Money/relationship problem

claire16c

Mojisola wrote: »

How can you go through a ceremony that makes you life partners without viewing the money coming into the household as joint money for the benefit of both of you?

If I earned more than my partner, I couldn't spend the excess on myself, knowing that he didn't have similar money. That's how I'd behave with a flat-sharer, not a life partner who I loved!

I agree. I'm not sure Id want to bother marrying someone like that.

I thought that being married made any of those types of agreements void anyway?

Fair enough having an agreement like that if you're buying a house with a boy/ girlfriend but someone you are marrying?

It's only 10k it's not like she's heir to millions.

globetraveller

Call off the civil partnership for now and continue to house share. It sounds like you have a lot to sort out before you take any more commitment then you have already. Time to talk I think. Best to do that before going any further.

Seanymph

I remember reading a financial book by a chap whose name escapes me at the moment - but he's one of the other famous ones that isn't Martin, american.

he says financial disparity is the greatest cause of divorce. And I don't doubt for a minute he's right.

A lifelong relationship takes depths of commitment that challenge us all. To be financially committed is vital.

Now you can do 50/50 if that works for both of you, and doesn't put one of you on an unfair footing and breed resentment in the other. But be brutally honest, are you happy with the current situation? Or is it something that you put up with because that's the price you have to pay to be with this person?

My OH and I have different accounts, because we are responsible for different things, and we carve the JOINT money up in a way we have agreed to allow us to meet those costs - he looks after two houses, and I look after one - he has a mortgage I don't - but we have a joint vision, jointly agreed wills, joint plans for where we will end up, and a shared way of moving forwards.

As long as you both agree you will work it out - but you have to find a way to agree.

conradmum

legogingerninja wrote: »

I guess the problem we have isn't about a specific bit of money for the wedding, or for the house. It's how do you reconcile two different financial outlooks on life, within a relationship?

I agree with the posters above. This is something you need to sort out before you make a lifelong commitment to each other and possibly have children.

Already you feel the effects of your different attitudes to money. Perhaps you're thinking your girlfriend has a 'what's yours is mine and what's mine is mine' attitude? Possibly.

Maybe talk through different scenarios together - what if one of you came into a lot of money? Would the other expect a share? What will happen when you have children? What if one of you wants to be a stay at home parent while the other thinks you should both work?

I think if neither of you are bad with money, nor have had a bad experience of being with someone who is bad with money, the best attitude is to treat all income as shared. A marriage is partnership of many things, including finances. This is true whether you want it to be so or not, in law, once you've been married a few years anyway.

Seanymph

conradmum I agree with most of what you have put - but financial merging is not legally necessary after a few years of marriage if you agree a way to legally keep some things seperate.

Whether or not it's correct to do that depends upon everyone's individual circumstances, but it needs sorting out and talking about.

All things need sorting out and talking about - Alvin someone's (remembered his name!) - his point was that people spend longer talking about what tv to buy than their financial situations and aspirations. It's not something that can be ignored, financial agreements are vital I think. Not always comfortable - but you need to have a joint vision and a future you are both working for.

victory

Seanymph wrote: »

conradmum I agree with most of what you have put - but financial merging is not legally necessary after a few years of marriage if you agree a way to legally keep some things seperate.

Whether or not it's correct to do that depends upon everyone's individual circumstances, but it needs sorting out and talking about.

All things need sorting out and talking about - Alvin someone's (remembered his name!) - his point was that people spend longer talking about what tv to buy than their financial situations and aspirations. It's not something that can be ignored, financial agreements are vital I think. Not always comfortable - but you need to have a joint vision and a future you are both working for.

http://alvinhall.com/art/AlvinHall_homephoto.jpg

bagpussbear

how about let your parents contribute the £5k, and you and your partner split the rest of the wedding cost yourselves? Agree with others, that £10K is alot of money though, you can have a nice wedding for a lot less.

But there is a bigger issue here with money equality in this relationship. If she is earning a bit more than you, why are you contributing 50% of the bills? I earn more than my husband, so what we put into bills is done on a proportional basis so its fairer. Sounds like you both need to have a sit down conversation about money to be honest, good luck.

Seanymph

that's the chappy!

He writes some really accessible and very sensible stuff.

Errata

Mojisola wrote: »

How can you go through a ceremony that makes you life partners without viewing the money coming into the household as joint money for the benefit of both of you?

!

Would you expect his massive debts to become joint ones too?

Mojisola

Errata wrote: »

Would you expect his massive debts to become joint ones too?

Yes. Paying them off would be a family commitment.

If one partner has a poor credit history, it makes sense to keep accounts separate but it's a mental shift that we're now a couple and family money or family debts - it's ours to deal with.