Money Moral Dilemma: Should I ask partner for the money back?

PoorPennilessMe

CashBackGuru wrote: »

I agree if they are married but it doesnt say that they are. Otherwise it's only fair to pay it back.

What difference does religion make to this??? Bear in mind that 'marriage' as we know it today was created in the first place by religion. As my partner and I are not religious, we have chosen to not get married, but still to live as man and wife.

As such, what benefits one, benefits both. What negatively affects one, affects the other.

Apologies for the rant, but I do get rather tired of the Religocentric society sometimes...

As for the MMD, then if it was established from the start that you have seperate finances, then it is only fair that he pays back the money loaned to him.

However I would guess that when he is 'flush' then you recieve the benfit too? I often find with my partner that if one of us has little money then the other floats us both out. Surely thats what happens in a lasting relationship?

The only other exception would be if you do not plan to stay together for the rest of your lives, in which case you should have got agreements in writing... (And why would you be with him at all in that case?)

When unsure, get it in writing!

UrbanFox

colinlyne wrote: »

If you are in a relationship partnership ( marriage or living together), the your partner should not be expected to pay you back. You should be "in it together" and were well aware of the situation before you set up with him. This is part of the relationship and if you want your money back, then you cannot think much about your partner. Partnerships are about sharing and not "mine and yours". This is a doomed partnership and I think that you are selfish. You don't deserve a partner of any sort if consideration for "your" money is your first concern. I bet that your partner doesn't know that you have made the matter public through this forum. A very inconsiderate and devious move. You deserve to be lonely!

I'm with Tina Turner on this one - What's love got to do with it?!

Why should anyone be expected to bankroll their partner's spending just because they earn more, or have money put aside? Did they agree together that his car and education costs were priorities for the family? Or were these decisions he took alone, and would have been prepared to go into debt for, had his partner not offered to loan him the money?

Yes, she could have given him these things as gifts from her savings, but maybe she has other plans for the money - who are you or I to say she's selfish?

It sounds as if the partner still has a few lessons to learn about the finer points of money management. He needs to find ways to ensure his bills are covered during periods of unemployment; if his partner regularly has to eat into her savings to cover monthly outgoings, they're both heading for trouble.

I disagree with those who are suggesting they open a shared bank account. 'What's yours is mine' cuts both ways - and if he's not mature enough to make provision for the bad times while he has money coming in, I think she would be crazy to entangle her finances with his.

He may be a thoroughly nice person and the love of her life, but that doesn't mean she should make allowances for his lack of financial nouse. He should certainly be making repayments for the car and degree. Depending on his attitude to planning for the next financial crisis, I would probably also include his share of the household expenses in the repayment plan.

PoorPennilessMe

ianking wrote: »

I never understand why long term cohabiting couples complain about not having the same rights as married couples. They can have the same rights.. just get married in a registry office.

Simply because although a Registry office wedding has references to religion removed, it is still a religious event! Marriage was created by religion(s), so if someone chose not to be party to religion, then it would be hipocritical to get married at all!

persian_star

PoorPennilessMe wrote: »

What difference does religion make to this??? Bear in mind that 'marriage' as we know it today was created in the first place by religion. As my partner and I are not religious, we have chosen to not get married, but still to live as man and wife.

When unsure, get it in writing!

Marriage may have been 'created' by religion, but in today's society it is more likely to be seen as an institution, or a 'state' of your relationship. I have very non-religious friends who chose to get married in a registry office rather than a church, so that their marriage would recognised by the State but they would have nothing to do with religion, and no promises were made in front of God or in any way to do with religion.

It is not a religious decision to get married or not, it's just a matter of preference.

However, it is a fact that society (and the government) tends to 'see' married couples as more stable simply as it is far more difficult to divorce than just split up. And it's also true that many people see marriage as the lifetime commitment whereas 'just living together' may not seem to be that, so when considering how to address your finances it may make a difference.

And I'm not saying that unmarried couple haven't got a good response to how to percieve their money, but when you get married, 'all I have i share with you' does tend to be one of the promises, so you would assume that unmarried, there are no clear boundaries, whereas married, it's been made clear.

I would also suggest that marriage is, in some ways, just your relationship 'put in writing'

As for the original question, if this is a reletionship that the couple want to go the distance (married or not) they should be able to talk about it, of course, but I would suggest a joint savings account to be the way to go. Then the boyfriend would perhaps feel more ownership of the savings, which would in turn help him understand the consequences of his spending.

BTW, my hubby has a VERY 'separate' attitude towards money, it was all I could do to persuade him to open a joint account for bills, and although we pay off the debt together, he sees it as 'mine' as the cards are in my name. I do find this quite upsetting, but I know that in the long run that he loves me, and he may not 'get it' right now because he was always taught was his was his, but as we go through life and face big monetary decisions he'll understand (I hope!) as we go that you cannot be selfish with money in a relationship as it undermines your joint future.

PoorPennilessMe

persian_star wrote: »

It is not a religious decision to get married or not, it's just a matter of preference.

However, it is a fact that society (and the government) tends to 'see' married couples as more stable simply as it is far more difficult to divorce than just split up.

I agree completely (and feel that people are entitled to get married for whatever reason pleases them).

For myself however, it is the idea that I should partake in a religious creation in order to pander to societies view of what is a 'stable' relationship.

On a side note, the statistics for the stability of relationships when people have lived together for 5+ years compared to marriage for the same length of time suggest that co-habitation is far more stable than marriage... Just a thought!

Big_Pete

This has similarities to my own situation. Almost 4 years ago I met Karen - she had a house with a relatively low mortgage and an ok job money wise. I had a good job - no assets - huge credit card debts and a credit rating that reflected them - and an expensive divorce to get through. After 2 months we knew this was going to be long term and she basically turned my finances around. After a year I got a mortgage and bought into the house and that gave Karen her "nest egg". That was used to invest in a second house and a small business.

Going forward whatever we earn or lose we do together but the "nest egg" has to be repaid as it was hers before I arrived and it will be hers to leave to her children one day.

qmpete

I have to agree with Big Pete on this.

I too have been in this situation, where my wife had a nest egg, and I had considerable debt from before we met. My wife bailed me out, and for a long time I was unable to pay her back due to my low income. However, together we have turned things around, and I am currently repaying her every penny she used to bail me out in the first place. I should have finished paying her this back within the next year.

The point I'm trying to make is that she never asked me to pay anything back, and doesn't expect me to, but I feel the need to. I got into a pickle, and that was my fault. She helped me out of it, so I have no debt on paper, but I feel I have a debt to my wife for her assistance and commitment to me and our relationship, and until I have repaid that I will be aware that she is out of pocket due to my problems from before we met. I am also aware that she has lost out on interest on the money she gave me, so I fully intend to keep paying her for a few months after I have repaid the original 'debt', to try to make up for the lost interest.

This whole process has helped me to take ownership of my finances and learn a valuable lesson from my previous mistakes.

Although I wish I had never got into debt in the first place, in a way the whole thing has brought us closer together as a couple, and made us stronger as a result.

I wish you well in addressing this from your point of view as the 'lender'. I believe that if you are asking the question, then you already feel that your partner should be paying you back, but I know it can't be an easy subject to bring up. Perhaps you can get some comfort from that fact that my wife and I are now in our tenth year of marriage, so the whole things has been hanging over our relationship for a long time, but there is light at the end of the tunnel, and I fully believe that the experience can make you stronger, both as an individual and as a couple.

Best of luck, and I hope you can come to an arrangement that is suitable for both of you.

:beer:

slicsav

Frankly I'm shocked that after 11 years together you would be wanting 'your' nest egg replenished.
I always thought that if a couple had made the decision to have a relationship whereby they lived in the same home, shared the same food, bed, mortgage etc. any monies were/should be treated equally....unless of course you'd made an agreement up-front that you'd both signed off on.
If you're feeling like this it sounds like the relationship is pretty much over and you should be moving on. minus the nest-egg of course. That's a chance you take when 'loaning' out money.

onlineo

Well according to jobseekers etc. as you are cohabiting partners he is only entitled to contribution jobseekers and no other benefits. If you were not cohabiting partners he would be eligible for full jobseekers and council tax relief as well as housing benefits. I have been through something similar except for the fact I was paying considerably less outgoings (£250) per month and had a small next egg that covered these for my unemployment.

However I expected and got no financial support from my partner. If I had, I think it would have taken longer for me to get into work!

d716ag

lots and lots of negative comments (how you choose to run our relationship is for you+him to decide), but they are missing the point:

It seems to me that you are a saver and he is a spender and he is out spending your saving ability (it's always that way around), in the long run this will cause problems, if his work is volatile in nature then savings are required to plug the gap, savings are also good for the unforeseen circumstances etc... These savings can be joint or yours or his but either way they are required.