Protecting your house from future Girlfriend

thewinkshow

to be honest its diffucult to ask such questions without coming across a bit tight or sinister, although thats not the case, i was merly asking "what if" scenerio, of course i hope it would never come to this and whoever i move in lasts.

but i will be in a postion where i will be sinking quite a bit of family given money in, so my family would not like for this to get lost of be split with someone

bit much though people saying get a prostitute and its doomed to fail becuse of my attitute.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Well, you seem a little phobic about commitment, so I thought the hourly paid alternative may be a solution?

Errata

OP - do a pre nup
Consider if any woman who moves in with you would be willing to pay all mortgage and bills if you are out of work for some considerable time
And vice versa

Coeus

Hi thewinkshow.

I understand your concerns about the issue and praise your maturity in planning this through, albeit being very early on. Assuming you originally want to retain 100% control of the assets i.e. do not agree to % split mortgage or accept funding for capital improvement purposes, there are a few actions you could take to clearly outline the situation:

1. Primarily if/when you do find a partner to move in with have the talk so both parties are clear in terms of ownership and the foreseeable future.

2. A lodging agreement is not a bad idea with a simple SO (standing order) system for rent paid directly to your bank account. Note however a tenancy agreement provides a greater amount of rights to the individual - I would avoid this.

3. Make sure to wholly pay council tax and mortgage payments from your bank account. It is very important that you do NOT pay from a joint account with said partner.


Reading through the posts you have gotten some stick for this which I would largely ignore. There is nothing wrong with:
- Hypothesising and planning about the future - most people have such thoughts and those that don't I would expect end up suffering for it if all goes bad.
- Wanting to protect your assets - it may work out, it may not, a fact of life.
- Wanting to protect your future family's assets - when it does work out I'd expect you'll want to share all this well protected wealth with your family.

rozeepozee

I don't know if this has already been answered as I don't have time to read the whole thread but it's not quite so simple as to say you are at no risk because you aren't married.

It's right there is no such thing as a common law wife or husband and consequently, if you are unmarried she shouldn't have a claim on your property unless you put her name on the deeds, or she contributes towards the mortgage or materially improves the house (perhaps paying for or installing a kitchen or extension, say). If this happens, she can claim she has an "equitable interest" in the property and entitled to a share of it were you to split up. She wouldn't be entitled to anything simply because you were cohabiting because of the length of time she lived with you or because she kept the house for you while you went out to work.

There's been talk of the law being changed for years because this situation can sometimes be very unfair. As already stated, the situation changes significantly if you have children or if you marry.

I used to be a divorce lawyer and for what it's worth think it's sensible to know your rights before you make major decisions in your life. Dewy eyed romance figures for very little at the point most couples decide to split up....

amcluesent

TBH gold-diggers will trap you by getting preggers, then claim a 'cold remedy' stopped the Pill working.

As well as protecting financial assets, always use a condom.

Also, best discretely record any pillow-talk about how you'll share a future together and qualify any 'sharing' to exclude individually held assets.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Coeus wrote: »

Hi thewinkshow.

I understand your concerns about the issue and praise your maturity in planning this through, albeit being very early on. Assuming you originally want to retain 100% control of the assets i.e. do not agree to % split mortgage or accept funding for capital improvement purposes, there are a few actions you could take to clearly outline the situation:

1. Primarily if/when you do find a partner to move in with have the talk so both parties are clear in terms of ownership and the foreseeable future.

2. A lodging agreement is not a bad idea with a simple SO (standing order) system for rent paid directly to your bank account. Note however a tenancy agreement provides a greater amount of rights to the individual - I would avoid this.

3. Make sure to wholly pay council tax and mortgage payments from your bank account. It is very important that you do NOT pay from a joint account with said partner.


Reading through the posts you have gotten some stick for this which I would largely ignore. There is nothing wrong with:
- Hypothesising and planning about the future - most people have such thoughts and those that don't I would expect end up suffering for it if all goes bad.
- Wanting to protect your assets - it may work out, it may not, a fact of life.
- Wanting to protect your future family's assets - when it does work out I'd expect you'll want to share all this well protected wealth with your family.

So, you suggest leaving a financial paper-trail from her bank account to his and on to the mortgage? And you see that as protection how?

Coeus

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

So, you suggest leaving a financial paper-trail from her bank account to his and on to the mortgage? And you see that as protection how?

In the same way that almost every rental agreement between two individuals, co-habiting or not, leaves a paper trail. This is the entirety of the point which you seem to have missed.

The paper trail clearly shows a lodgement agreement with RENT being paid into his bank account from which what he does with is not the court's concern. If you are to thoroughly read any point I have made in this post - this is the MOST IMPORTANT.

He can then show to the court that he is (i) entirely by name on the mortgage agreement and (ii) paying off the mortgage entirely by himself.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Coeus wrote: »

In the same way that almost every rental agreement between two individuals, co-habiting or not, leaves a paper trail. This is the entirety of the point which you seem to have missed.

The paper trail clearly shows a lodgement agreement with RENT being paid into his bank account from which what he does with is not the court's concern. If you are to thoroughly read any point I have made in this post - this is the MOST IMPORTANT.

He can then show to the court that he is (i) entirely by name on the mortgage agreement and (ii) paying off the mortgage entirely by himself.

And she can show that, as his partner, she has contributed to both his income and, by default, his ability to meet his commitments (including the mortgage). Hope that's clear enough for you, or do you want a diagram?

Coeus

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

And she can show that, as his partner, she has contributed to both his income and, by default, his ability to meet his commitments (including the mortgage). Hope that's clear enough for you, or do you want a diagram?

Again I think you missed the legally identifiable relationship of a rental agreement (in form of lodgement or tenancy).

Have you ever rented? Even if not, would you say that if your 'landlord' were to use some of the rent you have paid directly to his bank account for the mortgage on the same property entirely in his name - that you have a legal entitlement to part of the property? I would expect not and it is no different for co-habiting individuals as long as an legally recognised agreement exists such as the mentioned lodgement or tenancy agreement.

This is why it is very important and widely accepted that a clear paper trail identifying (i) paying of rent in accordance to said agreement and (ii) clear responsibility of due payment of mortgage/council tax from his INDIVIDUAL bank account is critical in court for establishing any part-ownership.