Moving In With Girlfriend

getmore4less

One thing that came up on another thread a while back about the single household situation was that it simplifies the tax(to not relevent).

Stepping back, living costs shared is fine in most people eyes, council tax bills etc.

Where it becomes less clear is what is a reasonable occupancy rate.

Nothing is one extreme, 1/2 the market rent is the other.

basing it on the mortgage is not really sensible allthough if that falls inbetween the market rent and zero then something to work with.

THe savings option is a good comprimise, it sets up the contributions/comitmment as a buying into the property without the complications of working it out till the comitment is made often with the next property move or a lump sum off the mortgage.

There is no right answer but if things go t***s up having a simple exit stratagy for both partys makes a lot of sense.

if there is an insistance o a mortgage contribution hen work out now what you are buying.

The equitable share is the amount of debt you are servicing.

trollopscarletwoman

Fencer wrote: »

How much should I pay? She said half of the mortgage (and half of all bills).

However, based on the fact that she owns the flat and has already contributed a lot to the flat (deposit and years of mortgage payments) and I am moving from a rented flat, then I feel that I should be offering more than half of the mortgage.

Should our relative earnings come into it at all?

I want to be fair, but I don't want to be insulting (macho guy coming in, flashing salary, taking over...)

If you've got a better salary move up the property ladder in buying a larger property as joint tenants.

All depends on how much you trust each other and how much importance you store in money. And whether you think it will last. But you have take a chance sometime. It sounds like with equity in the flat you'd come out of it smiling anyway.

I'll give you an example. My partner was widowed and I come along. She owned her house outright. She sold that, put me on the new mortgage, but she put down a £90,000 sum. I put in about £5000.

13 years on still together (not married yet) and signed a new deal last week.

Guest101

Surely the question is:

If the GF owned outright, would the OP be paying rent? The answer should be the same as if mortgaged.

Mojisola

Fencer wrote: »

How much should I pay? She said half of the mortgage (and half of all bills).

However, based on the fact that she owns the flat and has already contributed a lot to the flat (deposit and years of mortgage payments) and I am moving from a rented flat, then I feel that I should be offering more than half of the mortgage.

Should our relative earnings come into it at all?

I want to be fair, but I don't want to be insulting (macho guy coming in, flashing salary, taking over...)

For a relationship to work you have to be prepared to talk about things and to compromise.

If you're both able to do that, you will sort out what suits you two - which might be quite different to how other couples do things.

Some couples split the household bills according to their relative salaries so it could be 50/50 or 70/30.

Some put all their money into one pot, take out the same amount each and everything else is household money for bills, savings, holidays, etc.

Some like to keep everything strictly separate, even if this means one partner ends up with a lot more spare cash than the other.

Talk through with her what will suit you both and suggest you reassess it after six months or so. If the relationship continues, you may want to change how the money is managed.

Be aware that after you move in, the government will consider you a couple and expect you to financially support each other if you hit hard times.

StuC75

But in that scenario neither would the OPs Partner, and Im sure there standard and style of living would reflect that.

Likewise if the GF rented a property; the advise in paying half the rent would be met with the caveat of do you want adding to the tenancy... which provides 2 aspects to consider 1- Security of Protecting right to be there and 2- Obligation to continue payments whatever happens..

The OP and Partner (lets remove the sex's from either side of this debate), have a very 'enviable' position if its setup to work correctly for them..

Assuming both in secure jobs, and maintaining finances sensibly, they have a scenario that can provide a stable future - savings, onward purchase, holidays etc - all with no further financial burden than what they are budgeted to spend in the here and now..

Its not a situation to get stressed over..

Guest101 wrote: »

Surely the question is:

If the GF owned outright, would the OP be paying rent? The answer should be the same as if mortgaged.

Marisco

onlyroz wrote: »

I think a relationship *is* transient until you've made a definite permanent commitment like either marriage or jointly owning a property where both parties have their name on the deeds. Until you've reached that stage there is no harm in being a little cautious.

Then why not just be "girlfriend and boyfriend", why move in together if you don't think it will last, saves all the financial rubbish getting in the way. Then when you do feel it's long term, buy/rent something together with both names on it. That way both have a stake in the future, rather than one "owning" and the other paying "rent".

Mojisola

Marisco wrote: »

Then why not just be "girlfriend and boyfriend", why move in together if you don't think it will last, saves all the financial rubbish getting in the way. Then when you do feel it's long term, buy/rent something together with both names on it. That way both have a stake in the future, rather than one "owning" and the other paying "rent".

Because it's cheaper to live together than run two households?

StuC75

Also they may be already spending time at each others places, so its a natural evolution.Granted its not the most romantic , but its a hell of a perk.

Mojisola wrote: »

Because it's cheaper to live together than run two households?

Guest101

Mojisola wrote: »

Because it's cheaper to live together than run two households?

Exactly.

And the homeowners gets their mortgage paid...

Marisco

Mojisola wrote: »

Because it's cheaper to live together than run two households?

That is no basis to base a relationship on though!! If the person moving in has no stake in the flat/house, then what is to stop the "owner" kicking him/her out at the first argument?