Brother's Girlfriend Moving In

snowleopard61

tea_lover wrote: »

If the OP's initial suggestion is followed, and the GF pays 1/3 of the bills then the OP would be benefiting.

She would be gaining (a little) in financial terms, but I wouldn't see her as benefiting overall. The loss of privacy must be very significant and she and her children are spending many weekends away from their own home, reasonable as it is for the brother to ask what he is asking.

tea_lover

snowleopard61 wrote: »

She would be gaining (a little) in financial terms, but I wouldn't see her as benefiting overall. The loss of privacy must be very significant and she and her children are spending many weekends away from their own home, reasonable as it is for the brother to ask what he is asking.

Oh absolutely agree that there are benefits and losses all round. I think what I (and possibly some others) find galling is the sense of entitlement and the drip-feed of relevant information. There's quite a difference (to me, at least) between:

a) I own a house with my brother. His short-term gf is moving in, should we split the bills three ways.... and

b) I own a house with my brother. My two children also live with me. My brother has helped me out financially to buy my ex partner out. He has recently got engaged and would ideally like to sell this house and buy something with his fiancee but has agreed to wait to help me out. Should his fiancee pay 1/3 of the bills.

snowleopard61

tea_lover wrote: »

Oh absolutely agree that there are benefits and losses all round. I think what I (and possibly some others) find galling is the sense of entitlement and the drip-feed of relevant information.

Point taken (though I still think the figure of £300, however arrived at, is a bargain for which the girlfriend should be grateful).

Confusedandneedhelp

Or to put into another perspective, if it wasnt for her brother the OP would not be living there and would be worse of financially as she would be paying more living expenses.

The brother meanwhile now has a much larger income and does not need to rely on his sister.


OP no-one is suggesting that you arent a good sister. But you have to respect his life choices, he has chosen to get engaged. You chose to have two children with someone who then walked out. I doubt very much he would criticise you for this. But the way you spoke about him getting engaged is very rude. And why i think you believe he should live in your shadow, and not spread his wings.

Confusedandneedhelp

snowleopard61 wrote: »

Point taken (though I still think the figure of £300, however arrived at, is a bargain for which the girlfriend should be grateful).

What if the Brother decided to move out and live with his fiancee, the OP would be basically paying the full mortgage and trying to find someone as accomodating as her brother who would cover those costs while living with two kids?

(i know he is liable for the mortgage, but this argument is about practicalities it seems not financial ruin)

snowleopard61

Confusedandneedhelp wrote: »

What if the Brother decided to move out and live with his fiancee, the OP would be basically paying the full mortgage and trying to find someone as accomodating as her brother who would cover those costs while living with two kids?

(i know he is liable for the mortgage, but this argument is about practicalities it seems not financial ruin)

If the brother moved out, the OP would be at liberty to charge whatever she could get for his room, to a single person or couple. On the strength of the above it doesn't seem likely, but it's not impossible, that she could be better off financially than she is now.

Here's a thought (I don't know if anyone's mentioned it; there have been so many posts I may have missed it): I wonder how people would feel if the OP herself, rather than her brother, were moving a partner in - would they not expect that partner to make a full contribution, probably a third share, to all expenses?

Confusedandneedhelp

snowleopard61 wrote: »

If the brother moved out, the OP would be at liberty to charge whatever she could get for his room, to a single person or couple. On the strength of the above it doesn't seem likely, but it's not impossible, that she could be better off financially than she is now.

Here's a thought (I don't know if anyone's mentioned it; there have been so many posts I may have missed it): I wonder how people would feel if the OP herself, rather than her brother, were moving a partner in - would they not expect that partner to make a full contribution, probably a third share, to all expenses?

I did mention this.

And yes I agree they should, but it would otherwise be 4 people paying the same as 1, which to be fair would be a ridiculous situation given the argument is everyone should pay their way.

At the moment, as of right now

OP Pays (eg £500) for herself in 1 room, her two kids in another and for half the rest of the house.
Brother Pays (£500) for one room for himself and half for the rest of the house.

The girlfriend moves into the brother's room. and the Op no wants an extra £150-200 - for what? She still has her room, kids still have their room, brother is sharing his room, and already pays for half the house.

So now the Brother and His F pay £700 for 1 room, the OP pays £300 for 2...

your example would be accurate in the sense of same as above

OP £500 - 2 rooms
B £500 - 1 room

OP partner moves in, now they pay 700 - 300 Rouchly a 2/3 - 1/3 split (technically 4-1 would be 800 - 200)

snowleopard61

PS The OP’s brother will benefit enormously too (financially) when he and his girlfriend come to buy somewhere of their own, from the fact that she has been able to save so much, not to mention that he, as well as the OP, benefits in the shorter term from the girlfriend’s contribution now; and unlike the OP he (presumably!) actively wants his girlfriend living with him anyway.

Confusedandneedhelp

snowleopard61 wrote: »

PS The OP’s brother will benefit enormously too (financially) when he and his girlfriend come to buy somewhere of their own, from the fact that she has been able to save so much, not to mention that he, as well as the OP, benefits in the shorter term from the girlfriend’s contribution now; and unlike the OP he (presumably!) actively wants his girlfriend living with him anyway.

Yes he will benefit from it, but why shouldnt he. Why the mentality that because they are two adults who work, they need to pay more. Whilst the OP who is one adult who works part time should get more?

Why can there be no happiness for success? Well done OP's brother, you have a nice life ahead. Good for you.

Instead - OMG his life is nicer than the OPs and therefore the OP should be compensated.

snowleopard61

Confusedandneedhelp wrote: »

I did mention this.

And yes I agree they should, but it would otherwise be 4 people paying the same as 1, which to be fair would be a ridiculous situation given the argument is everyone should pay their way.

At the moment, as of right now

OP Pays (eg £500) for herself in 1 room, her two kids in another and for half the rest of the house.
Brother Pays (£500) for one room for himself and half for the rest of the house.

The girlfriend moves into the brother's room. and the Op no wants an extra £150-200 - for what? She still has her room, kids still have their room, brother is sharing his room, and already pays for half the house.

So now the Brother and His F pay £700 for 1 room, the OP pays £300 for 2...

your example would be accurate in the sense of same as above

OP £500 - 2 rooms
B £500 - 1 room

OP partner moves in, now they pay 700 - 300 Rouchly a 2/3 - 1/3 split (technically 4-1 would be 800 - 200)

I don't accept that the OP's children are in the same category as an adult with an income (and in the girlfriend's case, a rental income over and above her income from working).