Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Jennyrl
    • By Jennyrl 16th Sep 17, 2:14 PM
    • 2Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Jennyrl
    Buying a house with partner. He's paying deposit. We have 2 children.
    • #1
    • 16th Sep 17, 2:14 PM
    Buying a house with partner. He's paying deposit. We have 2 children. 16th Sep 17 at 2:14 PM
    Hi there.!

    I am desperately looking for some advice.!

    I have been with my partner for 8 years we have two children together aged 3 and 1. We are in the process of buying our first home together. Ignorantly we had not discussed ownership options until the solicitors paperwork came in.!

    As my partner is puting down the full deposit from his father's inheritence he feels he should protect this and in the event of a break up I should walk away with just my 50 % share of the equity. Therefore he favours option 3 tennants in common unequal shares.!

    I have to say I disagree with this. Our relationship has always been equal thus far. I currently work part time and look after the kids, supporting him to boost his career. I see no reason that our relationship and anything we chose to own together shouldn't be equal.

    I'm looking for the security that if feel I deserve having contriubuted thus far and plan to do so for the rest of my life. If we were married I don't think this would be an issue. Why should I be treated or have less security for my kids and I should things go wrong.!


    He thinks a good compromise would be to sign a tenancy in common unequal shares whereby he will write over 25% of the deposit to me on top of shared equity. The advice I have sought from all kinds of people in my life is that i should agree to no less than equal ownership. We are in a living and committed relationship. He has even divulged plans to propose to me in June. Something we have waited 8 years for. I don't see why I should wait another couple of years until we are married to feel secure.!

    Please please advice. We both want to go ahead with this purchase but we are struggling to agree what is right in terms of ownership. Complete loggerheads. It's such a shame as all this hurt and upset at the most exciting time of our lives is over some small possibility things go wrong some time far down the line.
Page 2
    • *max*
    • By *max* 16th Sep 17, 11:32 PM
    • 2,816 Posts
    • 13,215 Thanks
    *max*
    Ouch ouch ouch - this has Trust Issues stamped all over it. Not the financial sort either, but the "can I really let the person do this to me" ones.

    I'm presuming you were thinking of saying yes in two years? Well, these things take time to plan, so propose to him this weekend. And have the prenup ready sorted, saying that on matrimony, the tenants in common percentage is shifted to 50/50.

    If he's happy with that, you can relax into the interim arrangements, no? Both of you want certainty in a very uncertain process, just right now he has the assets. Nudge the playing field a bit - after all, you've come this far together and it might cheer up Dad to think of son settling down & it shortly being all paperworked in a way he's familiar with.
    Originally posted by DigForVictory
    This just screams "Let's get married now so I'm sure to get half of your money if things go wrong". Sorry but it does.

    PS: it won't be "cheering up dad" anyway. He's dead. :/
    Last edited by *max*; 16-09-2017 at 11:36 PM.
    • Kynthia
    • By Kynthia 17th Sep 17, 12:25 AM
    • 5,021 Posts
    • 7,000 Thanks
    Kynthia
    If you didn't have children then I'd agree with him. You aren't married and therefore you can protect your assets and acknowledge relationships fail.

    However you have children together and hace made a family. He has been very happy for you to make sacrifices for the family by working part time and therefore earning less money and potentially hampering your future career and earning potential. However when it comes to him showing he's fully committed by investing more than half the money in the family home he doesn't want to. This shows he doesn't value your contributions and only values financial ones. I hate to say it but this is a big reason why marriage before children is better as then the whole issue of non-financial contributions to the relationship and personal sacrifices are already valued and both parties are protected. Now that you have children and he is treating you this way you are at a disadvantage as you can't make him treat you as if married and even if you leave him you won't get a fair financial split and there will be an emotional fall out.

    So unless you can get him to see your contributions and sacrifices and change his mind you either agree to an uneven split knowing marriage will change that in the future (there's no guarantee he will propose), split up as now you know he's not prepared to act as if you are a fully invested family unit you now feel differently about him, or pull out of the purchase until you are married (which could result in a split also). I hope you resolve it but I can understand your hurt and disappointment in him.
    Don't listen to me, I'm no expert!
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 17th Sep 17, 1:20 AM
    • 953 Posts
    • 989 Thanks
    badmemory
    After 8 years and 2 children he is still not prepared to make a commitment. Sounds like a really nice guy! I am prepared to bet he doesn't have a will written in your favour either. Any life insurance to protect his kids future? If you go ahead with the house purchase make sure you have a will and that your share is left to your children not to him.
    • Spendless
    • By Spendless 17th Sep 17, 3:29 AM
    • 19,636 Posts
    • 31,718 Thanks
    Spendless
    Scenario B would be a moot point anyway, if they have been married that whole time. His deposit would be part of the pot.
    Originally posted by *max*
    Indeed, which is why I'm wondering why it is such a sticking point at the minute.
    • FBaby
    • By FBaby 17th Sep 17, 6:40 AM
    • 16,088 Posts
    • 39,963 Thanks
    FBaby
    Why have you both waited 8 years to marry and he is only planning to propose next year? Do you mean YOU have been waiting all this time? It doesn't make much sense.

    I think there is more to it all than what has been shared. If you marry, considering how long you've been together (I assume living together for most of the 8 years) and you divorce and therefore sell the house, you could fight for 50/50 anyway, if not getting the 50% of the deposit, getting the equivalent in another way.

    So it makes you wonder whether he feels the need to protect that deposit because he sees it as his father's money rather than his. I can understand that. If say your relationship has ups and downs, and he doesn't feel totally secure in what you might do, he might be prepared to risk his investment for the sake of committing to you, but he might feel oblige to protect his father's money.

    Of course, even if you do 50/50 but as tenants in common, he could opt to write a will to leave an element of his 50% to a family member rather than you.
    • Happier Me
    • By Happier Me 17th Sep 17, 7:23 PM
    • 376 Posts
    • 815 Thanks
    Happier Me
    I have potentially two large inheritances coming my way at some point in the (hopefully) very distant future, which I will share with my husband. He's put up with me for 22 years after all, married 16 of them, two children together and we started out with nothing. My husband is unlikely to inherit anything. It is absolutely right to share in this scenario and I wouldn't have it any other way. But he will benefit from this money because of his association with me... if I were to die first, these inheritances would bypass my husband and benefit our kids.

    But if we were to separate for whatever reason I would be very protective of my financial assets in a future relationship and that of any inheritance I receive. I see this as a sensible thing to do. I also intend to be one of those horrible MIL's who will help my children financially but will do whatever it takes to protect that financial help from a future relationship breakdown. We have both worked very hard, and still do, for our money I want to see this go to... and remain with... my children. I can see and separate the emotional aspect of this situation from the practical.

    If you had inherited this lump sum would you genuinely not want to protect this, in the unlikely event the relationship ends?
    • Judi
    • By Judi 18th Sep 17, 8:44 AM
    • 15,310 Posts
    • 62,884 Thanks
    Judi
    I look at it as what is mine is his, what is his is mine but if we split up i agree with this.

    if we were to separate for whatever reason I would be very protective of my financial assets in a future relationship and that of any inheritance I receive. I see this as a sensible thing to do.
    'Holy crap on a cracker!'
    • pollypenny
    • By pollypenny 18th Sep 17, 9:08 AM
    • 22,935 Posts
    • 59,262 Thanks
    pollypenny
    If I was the OP I'd be looking for a full time job asap and ensuring my own future.

    The guy sounds very half-hearted about commitment in spite of their two children, her support of his career and putting her own career on hold.
    Member #14 of SKI-ers club

    Words, words, they're all we have to go by!.

    (Pity they are mangled by this autocorrect!)
    • Mojisola
    • By Mojisola 18th Sep 17, 9:20 AM
    • 28,545 Posts
    • 72,696 Thanks
    Mojisola
    The guy sounds very half-hearted about commitment in spite of their two children, her support of his career and putting her own career on hold.
    Originally posted by pollypenny
    Or he could have agreed to the pressure of being the main wage-earner because the OP didn't want to go back to work full-time but is now feeling that he'd prefer to ringfence his inheritance.

    We don't know how the present situation came about.
    • maman
    • By maman 18th Sep 17, 9:34 AM
    • 17,000 Posts
    • 101,651 Thanks
    maman
    How much are we talking here? If it's 10% deposit it probably doesn't matter. If it's 75% deposit it's probably more of an issue.
    Originally posted by JReacher1

    I'd say it matters a lot however much it is. This couple have been together 8 years and for the first 5 presumably both worked but haven't saved enough for a deposit in all that time. This sounds like an opportunity he wouldn't have had without his father. I can see why he sees it as a personal gift to him from his dad.

    Or he could have agreed to the pressure of being the main wage-earner because the OP didn't want to go back to work full-time but is now feeling that he'd prefer to ringfence his inheritance.

    We don't know how the present situation came about.
    Originally posted by Mojisola

    So pleased you put an alternative point of view mojisola. I've come across a number of women who make a lifestyle choice of staying at home with children. It's the easy option IMO.


    I have great sympathy with men as the financial odds are stacked against them. If this couple marry and the relationship doesn't last then he stands to lose close contact with his children, his home, his inheritance and a big chunk of his wages for the next 17 years+. I don't blame him trying to protect this last gift from his father.
    • hazyjo
    • By hazyjo 18th Sep 17, 10:05 AM
    • 9,801 Posts
    • 12,423 Thanks
    hazyjo

    I have great sympathy with men as the financial odds are stacked against them. If this couple marry and the relationship doesn't last then he stands to lose close contact with his children, his home, his inheritance and a big chunk of his wages for the next 17 years+. I don't blame him trying to protect this last gift from his father.
    Originally posted by maman
    Totally agree. I'd want to protect it in his shoes too.


    I've known several blokes who have ended up barely able to afford to rent a small flat, let alone buy, when their marriages have ended as they have to pay a lot to their exes who look after the kids and get to stay in the family home (would also count as a second home meaning they'd be clobbered with the higher stamp duty). Not begrudging what the wife gets, but it doesn't usually leave the husband with much. If he can have that chunk of money, however big, to use as a deposit or whatever, I don't blame him.
    2017 wins: Opera tickets; film preview; lipstick; Ideal Home Show tickets + afternoon tea & bottle of Champagne; 2 cases of NKD; notebook; bath rack; books; film Premiere; Broadchurch DVDs; lipbalms; hamper (food/wine/Echo Dot/Jo Malone goodies); Avon lippies; cowhide rug; Windsor luxury break, foundation; Flybe flight
    • pollypenny
    • By pollypenny 18th Sep 17, 10:13 AM
    • 22,935 Posts
    • 59,262 Thanks
    pollypenny
    Or he could have agreed to the pressure of being the main wage-earner because the OP didn't want to go back to work full-time but is now feeling that he'd prefer to ringfence his inheritance.

    We don't know how the present situation came about.
    Originally posted by Mojisola


    Indeed, that could have been the agreement. However, women need to protect their futures, too.
    Member #14 of SKI-ers club

    Words, words, they're all we have to go by!.

    (Pity they are mangled by this autocorrect!)
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 18th Sep 17, 10:54 AM
    • 15,118 Posts
    • 14,764 Thanks
    Guest101
    If it was money from the relationship - e.g. saved up through wage - I'd say 50/50


    But as it's inheritance he should be morally free to do with it as he wishes.


    Perhaps just don't buy yet?
    • Jenniefour
    • By Jenniefour 18th Sep 17, 11:13 AM
    • 1,224 Posts
    • 1,251 Thanks
    Jenniefour
    Indeed, that could have been the agreement. However, women need to protect their futures, too.
    Originally posted by pollypenny
    I would rephrase that - both parents need to protect the future of their children, and getting married is possibly the most effective legal way of doing that. OP and her partner, for whatever reasons, have chosen not to get married before having their children and, surely, both of them know the possible implications of this, and both of them have made willing and unforced decisions about how to look after their family in whatever way suited them.

    I'm having difficulty figuring out why some folks seem to think OP should end this relationship and/or think that her partner is not committed to their future together. He has chosen to use his inheritance as a lever to buy the family a property which, presumably, would otherwise have not been a possibility. Everyone is going to benefit, including OP, even if their relationship ended because he has chosen/agreed to be the bigger earner, will be making the bigger contribution towards the mortgage and is offering to give her 25% of the deposit. So he is making a willing decision to provide some protection for OP as well in the future should their relationship end, and acknowledging OP's valuable contribution to their family set-up. He could, of course, have simply stuffed the money into a bank account and kept it there (or spent it on himself) and he would have been entitled to do that - but he hasn't.
    Last edited by Jenniefour; 18-09-2017 at 11:32 AM.
    • catkins
    • By catkins 18th Sep 17, 1:49 PM
    • 5,466 Posts
    • 11,552 Thanks
    catkins
    If it was money from the relationship - e.g. saved up through wage - I'd say 50/50


    But as it's inheritance he should be morally free to do with it as he wishes.


    Perhaps just don't buy yet?
    Originally posted by Guest101
    Would you think this if they were married? What if they had been together for 20 years?

    I ask because my DH inherited quite a large sum of money last year and it enabled us to buy a house outright (we were renting). If we were to split up we would divide the proceeds of the house sale 50/50.

    Admittedly we have been married over 30 years and it pretty unlikely we will split up but you never know.

    We have always shared all money that comes into the house and it has always been our money.
    The world is over 4 billion years old and yet you somehow managed to exist at the same time as David Bowie
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 18th Sep 17, 2:21 PM
    • 15,118 Posts
    • 14,764 Thanks
    Guest101
    Would you think this if they were married? - obviously not, marriage is a contract and all bets are off. What if they had been together for 20 years? - yes I would. The difference between 8 years and 20 years is minimal in terms of strength of relationship.

    I ask because my DH inherited quite a large sum of money last year and it enabled us to buy a house outright (we were renting). If we were to split up we would divide the proceeds of the house sale 50/50. - You're married

    Admittedly we have been married over 30 years and it pretty unlikely we will split up but you never know. - so the law is quite clear on this.

    We have always shared all money that comes into the house and it has always been our money.
    Originally posted by catkins
    That's fine, im happy for you.
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 18th Sep 17, 2:55 PM
    • 1,900 Posts
    • 5,238 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel

    Edit: I have no idea if such a thing is even possible, but is there a way to make it legally enforceable to put the OP's "half" in the children's name, in the form of a trust (I know nothing about those, so firing in the dark here!), should they separate? That way the partner would know for certain that his inheritance would go to his children, and not his potential ex-wife to do with as she pleases? That might reassure him. It would me.
    Originally posted by *max*
    If they did that, and then they did split up or the father died, then I think that half of the equity would be untouchable until the children were adults and would leave the OP unable to use that money to put another roof over their heads.
    • maman
    • By maman 18th Sep 17, 3:18 PM
    • 17,000 Posts
    • 101,651 Thanks
    maman
    Would you think this if they were married? What if they had been together for 20 years?

    I ask because my DH inherited quite a large sum of money last year and it enabled us to buy a house outright (we were renting). If we were to split up we would divide the proceeds of the house sale 50/50.

    Admittedly we have been married over 30 years and it pretty unlikely we will split up but you never know.

    We have always shared all money that comes into the house and it has always been our money.
    Originally posted by catkins

    I don't think it's so much about the likelihood of you splitting up as what you've brought to the relationship over the past 30 years. Obviously as you are married then different rules apply but in this case the OP isn't married and hasn't managed to save her 'half' of a deposit so, one assumes they've spent any money contributed (even assuming that was broadly equal over the years) on services and consumables. The money in question is a gift directly from father to son.


    I accept that some couples choose to see everything that comes in as 'our' money but there have been many threads that show this isn't a universally held view. Sadly many people have learned the hard way that it's often better to stay in control of your own finances and keep a distinction between his/hers/ours.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

5,070Posts Today

8,568Users online

Martin's Twitter