Giving my husband all my money?

margaretclare

bugslet wrote: »

Just to clarify, when I was talking about joint, I mean joint agreement as well. If discretionary spending and/or spending on bills is 50:50, or 75:25 doesn't matter. What matters is that it's an arrangement that suits both spouses; if one feels put out by the arrangement, then it doesn't come across as a joint venture to me.

I never married for several reasons and one of those was that I'm very independent and never wanted to whole joint thing, which is what marriage means to me. That's a personal stance and everyone is of course, free to interpret marriage in their own way

No woman could be more independent than I am. I've always had to stand on my own two feet from way, way back. God knows where I'd have been, otherwise. Redundancy coincident with widowhood, and a mortgage to pay...just as well I was independent.

I remarried in my mid-60s, married for love. DH and I have a joint account into which we both tip what we regard as half of the monthly domestic expenses. We don't use it for any other purpose - we each have our own accounts into which we receive our own pensions income. When we go away, we share the costs. Just come back from a weekend in Bristol - I paid the Holiday Inn, DH paid travel and meals.

rpc

willysmum wrote: »

i have run tax credits about his wages and they have said until they have his final 2013/2014 there isnt much they can do although they said they will write to me within 2 weeks.

Ballcocks.

If you tell them that you have a revised estimate for current year income, they will immediately change your payments. If your estimate (on which payments are based) and your actual are different by more than a certain amount, they will claim the money back.

We have done this about 4 times in the past year (not all info can be estimated e.g. childcare so you have to tell them each and every time that changes) and the recalculation has been immediate.

kaya

Mojisola wrote: »

Add up all the money coming into the household. Take off what's needed for regular bills, agreed savings for holidays, emergencies, etc, and divide what's left in two - one half is his and one half is yours.

One spouse keeping the other short of money is considered domestic abuse these days.

Is this an opinion or a legal precedent that has been set? We share all the money and always have done for 15 years but I have never thought of friends who act differently of being guilty of domestic abuse

margaretclare

kaya wrote: »

Is this an opinion or a legal precedent that has been set? We share all the money and always have done for 15 years but I have never thought of friends who act differently of being guilty of domestic abuse

I think what the OP describes is at least bordering on financial abuse. Not all couples manage their money in the same way, and as long as both are happy with the arrangement, it's no one else's business. It doesn't sound as if the OP is happy at all. She mentions 'having' to give her husband 'all' her money. This is not the language of a happy contented co-operative partnership. There are many ways of being abused and not all involve physical damage.

DH and I don't arrange our affairs as Mojisola suggests. We added up all the normal outgoings and, from that, decided on an amount we each would tip into the joint account which we keep for the purpose. Our own money is separate, but we do share everything when we go away, travel, meals, overnight stays, you name it.

Mojisola

kaya wrote: »

Is this an opinion or a legal precedent that has been set? We share all the money and always have done for 15 years but I have never thought of friends who act differently of being guilty of domestic abuse

I don't think I could stay friends with someone who deliberately keeps their spouse short of money.

RAS

Agree - many years ago a friend told me how much housekeeping she got. Sounded quite reasonable until she explained she paid the rent and rates and utilities out of it and provided his snap. She would have been much better off leaving him and living off benefits. We were both gob-msacked for different reasons

Not long afterwards I also found out that he was physically abusive. My opinion of him completely changed.

thorsoak

My father in law - born in 1907 - was weekly paid for most of his life. When he married my mother in law in 1936, he would hand over his unopened pay packet every Friday evening and Mary would carefully allocate the money to envelopes - one for rent/rates, one for coal/gas/elec, one for doctor (pre NHS, remember) one for funeral (insurance), one for food/housekeeping, one for clothes =and then divide what was left - he would have 75% of it, she would have 25%.

They carried on in this manner throughout their married life - extra envelopes being added when my OH was born - and even when he was promoted to monthly salary, they still used the same formula. He had some savings and Mary also had savings ...she saved her "secret" fund from the housekeeping. Apparently this was considered normal and "correct" right up to the 50s/60s.

Alias_Omega

willysmum wrote: »

Each month i get £600 tax credits and £54.20 child benefit

Each month you both get.....

This really bugs me, Mrs AO sometimes claims stake to the CTC and CB, however its for both of us. Just because you claim it, does not its yours...

Alias_Omega

RAS wrote: »

She would have been much better off leaving him and living off benefits.

Aint we all...

Our income is somewhat near £2800 a month, and i am lucky to see £50 out of it.

Now... if we split up... Child Maintenance is £420 per month..

However, i dont want too and i love having the wife/children around...well sometimes... :rotfl:

millysg1

Traditionally, women were always given Pin money for clothes and to manage the household which was usually agreed and put in a contract on engagement which the father of the bride would sign.
The amount and terms of the “pin money” were often written into the marriage contract, and the legal status of “pin money” was codified in English law. Such “pin money” was often the only actual cash the wife received from her husband, was considered her personal property, and served as a sort of safety net at a time