Cohabiting

I still don't get why someone should live for free while someone else has to pay.

The problem here is that either one will benefit from the position of the other, so the question is who does. Her as she gets him to pay towards her investment, which she would have to pay on her own if it wasn't for him leaving with her, or him because he gets cheaper rent than what he would have to pay if he wasn't with her.

So it's not a matter of how you look at it financially but you look at it emotionally, and even then there is no right or wrong but the need of both to be on the same page. Clearly they are not as she is keen on keep getting rent from him whilst he is getting tired of paying towards an investment he knows he'll get nothing out of. The issue is time now, as having been together 4 years, leaving together 12 months, it is time to decide if the dynamics remain the same, which he doesn't seem happy with, or they move on to the next stage of commitment.

Either way, I very much doubt they will remain a couple for long if nothing evolves.

Izadora wrote: »

I would've thought a fair way to look at it would be to make sure that they both benefit.

If you take half of the cost of all bills, excluding mortgage, and the rate for a room (inclusive of bills) and split the difference they both benefit.

e.g. If bills are £200 (£100 each) and to rent a room would be £400 then split the £300 difference between his share and what he'd pay elsewhere and they're both £150 a month better off.

Even sharing bills, she is better off - I know from having a lodger my bills went up a bit - e.g. gas up because we were using more hot water, electric up because we ran the washing machine more often, lost the single person discount on council tax. However, many bills unchanged - sky, phone line, tv licence, water (as I am not metered), broadband etc. Overall I reckon the bills went up by no more than 20% so on that basis sharing them with someone else would mean they cost 120% of what they did before, but I would only be paying 60% of what I used to pay. Food costs definitely go down per person if you cook together too - it's more efficient given typical package sizes, food wastage is more when you are on your own unless you are a brilliant planner (I am not).

My lodger ended up benefiting living with me versus renting a one bed flat on her own, but ultimately I was making a profit out of her - was a commercial arrangement. I wouldn't expect the same from a romantic partner. Maybe an understanding that they would use their savings from not paying rent to save up towards one day buying somewhere together... but even then if we split I doubt I would expect them to share that money.

If the OP really needs the money then maybe she should rent out the room the boyfriend has to himself to a lodger instead.

e.g. If bills are £200 (£100 each) and to rent a room would be £400 then split the £300 difference between his share and what he'd pay elsewhere and they're both £150 a month better off.

You haven't taken account the biggest saving, the growth in equity from the ownership of the property.

Comms69 wrote: »

Presumably you aren't sleeping with the owner though....

he made it clear that he sees this as a lodger arrangement (with added benefits for him) and any lodger landlord would charge you for that extra storage space!