheaper rents in social housing and/or housing benefit to keep a roof over their family's heads. A parent without the most care of their children following the breakdown of a relationship doesn't have the added support of benefits or bedroom allowances for those children. I know of several men for whom starting again has meant at least some time living in a house-share whilst they get back on their feet. For a lower earner in an expensive, getting back on your feet may well never happen financially.

Or is your suggestion that all those thousands of people out there just scroungers?

Ideally, he would move out and you could keep dating, but I doubt he’d be happy with that, so you will have to decide whether you value the relationship enough to keep living together.

I’m also really shocked at his attitude about money - what is he doing with the rest of his income? I agree that he should not have an interest in your house but it sounds like he’s really underpaying his way. I doubt two late teens are cheap to keep.

what is he doing with the rest of his income?
Maybe saving towards a deposit because he suspects OP might be about to chuck him out in the street at anytime?

If he pays more then he wants those payments to contribute to the mortgage which I don't want
He's making a right mug out of you isn't he?

He should be paying more because it's HIS job to provide for HIS children!
Instead, he's lumbering YOU with that responsibility - and essentially blackmailing you by saying if he's 'forced' to pay for his own blasted kids then he wants a financial interest in your house!

If he didn't live with you he'd HAVE to pay extra to house them....or actually, he'd probably not bother at all and just let their mother keep that responsibility.
He didn't get a bigger place for them when they were young...he just found himself a woman with means to sponge off.......and that's exactly what he's doing.

If you seriously want to stay with this 'man'....then see a solicitor on your own and go through all the responsibilities and legalities of him living with you and paying the basics for himself and his kids.

Him paying you 'rent' doesn't give him automatic financial interest in your property.

You're paying for everything and yet don't even get to enjoy your own space or use your own office to do the work which pays for all his and his kids expenses!

Seriously woman - wake up!

What @monkeymonkey2010 said

Thank you all. At least I am not insane for feeling resentful! To answer a question, DP did have his kids 50/50 before we met and was living in a one bed flat which he had moved into about 12 months before we met. They managed like that for a few years (his kids sharing 1 room when they stayed over 50% and him sleeping on the sofa) then they moved in with us in 2016. I do wish we hadn't taken that step. TBH, I was never happy about it but felt i had to put up with it as I wanted very much to live with DP. Obviously he comes as a package. The issue has always been that I came to the relationship with a lot more assets than him and I earn a lot more. I am not sure how we ever reconcile that. Part of me think that we should move somewhere else where we contribute 50/50 and both pay equally but that would mean downsizing drastically to a 2 or 3 bed which isn't fair on my kids.