Is my partner right to feel aggrieved? Please help.

Mods

marisco wrote: »

I think it shows real maturity from both of you that there is a concern of 'what if things go wrong'. You are entering living together with the full realisation that you are about to entwine your lives and all that this entails. The dynamics of your relationship is about to change in a huge way and you are both finding your feet a little.

Up till now you have been able to enjoy your relationship, whilst remaining financially independant of each other on the whole. It can feel like a bit of a leap of faith when you decide to take that final step and move in with someone. Something you are both facing right now and approaching with understandable caution and giving alot of thought to. By maintaining really good communication I am sure you can navigate your way through this together, reaasure each other and come out the other side all the stronger.

Thanks again, Marisco. Your words are very comforting.

Mods

tayforth wrote: »

Um, aren't you already engaged? That would assume a certain level of confidence/belief that it's going to work.

Having said that, I do admire you for posting about this. It's a tricky situation, made more complicated by asking your parents for a loan. I really don't know what to advise, but I do wish you both all the best.

Yeah, we're engaged but we got engaged before living together. I guess living together is the real test. I know I have many idiosyncrasies and habits that will test her patience to the max when we're under the same roof full time whilst she might struggle having to share the lead with me about how we live in after being the sole captain of her ship for so long.

Thanks for your well wishes. I hope good fortune and kindness is returned to you and everyone else who posted here tonight. The internet is amazing! We're all complete strangers yet you have all taken the time to offer your wisdom or kind words!

tayforth

Mods wrote: »

Yeah, we're engaged but we got engaged before living together. I guess living together is the real test. I know I have many idiosyncrasies and habits that will test her patience to the max when we're under the same roof full time whilst she might struggle having to share the lead with me about how we live in after being the sole captain of her ship for so long.

Thanks for your well wishes. I hope good fortune and kindness is returned to you and everyone else who posted here tonight. The internet is amazing! We're all complete strangers yet you have all taken the time to offer your wisdom or kind words!

Likewise, I have had so much kindness and good wishes in my time of need

At the risk of repeating what others have said, I understand your anxiety about protecting yourself financially. Conversely, I understand your fiancee wanting to protect her children's security.

The most sensible solution is for you both to rent initially, to see how living together goes. In that time, if her house sells, you may decide to buy together. How you do that is up to you, there are various options which can be used to protect each person's contribution. I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of it all.

If you do get married, it's all moot, as in any divorce the courts will make provision for the children. I don't know whether it's different if they're not yours, you'll need to DYOR. But yes,marriage does change things with respect to property and assets.

Mods

tayforth wrote: »

Likewise, I have had so much kindness and good wishes in my time of need

At the risk of repeating what others have said, I understand your anxiety about protecting yourself financially. Conversely, I understand your fiancee wanting to protect her children's security.

The most sensible solution is for you both to rent initially, to see how living together goes. In that time, if her house sells, you may decide to buy together. How you do that is up to you, there are various options which can be used to protect each person's contribution. I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of it all.

If you do get married, it's all moot, as in any divorce the courts will make provision for the children. I don't know whether it's different if they're not yours, you'll need to DYOR. But yes,marriage does change things with respect to property and assets.

We spoke to a solicitor informally about it sometime ago. I think he said that when married people split, the courts generally disregard prenups . He said they hold little water because courts will look to make provisions for the children as you said and they will also look to split assets in a way that ensures both parties can start again or house themselves. So, if one party has the house and the other has an inheritance in the bank then they simply say one has the house whilst the other keeps the money. Of course, this is a very simplistic example. A friend of the family got divorced from his wife and he willingly conceded the house so that he could keep his salary or pension or something like that.

Kynthia

If you don't rent first but do buy, could you not put her name on the deeds but have a deed of trust stating she owns a certain small percentage of the property? That way you aren't risking 50% of a property that you have paid for, but she also has the security of being on the deeds. Then later on the percentage could be increased, or you marry and it becomes irrelevant?

sharp910sh

Wait and second you have agreed to marry this woman, yet having problems about living with her. Logic says if you don't want to live together because of money problems, you will have even bigger problems when you do marry. I would just rent a place, see how it works out. If everyone is happy after 6 or 12 months get married and buy a nice house. Stop thinking about "your" money, if you want to marry her it will your both of yours money.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

As I've been a single mum starting a new relationship, I can understand where she's coming from - she's selling her house and effectively being asked to move her children into a house which won't even be part hers. That's scary when you have kids to house and protect.

However, at the same time, I can appreciate the wisdom in your parents' minds. Renting is a very good move; it's completely different dynamics when you move in and take more of a direct role with the kids; you get the worst of them as well as their best. And the boring, everyday stuff means that habits, quirks and idiosyncrasies neither of you noticed before can become really irritating.

I don't agree with the sole ownership; that really would feel like a slap in the face that the future inlaws don't want you two to be linked financially, which could lead her to think that this isn't a permanent relationship, it's being seen as a brief fling.


But definitely, try living together in a rental that she could afford if something did go wrong. That way, she has the security of a joint tenancy and the lump sum behind her if things don't work out and, if they do, which I hope they will, you both have a substantial sum to put into a genuine permanent home together.

I would suggest renting for two years - that gives plenty of time to come together as a family and iron out any irritations before they become a problem. I've found that problems usually come to the fore after about 15 months, so a shorter period of time doesn't allow for that.

But good luck.

zzzLazyDaisy

I think it is you that has thrown your partner the curve ball.

As I understand it:

• She owns her own house where she lives with the children.
• You agreed to buy a house together where you would live as a family
• She has a buyer for her house, and the sale is going through
• you have found a house to buy which needs improvements
• The equity from the sale of her house will pay for the improvements to the new house
  
  Having spoken to your parents:
  
• You have now decided that instead of buying the house together, you will buy it in your sole name with assistance from your parents
• Your idea now (based on parents advice) is that she will still sell her house, but instead of buying the new house together as planned, she will put the money in the bank, and move into your house with her children, until such time as you decide that this relationship is stable enough for her to buy a share of your house

If the above is a correct summary of the situation, then I can understand why your gf is upset.

She will lose her home, which provides security for herself and her children. She will also lose tax credits etc and become more financially dependent on you. That is a big leap of faith to take when you have children. She is making these big changes in her life, because she believed it was because you and she were planning to buy a home together and live as a family. Now it seems she will be little more than a lodger in your home, with no security, and could literally be put out onto the streets with her children at a moments notice. Yes, she would have the equity from the house in the bank, but that does not help when she has sold the roof over her children's heads.

In her shoes, I would stop the sale of my house. I would not sell up and move into your house (for the reasons explained above) and I would not sell up and move into rented accommodation, for the same reasons.

It sound very much to me that you have had second thoughts about the financial aspects of moving in together, or even if the relationship is going to work - which is fair enough, if you have those doubts you should definitely be expressing them now, before you make commitments that will be difficult to reverse. But in that case you have to respect the fact that she will re-evaluate her own position in the light of that.

Since you are uncertain about how this relationship is going to work, I think it is unfair to expect her to sell her home and uproot her children for an uncertain future. Why don't you just move into her house and see how it goes? Yes the ex's name is still on the mortgage, but that is not uncommon these days, and you say he has re-married, so this should not cause a practical problem. Yes her tax credits, and possibly other benefits would be affected if you move in, but they will be affected wherever you choose to live together.

Alternatively, she could remain in her home with her children, and you could buy your new house with the help of your parents. This would be one more step towards eventually moving in together when you feel more certain about whether you want to make a future with this woman and her children. You would both spend time at each house and you would get a sense of what it would be like to live there together as a family, without her having to potentially put her children at risk of being made homeless if it all goes belly up.

Surely you can see that must be a huge consideration for her?

EDIT: Having re-read the thread, it seems that she was selling her house anyway, even if you hadn't been on the scene? In that case I'd suggest that she goes ahead and does whatever she was intending to do if you were not around (buy another house in her own name? Rent?). Once she has established a home for herself and her children in her own name, there is no reason why you can't move in with her, is there? Yes the relationship might not work, and yes in that scenario it would be you looking for somewhere else to live rather than her and the children - but that wouldn't be such a bad thing, would it?

HalfPint

Hi,

I agree with what Jojo and Lazydaisy are saying. Having been in a similar situation I can completely understand your partners reaction.

Bit of background on me: 10 years ago I was being forced to sell my home by my now exhusband. I had 2 young children (3 & 1). I met and fell in love with my (now) husband. He asked me to move in with him, which was 400 miles from my home. It was a very scary time for me and I took a leap of faith and moved in. It was his house, 400 miles from any family, friends and I had no security (my parents though I was mad). Thats the brief version!

What helped me decide was 2 things, firstly my brother advised me that I would never know if it would work until I tried and secondly my husband spent an awful lot of time and energy reassuring me, loving me, putting up with my many emotional crisis at 'what happens if it goes wrong, I have no home and no money) I did not manipulate him, I was just very very concerned for myself and my kids. He understood me, and did everything possible to help me feel safe and secure.

10 years on...we are happily married, the house is still in his name only but I have never felt more safe and secure.

I guess my point is a lot of the way your partner is behaving is because of her emotions and wanting to feel safe and secure for her children. Your parents suggestion has threatened that so she is naturally now worried that she is not seen as trusted.

Take your parents out of the equation, It's your relationship not theirs (though I completely understand and realise that they only want to protect you) and then work out the best way forward without your parents involvement.

I wish you both a happy future together, she is lucky to have found you and you her.

HP x

Mods

Thanks everyone.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

As I've been a single mum starting a new relationship, I can understand where she's coming from - she's selling her house and effectively being asked to move her children into a house which won't even be part hers. That's scary when you have kids to house and protect.

However, at the same time, I can appreciate the wisdom in your parents' minds. Renting is a very good move; it's completely different dynamics when you move in and take more of a direct role with the kids; you get the worst of them as well as their best. And the boring, everyday stuff means that habits, quirks and idiosyncrasies neither of you noticed before can become really irritating.

I don't agree with the sole ownership; that really would feel like a slap in the face that the future inlaws don't want you two to be linked financially, which could lead her to think that this isn't a permanent relationship, it's being seen as a brief fling.


But definitely, try living together in a rental that she could afford if something did go wrong. That way, she has the security of a joint tenancy and the lump sum behind her if things don't work out and, if they do, which I hope they will, you both have a substantial sum to put into a genuine permanent home together.

I would suggest renting for two years - that gives plenty of time to come together as a family and iron out any irritations before they become a problem. I've found that problems usually come to the fore after about 15 months, so a shorter period of time doesn't allow for that.

But good luck.

That's interesting because she keeps asking me 'why two years before I go on the deeds?' I have been trying to explain the logic behind it and haven't been successful but you summed it up pretty well here.

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

I think it is you that has thrown your partner the curve ball.

As I understand it:

• She owns her own house where she lives with the children.
• You agreed to buy a house together where you would live as a family
• She has a buyer for her house, and the sale is going through
• you have found a house to buy which needs improvements
• The equity from the sale of her house will pay for the improvements to the new house
  
  Having spoken to your parents:
• You have now decided that instead of buying the house together, you will buy it in your sole name with assistance from your parents
• Your idea now (based on parents advice) is that she will still sell her house, but instead of buying the new house together as planned, she will put the money in the bank, and move into your house with her children, until such time as you decide that this relationship is stable enough for her to buy a share of your house

If the above is a correct summary of the situation, then I can understand why your gf is upset.

She will lose her home, which provides security for herself and her children. She will also lose tax credits etc and become more financially dependent on you. That is a big leap of faith to take when you have children. She is making these big changes in her life, because she believed it was because you and she were planning to buy a home together and live as a family. Now it seems she will be little more than a lodger in your home, with no security, and could literally be put out onto the streets with her children at a moments notice. Yes, she would have the equity from the house in the bank, but that does not help when she has sold the roof over her children's heads.

In her shoes, I would stop the sale of my house. I would not sell up and move into your house (for the reasons explained above) and I would not sell up and move into rented accommodation, for the same reasons.

It sound very much to me that you have had second thoughts about the financial aspects of moving in together, or even if the relationship is going to work - which is fair enough, if you have those doubts you should definitely be expressing them now, before you make commitments that will be difficult to reverse. But in that case you have to respect the fact that she will re-evaluate her own position in the light of that.

Since you are uncertain about how this relationship is going to work, I think it is unfair to expect her to sell her home and uproot her children for an uncertain future. Why don't you just move into her house and see how it goes? Yes the ex's name is still on the mortgage, but that is not uncommon these days, and you say he has re-married, so this should not cause a practical problem. Yes her tax credits, and possibly other benefits would be affected if you move in, but they will be affected wherever you choose to live together.

Alternatively, she could remain in her home with her children, and you could buy your new house with the help of your parents. This would be one more step towards eventually moving in together when you feel more certain about whether you want to make a future with this woman and her children. You would both spend time at each house and you would get a sense of what it would be like to live there together as a family, without her having to potentially put her children at risk of being made homeless if it all goes belly up.

Surely you can see that must be a huge consideration for her?

EDIT: Having re-read the thread, it seems that she was selling her house anyway, even if you hadn't been on the scene? In that case I'd suggest that she goes ahead and does whatever she was intending to do if you were not around (buy another house in her own name? Rent?). Once she has established a home for herself and her children in her own name, there is no reason why you can't move in with her, is there? Yes the relationship might not work, and yes in that scenario it would be you looking for somewhere else to live rather than her and the children - but that wouldn't be such a bad thing, would it?

Indeed. I haven't asked her to sell her home. She was selling it anyway. To say she has security in the home where she lives now, is stretching it a bit too. Yes, so far the payments have been made by both her and her ex partner but that's not to say he hasn't caused difficulties for her before so no, she perhaps didn't have total security in that house anyway.

HalfPint wrote: »

Hi,

I agree with what Jojo and Lazydaisy are saying. Having been in a similar situation I can completely understand your partners reaction.

Bit of background on me: 10 years ago I was being forced to sell my home by my now exhusband. I had 2 young children (3 & 1). I met and fell in love with my (now) husband. He asked me to move in with him, which was 400 miles from my home. It was a very scary time for me and I took a leap of faith and moved in. It was his house, 400 miles from any family, friends and I had no security (my parents though I was mad). Thats the brief version!

What helped me decide was 2 things, firstly my brother advised me that I would never know if it would work until I tried and secondly my husband spent an awful lot of time and energy reassuring me, loving me, putting up with my many emotional crisis at 'what happens if it goes wrong, I have no home and no money) I did not manipulate him, I was just very very concerned for myself and my kids. He understood me, and did everything possible to help me feel safe and secure.

10 years on...we are happily married, the house is still in his name only but I have never felt more safe and secure.

I guess my point is a lot of the way your partner is behaving is because of her emotions and wanting to feel safe and secure for her children. Your parents suggestion has threatened that so she is naturally now worried that she is not seen as trusted.

Take your parents out of the equation, It's your relationship not theirs (though I completely understand and realise that they only want to protect you) and then work out the best way forward without your parents involvement.

I wish you both a happy future together, she is lucky to have found you and you her.

HP x

Thanks. I get what she is concerned about. I really do. What bugs me is that I have spent an awful lot of time reassuring her and trying my best to take care of her and the children under the circumstances.You were able to use your partner's reassurances to give you that sense of security but she's not able to feel as secure about my assurances and understandably insists on going on the deeds to protect herself whilst I am condemned for considering that my parents suggestion might give us both that bit of security if it goes wrong before we marry. I fully understand the need to protect her children and her interests but she needs to understand my need to protect me. As another poster said, I have no guarantees that she will act in the same way she did to her ex after their split if we split prior to getting married whilst living together in a house we both own.