HELP!! Mortgage deposit, my husband has more!!

catkins

victory wrote: »

Which is exactly right, it is his inheritence, from his father to his son and he wants to protect it, would you want to take it if you split up?

If it were a lottery win, that is completely different, it would be fun, happy money an inheritence is not at all happy.

I don't honestly see what difference it makes whether the money is "happy" money or "sad" money. It should still be their money.


What if one of them had some sort of accident and received a large sum as compensation. That would obviously be "sad" money so should the person who received it keep it entirely to themselves?

peachyprice

pickledonionspaceraider wrote: »

is slightly out of context, as the discussion was reference the man potentially verbalising his larger ownership stakes - when there would be no need to reiterate - as both parties would be aware already of the situation they had agreed to be in . To repeat this unnecessarily could be construed as passive aggressive behaviour. I cant imagine anyone enjoying being constantly reminded that their spouse was the main owner of the house, and can't imagine why it would need to be discussed further once the house is brought

Don't really see what difference it would make if it were the man or woman who owned more

I really don't understand why your default view is that protecting an asset would result in this type of behaviour , absolutely nothing that OP has posted suggests that this is what her OP would so, same as I wouldn't.

peachyprice

silvercar wrote: »

We have been married 26 years, maybe that makes a difference. I recently inherited a large sum of money that will enable us to buy something significant that I think of as ours not mine.

And if your spouse walked out on you a year later you'd be happy that they'd had 50% of your inheritance?

thriftylass

I think it is a personal matter how you interpret what marriage means to you. For us it is complete trust. My DH paid the deposit for our house as he had one to sell and lived in rented accomodation. I then paid for furnishing the house but not equal to his deposit. Did it matter, no. We still own the house 50/50. We have separate accounts as we don't see the need for a joint account, it's what's works for us. I am more organised so I keep the savings accounts in my name but with OUR money. If I where to inherit it would be our money unless my parents specify any different wishes.

The most important thing is that you do what works for you both and agree on it/talk about it.

thriftylass

peachyprice wrote: »

And if your spouse walked out on you a year later you'd be happy that they'd had 50% of your inheritance?

I guess she would and so would I. At the time she got the money she wanted to benefit from it as a couple, and why not, they're married and agreed to share. Would it not be weird to base every decision you make in marriage on the possibility to split up in 2 years time ? But as long as it works for you and you are happy each to their own.

Back to the original post. Him wanting to keep is assets safe and split things based on how much they put in is fair enough. IF that's what they both want. It's a shame that it seems it's not and that it took 8 years of living together and one year of marriage to find out for the OP. Communication...one of the most important factors of a successful marriage I think

jaylee3

pickledonionspaceraider wrote: »

I think this whole thread highlights how attitudes to marriage have changed over the years. Women now have more of their own finances and careers than they did years ago and are far more independent

Divorce rates are higher now - Many folk will not stay in an unhappy marriage for the sake of appearances. move with the times or risk exposing yourselves.

Every individual marriage is different - and people saying a 'good' marriage should be this , or that, are purely speaking about what works for them. There is no one rule fits all for relationships and as long as both parties are happy, it really doesn't matter a jot what other people may or may not think as they are not living your life for you

Some good points, some of which I agree with.

However, it falls apart at the end, (where I bolded it,) because both parties AREN'T happy. And that is why the OP started the thread, because she is unhappy with the situation.

So even though your philosophy is good; the post (unfortunately) is somewhat moot, because both parties are not happy.

burlington6

Can you imagine the advice if the op had come on here saying she was expecting the money and wanted to protect herself from her new husband. The forum would tell her to do exactly that.......but because it's a man on the advice is the opposite.

OP, the sensible thing to do is agree with him and when you have your money put it into the home and you are both in the same position.
What happens to the money if you meet someone else next year. Would you want the money to then start a new life with your new man?

JimmyTheWig

peachyprice wrote: »

And if your spouse walked out on you a year later you'd be happy that they'd had 50% of your inheritance?

I would imagine that they would be more upset about losing their spouse than losing the money.
To dwell on what happens to the money after a split suggests priorities are the other way around.

Mojisola

burlington6 wrote: »

Can you imagine the advice if the op had come on here saying she was expecting the money and wanted to protect herself from her new husband. The forum would tell her to do exactly that.......but because it's a man on the advice is the opposite.

I don't think that's true. If the couple were married, my advice would be the same regardless of who had inherited the money.

TeamMCS

I must admit I'm rather surprised by the OP and the subsequent responses in this thread.

First of all I think it's pretty natural to be shocked by the question of shared and unshared assets. Once that subsides I really believe you should be in unemotional about these sorts of discussions. The world is not a Disney film and not everything end with, "... And they lived happily ever after". I get the impression this reality shakes the foundations of some peoples thinking so it becomes very hard the accept - almost to the point of breaking up a perfectly happy relationship.

Hedging, to use a clinical term, is a very wise approach. If he wishes to protect his investment in your futures together then that it perfectly responsible and entirely unemotional.

I've seen this before where emotion entirely clouds the logic behind the thinking. It's the source of many costly divorces.

As the other have said, the point it somewhat moot given all assets will legally be split 50\50 in most cases.