if you own your own house or houses ....

SailorSam

After my Mum died, i moved into her house. I bought out the shares from the rest of my family, but i suggested to one of my Sisters that we should register it at the Land Registry as joint owners, one of the reasons was if i met someone and let them move in, then it didn't work out, the house may be safer.

Gefjun

Just because someone lives with you doesn't mean they are entitled to half of your property. Normally houses bought by two people are bought in joint tenancy which means that if something happens to one, the other automatically gets your half. If you wanted to take the next step and split the property, you can put your partner on as a tenant in common which means that if anything happens to you, you can give your half of the house (through a will) to anyone else i.e. children or your family. Plus you can get paperwork in place to say that you're entitled to the first £x amount of the equity in the property before your partner gets anything. I don't know what this is called, but a good solicitor will know.

Personally I'd say that the property was mine until the partner had cleared their debt and had a proven track record of at least a couple of years before considering giving them anything of mine. After all, you've worked hard for it - don't jeopardise it!

Dawning

I often wonder about this. Not involved with anyone at the moment but when I think ahead it does occur to me that I have no clue what the law says about it. I presume if I were to marry and partner moved in without a property of their own, then they'd have a claim on some or even half of mine?? Living together I dont know if it's the same. I paid for it, my name is on the deeds. If someone lived with me for a year I'd say they had no claim at all. But 20 years down the line what would the situation be? I dont know.

ceridwen

Tropez wrote: »

I own my own home with no mortgage. My partner moved in earlier this year. She contributes to some of the running costs of the home and lets out her own property to contribute to her income but I wouldn't charge her rent or anything like that.

I wouldn't regard her as having an actual claim to the home but I'm also hoping that would never become an issue anyway because I'm hoping she never see's the light and leaves me!

Thats the view I would take personally. I own a home mortgage-free. Should I decide to have a boyfriend move in with me then I would expect him to cover half the cost of the bills. I deliberately wouldnt expect any further monies out of him for anything:
1. that way he wouldnt be able to get any "ownership" of my property
and
2. I would feel I was making a "profit" out of him if I expected anything more than half the bills and one doesnt make a "profit" from a personal relationship in my book.

The not letting him pay any more than that half of the bills (ie paying towards any work on the house) would also be a precautionary measure to protect my assets - in case we split up and he turned out to be less ethical than me and had a go at trying to steal some of my money.

Obviously - I would get legal advice whether the mere fact that it was my name only remaining on the bills and I wasnt going to let him pay towards any work on the house was sufficient to protect my money - or whether I would need a legal agreement to make sure of it. (Would hate thought of having to be so formal as to have to make a written agreement - so would be hoping I would be safe without it.)

ceridwen

gratefulforhelp wrote: »

From the person moving in's point of view, if you live in someone else's house for ten years and pay rent, but have no entitlement to any equity, would it be fair as you would miss out on the potential investment of owning property?

The other way round of looking at this scenario is that the one who "moved in" would have had 10 years of not having to pay rent.

I have sat down and thought through this scenario myself - with both the "happily ever after" scenario and the "never darken my door again" scenario. The conclusion I came to was that if a boyfriend had lived rent-free in my home for x years then he would have saved himself a lot of money in rent. What he had done with that "saved" money would have been his business obviously - but if he'd chosen to "blow" that money, rather than investing it in assets of some description or at least saving it then that would have been HIS choice - therefore HIS hard luck.

So - 10 years of living rent-free (as compared to renting a one bedroom flat for instance) would mean he had saved somewhere about £60k at the very least on rental payments (ie certainly enough for him to have put down a decent deposit on a place of his own - which he could then have rented out as a BTL and kept any profit from doing so for himself).

EDIT: Just recalled that your scenario was that the would-be partner has debts. Must confess I never put that into my scenarios that I worked out - as I've never (to my knowledge) dated anyone with debts. Errrm...in that scenario - then I would view the money I had saved them on rent as going towards repaying their debts initially and then being used by them for assets/savings (thats assuming I hadnt decided to change their "status" from boyfriend to friend after finding out they had debts I admit - much in the way of debts would equal me being too worried I might get "pulled down" by them..hence a change of "status" for them...). My value system is that it doesnt matter how much money anyone has - but they must be practical with it and use it well (so anyone with THAT much debt would probably have just proven themself to have a different value system to my own).

gratefulforhelp_2

gratefulforhelp wrote: »

From the person moving in's point of view, if you live in someone else's house for ten years and pay rent, but have no entitlement to any equity, would it be fair as you would miss out on the potential investment of owning property?

ceridwen wrote: »

The other way round of looking at this scenario is that the one who "moved in" would have had 10 years of not having to pay rent.

............................................................................................

ceridwen

Ah right - didnt spot the bit about paying rent.

Um....that raises a different question there. As I would never have charged rent to a boyfriend - hmmm..

I tend to think that if a boyfriend had been charged rent and then moved out - that he would have been more of a lodger with "added benefits";) than a quasi-husband IYSWIM.

I wouldnt have done that - as stated - so havent really thought that scenario through (I'm guessing I might give him a "present to a friend" of a bit of money - couple of thousand £ perhaps???? - to help with setting-up costs elsewhere).

Jinx

I think it depends on the premise on which you move the partner in........ if you think its a long term relationship and he/she will pay a full and proper share into the house while dealing with debt then I think morally they should walk away with something. If however, you move them in and let them live scot-free while paying the debts off then of course, they should not benefit from your generosity more than they already have!

Personally in our relationship I had the debts and my own house while he had no debts and his own house. Partner and I bought a house together and had a financial agreement drawn up by our solicitor. However, I always said if we married all bets were off and its a level playing field...still heading to be debt free and now married.

Nottoobadyet

Tropez wrote: »

I wouldn't regard her as having an actual claim to the home but I'm also hoping that would never become an issue anyway because I'm hoping she never see's the light and leaves me!

Nothing to add to the topic, but this put a huge smile on my face!

princeofpounds

So is the question a moral or a legal one?

Legally the situation is pretty clear - if you are not married and own your house then a partner moving in is not automatically due anything. However, if they have a record of making contributions to the property (paying some of the mortgage, doing DIY improvements etc) that can be legal grounds for a claim of a part-share of the property.

Unlike bitter&twisted (who is a knowledgeable poster) I am not of the opinion that you cannot ask your partner for rental payments. Otherwise every lodger and his dog would be claiming that they owned part of the property whenever they were booted out. However, you have to be very careful and have a formal legal agreement because if a long-term relationship with rental payments has been underway a judge might decide that there has been a record of contributions. So b&t's recommendation for 'invisible' contributions only is the only safe way.

If you are married but the house remains only in your name, it does not belong to your spouse. However, they do have a claim on half your assets if you divorce (give or take the details of any settlement) then they will get half of it sooner or later.