Moving In With Girlfriend

StuC75

This scenario is less binding should it not work out in the short term, if they are on a tenancy or mortgage and decide that its not working out, its a costly experience. Mortgages can be more binding than Marriage..

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".

Guest101

Marisco wrote: »

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?

My point exactly.

BoJangles_2

Mojisola wrote: »

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

Especially for the person without the mortgage paying no rent!

Mojisola

Marisco wrote: »

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?

Presumably most people get to a certain stage in their relationship before they agree to a partner moving in?

There is nothing to stop the owner throwing out the BF/GF without any notice because they don't have any rights - which is why I suggest the incomer pays what they would otherwise pay out in rent into an account so that they have the capital necessary to find somewhere else to live if that happens.

SeduLOUs

In my opinion the only 'fair' way is for both parties of a relationship to have an equal amount of disposable income remaining after all essential bills have been paid, and that's how it works in my house (we both get paid into a joint account for all bills/savings/groceries etc and have a standing order of a set amount that goes to our personal accounts).

We both work full time but have quite different salaries, and it just wouldn't seem right to me for either one of us to be able to afford a life of luxury when the other can barely afford a single night out.

BoJangles_2

Mojisola wrote: »

Presumably most people get to a certain stage in their relationship before they agree to a partner moving in?

There is nothing to stop the owner throwing out the BF/GF without any notice because they don't have any rights - which is why I suggest the incomer pays what they would otherwise pay out in rent into an account so that they have the capital necessary to find somewhere else to live if that happens.

But it is likely that savings will be made (which they can save), as said, rent can be a lot higher than the full mortgage due each month.

I think it is off that a person can pay nothing for their living costs.

Guest101

Mojisola wrote: »

Presumably most people get to a certain stage in their relationship before they agree to a partner moving in?

There is nothing to stop the owner throwing out the BF/GF without any notice because they don't have any rights - which is why I suggest the incomer pays what they would otherwise pay out in rent into an account so that they have the capital necessary to find somewhere else to live if that happens.

And why i second this advice.


So it's not fair that Person A lives rent free (not sure why it's not fair, but for whatever)
But it's fair for Person A to pay off the mortgage for Person B.

I guess Person A is very generous, I'd like to meet Person A, so they can pay off my mortgage......

Guest101

BoJangles wrote: »

But it is likely that savings will be made (which they can save), as said, rent can be a lot higher than the full mortgage due each month.

I think it is off that a person can pay nothing for their living costs.

Why is it?

Mojisola

Mojisola wrote: »

They share all bills except mortgage and repairs/maintenance - either 50/50 or in proportion to their income.

He opens a new account and pays in what they decide is fair - the equivalent of half the mortgage or the local going rate for a houseshare or whatever - and lets that money build up.

If life is wonderful and they decide they are in the relationship for the long run, the savings become joint money - they could reduce the mortgage, buy somewhere else, have some good holidays, keep it as a rainy day fund, etc.

If they end up hating the sight of each other and want to go their separate ways, he will have a lump sum and can move out quickly without having any claim on her property.

BoJangles wrote: »

I think it is off that a person can pay nothing for their living costs.

Which is why some couples go with the above system - if the relationship doesn't last long, yes, the incomer hasn't had to pay rent for those months but he/she also hasn't had any security of tenure. Because the incomer hasn't paid towards the mortgage, the owner is safe from claims against the property.

If the relationship does work out, the money sorts itself out because the savings can be used for whatever the couple decide.

FBaby

All what matters OP is that you go into it both knowing where you stand. There is no right and wrong, what is wrong is not to lay out eachother's expectations before you move in and make assumptions about each other's intentions and motives. There is nothing wrong in talking it through, considering all situations, and laying out potential disagreements/misunderstandings. If you can't communicate all this at this stage of the relationship, then it probably isn't the right time yet to agree to move in together.

In the end, you should both agree what paying towards the mortgage or rent means to each of you. My view is what is fairer is: Contribution towards the bills should be based on income, so that if you earn more than twice as much as she does, you can't contribute twice more. However, in terms of the mortgage/rent, I would think that considering the rights you lose out of by not being on the mortgage, nor being a proper tenant, that a contribution of say 1/3rd or 2/5th, rather than 1/2 is reasonable.

This can then be amended as your relationship progesses.