Cohabitation and assets

bundly

I am single, self supporting since age 16, now own a house, have paid off the mortgage and have substantial savings. All by my own efforts. Although I have these capital assets, my weekly income is small and derives almost entirely from two lodgers currently living in my home with me.

I am considering having my boyfriend move in with me, and that means I would lose a lodger as we'd need the space for my boyfriend to have an office/bolthole/den/storage space (although he'd share my bedroom). In other words, he'll have a room in my house that is exclusively his, and obviously, I'd lose the £80pw I currently earn for that room.

If I were to have my boyfriend move in with me and the relationship ended after say, a year, or five, or ten, would he have any claim on my assets?

Would it be best just to ask him to pay a one-third share of the household bills, or would it be safer for me to give him the "status" of lodger and charge him the £80 I will be losing by booting out my lodger to make space for him? Or lodger status but charge just a small amount to cover a third of the bills, or could he still claim something of my assets even if he was a lodger, by citing the sexual/emotional relationship we had over x years?

Should I whisk him down to a solicitor to sign some kind of declaration that he'd never claim on my assets? If so, how can this be done in the heat of romance without hurting the man's feelings?

Have heard a few horror stories lately and so need to check this. Seems better for me to be in the know upfront than to come on here grizzling in a few yearss time when it's all gone pearshaped.

There are no children involved (present or future) and it is envisaged that my boyfriend would be selling or letting his own house and that the substantial capital or income from that, would, of course, be entirely his in his own a/c to which i would have no access or entitlement.

So, to sum up, there are two questions:

1. what if anything should he pay me to live here and

2. how do I protect my assets?

Obviously I want a solution that is 100% fair to both parties, with neither being exploited or left vulnerable.

Thanks in advance

Bundly

DylanO

As long as he doesn't pay anything towards the mortgage and other house costs then I'm sure you'll be safe. Nothing to stop you insisting that the money he saves in rent, is saved in another account in his name so should you split up, he won't find himself homeless without any money.

I'm not sure about charging him rent, unless he will have his own room?

bundly

DylanO wrote: »

As long as he doesn't pay anything towards the mortgage and other house costs then I'm sure you'll be safe. Nothing to stop you insisting that the money he saves in rent, is saved in another account in his name so should you split up, he won't find himself homeless without any money.

I'm not sure about charging him rent, unless he will have his own room?

Sorry Dylan our posts crossed, well, that is to say, I was editing mine while you posted, adding that he will have his own room. There is no mortgage. There would be no joint accounts of any sort (they just seem to cause arguments between couples!)

You have just reminded me to add that he would not be expected to pay any house maintenance, repairs, improvements or extensions etc.

paddy's_mum

A safer way would be to rent out both properties and rent another between you where you are joint tenants. That way everything is shared equally - responsiblility, bills, effort, risk etc.

You may find that he is quite willing to sign a Cohabitation Agreement and I find that a sensible precaution not a romance busting move. After all, he has as much to lose in terms of assets-up-for-grabs as you do if between you, you decide that you will instead both live in his property.

Good luck and hope that helps.

CH27

Sell both properties & buy another splitting the cost 50/50 and then spliting all expenses 50/50.
That way there will be no resentments or worries.

Gigglepig

bundly wrote: »

Would it be best just to ask him to pay a one-third share of the household bills, or would it be safer for me to give him the "status" of lodger and charge him the £80 I will be losing by booting out my lodger to make space for him? Or lodger status but charge just a small amount to cover a third of the bills, or could he still claim something of my assets even if he was a lodger, by citing the sexual/emotional relationship we had over x years?

If my partner referred to me as a lodger I'm afraid it would kill the romance for me. :eek:

As a lodger, perhaps he should bill you back for the sexual/emotional services he provides ?? :rotfl:

I think it is sensible for both of you to protect your assets, and there is some good advice above regarding letting/selling up and moving in elsewhere.

However.... if you are preoccupied or resentful in any way regarding the "loss" of 80pw that you could have charged a "lodger" rather than the prospect of a shared life together, is that the frame of mind you want to be in before living together?

Dunroamin

Gigglepig wrote: »

If my partner referred to me as a lodger I'm afraid it would kill the romance for me. :eek:

As a lodger, perhaps he should bill you back for the sexual/emotional services he provides ?? :rotfl:

I think it is sensible for both of you to protect your assets, and there is some good advice above regarding letting/selling up and moving in elsewhere.

However.... if you are preoccupied or resentful in any way regarding the "loss" of 80pw that you could have charged a "lodger" rather than the prospect of a shared life together, is that the frame of mind you want to be in before living together?

But you surely wouldn't expect to live rent free with a partner just because s/he owns their own home? If the BF wanted to do this then a quick exit would be in order.

Gigglepig

Like I said in my post Dunroamin, I think it is sensible for both of the OP and their OH to protect their assets, and there is some good advice already posted on this above. In my mind there is a difference between cohabiting and being jointly responsible for rent and other expenses, versus on party being seen as a "lodger"

Edited to say - as people have posted above, for each party to pay half the rent or mortgage on a 3rd property may be lot clearer than to work out what would be 1/2 the market rent of one of their properties, and to reach a fair agreement without any resentment.

I agree they should split costs (rent/mortgage/bills) and of course it is fair to expect nobody lives "rent free". But, in addition to discussing payment of the costs the OP also mentions another thing entirely - the "loss of income" on not being able to let out a room.

That is not cost, but loss of income. It is starting to sound a bit too business like for me. A a relationship is always give and take, and I don't think it is possible or necessary to account for everything. Share costs yet, but compensate for lack of earnings, maybe a step too far?

Odette

I think a pertinant question is what is the current housing/outgoings of the partner? Im going to assume they have some income and are paying some kind of rent or mortgage.

If he pays more than 80pw currently, arrange to be a lodger as he is using that room of yours. I have been in this situation and I would never expect NOT to contribute something (unless you are very very wealthy and offer).

If he pays less then thats more troublesome. Either way you should discuss this without involving feeling too much, after all it is a business transaction that you want to protect both your futures hopefully. I hope you are both reasonable people as that will make it easier!

bundly

Odette wrote: »

I think a pertinant question is what is the current housing/outgoings of the partner? Im going to assume they have some income and are paying some kind of rent or mortgage.

There's always "something" we forget to say, isn't there?

Sorry!

Boyfriend is newly retired. Owns his house outright no mortgage.
Does this make a difference to the previous posters' advice?

I am 53 and he is 55.

Selling my home and buying one 50/50 with him is not an option because my income derives from this house. He has a big fat pension. If I sold it I would have maybe some capital left from my equity, but I would be eating into that equity each month --- just to live, then if we broke up after, say, 3 yrs I would no longer have the assets to buy another big house like this one, hence no lodgers, hence no income, and would have to draw Jobseekers Allowance! He on the other hand would still have the equity he started out with because, having a pension, he would not have to use his equity to live.

bundly

Gigglepig wrote: »

That is not cost, but loss of income. It is starting to sound a bit too business like for me. A a relationship is always give and take

But surely, if I lose £80 a week in order to have him live here, while he loses nothing AND gets to live rent free, that isn't give and take?

B.