Could my partner take my house from me if we were to split ?

dkny_2

money_saving_expert wrote:

I
I know my girlfriend well and know what a vindictive, spiteful and evil person she can be.

Why are you with her then, sounds like true love to me :rolleyes:

kittiwoz

I think this thread makes an extremely good argument in favour of planned parenthood. It is very money saving. I would say as a general rule that if you feel that combining your finances is too much of a commitment then combining your DNA is probably is probably also too much commitment for this stage of the relationship.

barnaby-bear

money_saving_expert wrote:

Me and my girlfriend have a baby but we are not married.

The problem is that I am a first time buyer and currently renting, but our relationship is very rocky.

The mortgage would be in my name and I would be the only one paying it, in addition to all the other bills (my girlfriend does not work so has no income).

If I had a mortgage and bought property but had the misfortune of splitting up with my girlfriend, would she be entitled to any part of the property ?

I've heard of a common law where if a couple have been living together for so many years, the partner is entitled to half of the belongings.

This is a major concern of mine and holding me back from getting a mortgage.

If she pays nothing towards the mortgage and bills I cant see why she would be entitled to any part of the property, especially as we are not married.

However, we have and will be living together and do have a baby together.

This is a tyipcal horror story I've heard...

This bloke buys a property himself and lives there with his girlfriend and child for 2 years. The girlfriend then cheats on him so the relationship ends. She then takes the house from him and he is left paying the mortgage.

This seems so unfair and I need confimration whether the same could happen to me before I even consider buying property.

Can someone please advise or point me in the right direction ?

http://www.divorce.co.uk/hottopics/articles/cohabitants.htm#1

"Jerry might be able to persuade Mick or a court that she should live in the house with the children until the children were grown up, but after that Jerry would have to move out."

Not so much a right to the money in the house but she may get to live there for 16 years because of the kiddy although most dad's would want to house their own kids. It wouldn't surprise me if co-habitees get more protection soon the situation may change.

Dumyat

sounds like you have other issues more pressing like do you want to be with her if you are planning the "divorce"

Need_More_Money_2

barnaby-bear wrote:

Not so much a right to the money in the house but she may get to live there for 16 years because of the kiddy although most dad's would want to house their own kids. It wouldn't surprise me if co-habitees get more protection soon the situation may change.

But what happens if he can't afford to pay the mortgage on top of paying rent for somewhere to live himself and paying maintainence for the child?

barnaby-bear

Need_More_Money wrote:

But what happens if he can't afford to pay the mortgage on top of paying rent for somewhere to live himself and paying maintainence for the child?

He can go and live with mum and dad?

Maybe he should have thought more carefully about who and when he had a kid with?

I certainly don't want to pay (via my tax) for some stranger's kid to be housed - his kid his responsibility.

MJMum

I agree with Lynzpower.

Hey, how about YOU take the damaging career break, lose your pension and get yourself into an unstable housing situation (ie become the stay-at-home parent) and let your GF go to work?

No? Not too appealing really?

Based on your posts, do you really think that your relationship with GF is going to last as long as your mortgage? If not, do yourself a favour and buy a smaller, cheaper property for yourself, factoring in the 15% net pay maintainence payments. (And I speak as a step-mother who wouldn't be with someone who wasn't prepared to live up to his responsibilities to his children!)

thesaint

When did the O.P. say that he wouldn't live up to the responsibilties to his children, or is this an assumption?

MJMum

I think suggesting that his GF's parents should house his child would count!

Need_More_Money_2

barnaby-bear wrote:

He can go and live with mum and dad?

Maybe he should have thought more carefully about who and when he had a kid with?

I certainly don't want to pay (via my tax) for some stranger's kid to be housed - his kid his responsibility.

Sure, he should maintenence for his child, but if he doesn't earn enough to pay the mortgage as well, then he can't do that too. What if the house is a big house that could only be afforded because both parents are living there?
Saying he'll just have to, doesn't make it possible.
Surely selling of the house and arranging suitable smaller separate accomodation would be more sensible?