How do you spilt the bills with your OH?

tara747

hayley11 wrote: »

But would you rather she paid the same as you and then had hardly any money for the month whereas you had lots? Hopefully in the new year OH is going to get a new job and will be earning twice as much as me but he's still going to get the same amount of "spends" as I am. We're a couple and he would hate for me to be skint all month while he was living it up!

It's odd that you're resentful towards her though, surely happiness is more important than money?

Also I don't agree that women spend more than men, my OH loves computer games at £40 a pop, he plays football twice a week, likes playing poker, likes renting DVD's etc. Whereas I don't really have any regular outgoings like that. All i'd get is my hair done probably once every 6 weeks at about £50 a go. And buy the occassionally item of clothing or something.

OK, I should clarify - he does earn a pretty good salary, it's not like he's on £15K and I'm on £50K! In that case I would certainly offer to spilt bills proportionally to our income. So he has plenty of disposable income for himself, perhaps not as much as me but we are only talking £4K difference in income here. And I do spend far more on grooming, whereas he probably buys clothes once a year max. He doesn't really have expensive habits either.

Anyway, just thought I should clear that one up. Does that change your view?

Any

tara747 wrote: »

OK, I should clarify - he does earn a pretty good salary, it's not like he's on £15K and I'm on £50K! In that case I would certainly offer to spilt bills proportionally to our income. So he has plenty of disposable income for himself, perhaps not as much as me but we are only talking £4K difference in income here. And I do spend far more on grooming, whereas he probably buys clothes once a year max. He doesn't really have expensive habits either.

Anyway, just thought I should clear that one up. Does that change your view?

At least yours buys his clothes - I have to go shopping for my husband's clothes, otherwise he would walk around in a clothes from last century with holes in it:rotfl:

feelinggood_2

We have seperate accounts. I get IB and DLA into my account, OHs wages go into his. He pays all the bills, food and things. Any expensive items come out of his account. He gives me a small amount of 'spends' every month.

tara747

Any wrote: »

At least yours buys his clothes - I have to go shopping for my husband's clothes, otherwise he would walk around in a clothes from last century with holes in it:rotfl:

:rotfl::rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Idiophreak

Any wrote: »

At least yours buys his clothes - I have to go shopping for my husband's clothes, otherwise he would walk around in a clothes from last century with holes in it:rotfl:

...but who has to pay for them?

tara747

Idiophreak wrote: »

Have to say, this rings pretty true with me.

GF and I have been discussing lately how we'll handle the finances when we move in..have decided that we'll get a joint account for *everything* we both use, then just have whatever's left each to spend on ourselves. Thing is, I earn about 50% more than she does, so she wants a 60/40 split in contribution to the joint account.

On the one hand, it makes sense, seeing as I earn more, blah blah blah.

On the other hand, it's not luck I earn more...I worked hard to get where I am, I do a job that I don't particularly enjoy (don't get me wrong, it's OK). The OH, meanwhile, does a job she really enjoys, but gets paid less for. There's a part of me that really resents the fact I'm not going to be much better off than her at the end of the day, despite my deliberate pursuit of a profitable career.

I guess the reason I wanted money in the first place was so that I could afford to provide for her etc etc, but it still smarts somehow...

I can understand your resentment - I might feel the same if that were me. If OH were doing an 'interesting but poorly paid' job, despite being able and qualified for something better paid but 'a bit boring' (while I was doing a 'boring' job myself to earn more) it would be difficult to take. But then you do say she works twice the hours, it doesn't sound as if she is p**sing around in some arty farty non-job. Does she have the qualifications/experience to work in a job/profession where she would earn more?

I suppose the 'what's mine is mine' attitude is easier to have while you're childless. How would you feel if you had a baby and she wanted to take a year or two off to bring it up? I don't have children, but I'd like to think that I could do this. My savings would hopefully help us through this time, but I would hope that OH would agree to support us. I think that if you start planning a family, things change financially.

It seems that the people who are most reluctant to merge their finances are:

1. Those who met their OH later than their early 20s (so have had everything their own way for longer)
2. Childless
3. Those with debts (so as not to affect the OH's credit rating)

Those who are keen to do so are:

1. Those who married young (less time to develop indepedence/stubborn streak)
2. Those with children (probably resigned to having less or no disposable income!)

Is this accurate enough???

I must say, the responses to this thread are fascinating!

tara747

p.s. if I ever did earn a LOT more than my OH, I would definitely insist on contributing more %-wise to the bills. The £4K difference in our salaries at present does not make this worthwhile. But if we ever buy a house, I reckon I will be happy to put in more than him deposit-wise, simply because I have more savings.

Catwoman1975

tara747 wrote: »

I can understand your resentment - I might feel the same if that were me. But I suppose this is an easier attitude to have while you're childless. How would you feel if you had a baby and she wanted to take a year or two off to bring it up? I don't have children, but I'd like to think that I could do this. My savings would hopefully help us through this time, but I would hope that OH would agree to support us. I think that if you start planning a family, things change financially.

It seems that the people who are most reluctant to merge their finances are:

1. Those who met their OH later than etheir arly 20s (so have had everything their own way for longer)
2. Childless
3. Those with debts (so as not to affect the OH's credit rating)

Those who are keen to do so are:

1. Those who married young (less time to develop indepedence/stubborn streak)
2. Those with children (probably resigned to having less or no disposable income!)

Is this accurate enough???

I must say, the responses to this thread are fascinating!

This rings very true for me. DH and I were 17 when we met and have always have one pot for everything. What's mine is his and all that! Up until a few years ago we have very little disposable income and I was a SAHM. I don't think that it ever crosses his mind that he earns 7 times more than me, yet only has the same amount to spend as me. In fact I probably spend more than him as I go out more. I am very sensible with money and would not go out and spend £200 on a handbag like some of my friends, so that does help.

Any

Idiophreak wrote: »

...but who has to pay for them?

Me usually... Depends whether I have any money. If he needs something and I have no cash I tell him and he gives me cash to go and get them.:o

Any

Catwoman1975 wrote: »

I am very sensible with money and would not go out and spend £200 on a handbag like some of my friends, so that does help.

Yes, I have to say, would I be earning loads more money and my wife/husband would go out and buy Louis Vuiton handbag/Wii game for £300 while I had to ask mate at work for sandwich because of unexpected expense, I would be pretty p**ss off. And there are people like that!