Would this irk you? New home plans…

[CrystalBall80]

Hello all, I’m going around and around in my head over this so I thought I’d try to get some opinions and maybe advice if anyone has been through similar.

My DP and I have been together almost 3 years, we have 3 DC between us, I have one and he has 2, all under 10 YO. I have my DS full time, he has his DC almost half the time.

We have decided to sell our respective homes and buy a home together for the five of us to live in. We do not want to compromise on the DC sharing bedrooms so we have hit the top of our budget to get a large enough home in a good area. I have worked out the sums (to the penny) and I can just about afford to own, and pay half towards this home, save a little (jointly, for emergencies / home improvements etc) and have a small amount of disposable income each month.

With interest rates (and everything else) rising, I’m growing more and more concerned about affording this big house. DP earns more than me and is not worried at all. He even proudly announced last week that he’ll be able to put over £1000 aside each month into a savings account for him and his DC. I certainly couldn’t afford to do that, even though I’ve just taken a better paid job and do evening work (all home based) on top.

This has really irked me. Because what I’m now thinking is,

1. Am I (and ultimately my DS) going to be worse off buying this house, a house I only need because my partner has two DC.
2. We had spoken about putting towards the house relative to our earnings but that seems to have gone out the window.
3. My new role is completely remote, my DP works out of home, often on location, so as well as paying for half of this expensive home, am I eventually going to be default childcare?

I love my current home and I’ve been so happy here, but I also adore (most of the time!) my DP and have always wanted a family home, I’m just now confused and wondering whether to stay put :-/

My initial thinking was to go into this completely 50/50 with all legalities water-tight via a solicitor, i.e. if one of us dies the house goes up for sale within 6 months and we take our deposits then split the equity, etc.

But this quite possibly will not leave you enough to buy another house for you and your dc. Especially if you buy now when the market is inflated.

Well said!

Frankly I'd reconsider the relationship, not just the living arrangements.

This.

Really OP, you have a home you like & can afford. Why make any change at all? Continue to date him if you want, continue to build your own career & financial security, and prioritize your son. And avoid all the blended family BS.

What actually would be the point of moving in together? I don't hear him begging you to marry him. Just licking his chops over free childcare and lower expenses.

Marriage would offer protection for OP, but he certainly doesn't seem to be suggesting it.

Don't gamble on ever seeing a penny of his family money. You need to focus on your own income and career, and how to advance them. Distracting yourself now with this convoluted living arrangement scheme is not a good use of your mental energy!

Even if he agrees to pay more -- what if he fails to do so once you are trapped? You are placing yourself and your child at his mercy, and for what?

@CrystalBall80, how did he treat his ex financially? This might be an indicative as to how he will behave with you in the event of separation.

I hope everything does work out OK for you but making a financial commitment is often a trigger for poor behaviour to start. Consider an exit plan..would you be able to afford to buy another place? Incurring selling & buying fees again, if needed.

Thanks all - I want to air all these thoughts this evening to DP. I have already called him to say I don't believe I can afford the big house, and I know he has his heart set on it (and I do love it), and we're going to let a lot of people down, but I just can't move forwards with it. A few people have mentioned the financial security that being married would bring when we/before we buy a house together. DP has not been against marriage, but I truly believe if I wasn't bothered then he wouldn't give it a second thought - I guess what I'm asking, and this might sound quite naive, but how can I explain to him why marriage would bring the financial security that I/we/ the DC need - he's always been in the 'it's only a piece of paper' camp.

Also, I have no interest in his parents' money, I just meant his recent statements re. separate finances could indicate that we'd both be in for a long road of financial issues as we're on different pages.

listen to your gut op.
none of this is sounding great, although i appreciate we’re only getting told the problematic bits. But so far.. you have to justify your finances to him and point out your disadvantage, he doesn’t sound like he prioritises your welfare /finances here. It is skewed towards his benefit.

he has a high conflict ex( allegedly - or she’s having to fight tooth and nail for her dc?)

you are dragging your feet over it all suggesting your gut instinct is screaming no .

When I moved in with now dh back in the day I went from no kids to a dsc and a house that anyone sensible was telling me to avoid like the plague. The difference was dh did not need reminding to prioritise my needs where needed. He made sure I was protected from the house negative equity and we were on the same page over marriage and kids. So we’ve (and I ) have been fine. I didn’t have to fight for any of this and this is what’s concerning for your situation. You are having to fight for what you and ds need. You haven’t even moved in yet. Imagine what it’s going to be like then getting your self heard?

This. And yea you should be analysing every angle. Those who rush into playing happy families second time around leave chaos and trauma for the children to deal with.

Well yes it is a piece of paper, a legally binding piece of paper! It means that upon separation, both parties needs (housing, financial) have to be met. That the cumulative assets of the partnership are fairly apportioned. Without it, what's his is his and what's yours is yours. In situations where you're proving childcare to support his career, living frugally & allowing him to build savings etc then without marriage you are very disadvantaged.
Plus inheritance tax and many other financial differences.

he's always been in the 'it's only a piece of paper' camp.

A £50 note is also a price of paper. As are house deeds, insurance policies, employment contracts, passports.

Lots of very important pieces of paper out there.

Let’s be honest, doesn’t sound much like a team let alone a relationship. He is only looking after his own, sounds like a spineless man who is in it for himself.

Protect yourself and your kids. Tell him to go take a walk of a pier.

It's funny how it's only a bit of paper to the side in the relationship that would come out of a split better off without it....

I am not clear on what assets she is bringing that will better his life and his kids lives financially? Why is it his duty to better her life and her kids lives financially?

That shouldn't be the goal. They need a solution that protects both of them but they are dating and trying out living together with two sets of kids - no one has a responsibility to better the other ones lives. I think the idea that it is a man's duty to financially care for women and children needs to be done away with. He isn't a horrible person for not giving her access to all his assets. That isn't the needed compromise here. Single parents should protect themselves and their kids.

Personally buying a house when the two families have never lived together is a huge gamble in itself. I would never combine finances at this point. There is no way to know how it will go and a shared mortgage with unequal incomes is a recipe for disaster. I know many disagree but I don't think it is the higher earner's duty to pay expenses for the lower earner in a dating relationship or to ensure their financial comfort.

I am glad they are talking more as they are clearly not on the same page. Both will end up resentful if they move forward with the current set up and expectations.

Bingo!

The "only a piece of paper" quip is so juvenile and uninformed.

She’ll be paying 50% for a house where only 2/5 of the occupants are on “her” side, and undoubtedly picking up on the childcare her DP’s parents are currently helping him out with. What will he be able to offer her in return if he can’t look after his own kids without help, let alone OPs?

OP are you claiming any benefits or financial support that you’d also lose by moving in together?

Assuming she is a joint owner of the home, she would be entitled to 50% of the equity, not 2/5ths. And it isn't really 2/5ths because her child is there 100% of the time, so 50% of the time 2/3 of the occupants are on 'her' side and 50% of the time 2/5ths are on 'her' side (using your language). This equals out to 50/50.

And if she doesn't want to do childcare, she doesn't need to. Her boyfriend and his parents can continue to do it. I think the expectation that he will contribute financial security and comfort and she will contribute childcare will make them both resentful.

Glad you’re having a talk OP. I suggest that as well as discussing the financial side, you also raise your childcare concern.

Best to analyse every potential situation and see if you’ve considered it and are aligned, even worst case scenarios. Eg:

Hss he thought about how he may feel about living with someone else’s child 100% of the time, particularly as he’ll only be living with his own 50% of the time.

What will happen if he dies, will he want you to sell the house to raise money for his DC to be looked after?

What do you want to happen should you die - would you want him to raise your child?

I was living with DP and his DD was over 50% of the time when her mother died. DD moved in with us. It worked because we’d been clear about our expectations and DP didn’t expect me to do the school pickups DSD’s mother did. He paid for childcare.

@Midlifemusings the OP says that her DP will be able to save £1000 per month after moving in with her (which he can't do at the moment) while she won't be able to save anything. That's the financial discrepancy here.

Absolutely, which is why I don't think they should buy this house and move in together. I just disagree that the answer is to buy the house, move in together, and his savings should go towards ensuring the financial comfort of OP and her child and in return she will look after his kids. I think that is a recipe for resentment and disaster.

I am not clear on what assets she is bringing that will better his life and his kids lives financially? Why is it his duty to better her life and her kids lives financially?
Her assets would be her time in childcare (almost inevitable as he will be away working) and her ability to save, as she will be spending that money purchasing and running a house bigger than she needs or can comfortably afford.
So he gets to feather his nest at OPs expense. It's not the mans duty to better her life financially, but at the very least he should see it as his duty to make sure she's not worse off by joining finances with him.

Also, the mans childrens bedrooms are in the house and costing money whether the children are in them or not. It's daft to start talking about the house itself in terms of them only being there 50% of the time when the cost of their accomodation will be there 100% of the time.
Their personal costs, food, clothes, hobbies, treats are different.

Assuming she is a joint owner of the home, she would be entitled to 50% of the equity, not 2/5ths. And it isn't really 2/5ths because her child is there 100% of the time, so 50% of the time 2/3 of the occupants are on 'her' side and 50% of the time 2/5ths are on 'her' side (using your language). This equals out to 50/50.

Firstly, it doesn't matter if he's a children are only there 50% of the time when they are the driver to needing a bigger house.

Regardless of how often they are there, the OP is still paying increased monthly mortgage payments, plus 50% of the bills on a larger property.

The saving of them not being there half the time is actually quite small in proportion to the uplift of buying and maintaining the larger home.

Which is again why this works in her partners favour.

It's perfectly acceptable for him to want to want everything 50/50 but I do question the person who wants to do this to the point that their supposedly loved partner has to work two jobs and is maxing out her income (at a time of rising costs) whilst they expect to save £1k per month.

The fact is the OP would be a fool to agree to this and it's perfectly acceptable (again) for her to say no to this set up.

If he is so keen to move in together then he is presumably welcome to suggest a more equitable proposal that leaves them both with the same disposal income and degree of financial risk.

The fact marriage is a bit of paper is also a red flag and I'd never buy a home with a DP rather than a DH.

@Midlifemusings OP will be having to fork out for 50% of a 4 bed house instead of 50% a 3 bed house - her DSCs being there only 50% of the time doesn’t make that any cheaper. And there’s nothing to say a 4 bed house will increase in equity proportionally more than a 3 bed house would, that’s if it goes up at all.

Having said all that I do agree with you that his savings shouldn’t go towards ensuring the financial comfort of OP and her child, but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t financially contribute a little more than she would.

And while in theory if she doesn't want to do childcare then she doesn't need to, can you imagine if she turns round to her DSC and said sorry kids you need to go round to your GPs even though I’m home with your step sibling otherwise it wouldn’t be a fair division of time and resources between me and your dad? Like you say, a recipe for resentment and disaster.

Their personal costs, food, clothes, hobbies, treats are different.
But these will be concentrated in the days that they are there. The best meals, clothes and treats will be held back for 'their' days, they won't be eating yesterday's leftovers or running around in old clothes because nothing special is going on.

That’s a big assumption. We don’t know that. You may say you’ve seen it happen a lot on here, but that is because mostly the people posting here are doing so about problems. Many of us step-parents make it work without being mugs or our own DC being “second class”. But that’s why I suggested the OP talk through all such scenarios with her DP before moving in together.

Hobbies eg sports clubs are equally likely to be on the mum’s time.