OK I'm worried now...

BlaEm

My OH and I have a living together agreement:
http://www.advicenow.org.uk/living-together/living-together-agreements/
In which we state that he contributes a rent (which we agreed would be 50% of the market rate for rental, and not based on the mortgage cost), and I can't kick him out without notice. It's even in my will that if I die, my beneficiaries must let him stay for a period.

I disagree that people like OP and I are 'having our cake' - my OH is perfectly happy paying me what he would otherwise be paying in rent; he chose to invest his savings elsewhere, I chose to invest mine in property. We both wanted to live together and my investment happens to provide this. I don't contribute to or have any claim on his investments (which are actually >my equity), and neither of us see him paying for somewhere to live as contributing to mine. In fact I don't physically spend what he pays me on the mortgage, as I cover that myself.

OP - you've obviously been with your partner for a while, it doesn't have to be awkward to discuss things like having an agreement as it's the sensible thing to do. It may not be romantic but you both need to protect yourselves.

TBagpuss

He might potentially make a claim if the two of you split up, based on the contributions he made.

Your best bet would be to have a cohabitation agreement, which means that you can specifically define and limit what claims he would have. Constructive trusts are based on the assumption that there was a shared intention or understanding that he would have an interest in the property. A shared intention or understanding can be inferred from looking at how you have both acted, but as it is an assumption, it can be disproved by evidence to the contrary - a written agreement which explicitly states that he will not be entitled to any share of the property as a result of contributing to the mortgage or bills is very good evidence that there is no joint agreement that he does have an interest.

It is sensible to get any cohabitation drawn up formally and to them review it (and record that you have, perhaps be re-signing it) every few years or whenever there is any major change, such as a house move, a change in the proportion of outgoings you pay, or anything of that kind.

A cohabitation agreement eed not be limited to saying he gains no interst - you could equally chose to agree that he would be entitled to a share, and to define how that share was to be calcuated (e.g if the house is currently worth £200K and you have a £150K mortgage, you could say that you are entitled to 35% of the value of the house (i.e. the current equity) and that any equity available after you have received that will be split equally - that would mean that if the house was sold tomorrow, he would get nothing, as 25% of the house value would use up all of the equity. If however you sold in 5 years, and at that time the house was worth £250K and the mortgage was down to £100K, you would get 25% of the house value (your current equity plus passive growth on that portion) = £62.5K + £43.75 (half the remaining equity) = £106,250. He would get $43K which would reflect the contributions he had made to the mortgage and the increase in house prices.

If the house didn;t go up in value (e.g house sells for £200K, mortgage down to £100K) You would get 25% of the value = £50K, + 1/2 the rest = £25K, and he would get the other £25K, reflecting what you've each paid off the mortgage.

meanwhile, the money you are saving by only paying half the mortgage and bills if available for you to put into other savings.

dirty_magic

martinsurrey wrote: »

so he lives rent free? a lot of renters pay 100% of thier landlords mortgage (and a profit!) yet the tenants have no claim over the property.

OP, Have the difficult conversation, it doesnt have to be too bad though, stress that its just so that everyone knows where they stand. say that this is only to protect both of you from expensive and painful legal implications if the worst was to happen.

They're in a relationship, he's not a tenant. Like someone else said, if he was a tenant he'd have rights; the OP could just turn around and say thanks for paying half my mortgage but it's over, get out.

I think it's such a cold way of viewing a relationship to treat it like a landlord/tenant situation. This is why I wouldn't want to live in someone else's house!

Newlyboughthouse

Wow really varied opinions on the matter - seems to be a highly contentious issue. I will get agreement done just in case. I don't think I'll ever change my opinion that my house is my investment, not his, and that it would be wrong for him to not contribute. I think he'd feel really uncomfortable living for free or paying a nominal amount knowing I was paying a hell of a lot more for the roof over our head - I know I would!

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays

Newlyboughthouse wrote: »

Wow really varied opinions on the matter - seems to be a highly contentious issue. I will get agreement done just in case. I don't think I'll ever change my opinion that my house is my investment, not his, and that it would be wrong for him to not contribute. I think he'd feel really uncomfortable living for free or paying a nominal amount knowing I was paying a hell of a lot more for the roof over our head - I know I would!

If it's not his investment, then what's he paying you for? It's not rent, as you've made clear he's not a tenant/lodger.

Let's face it, if the genders were reversed there'd be !!!!ing uproar.

Newlyboughthouse

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays wrote: »

If it's not his investment, then what's he paying you for? It's not rent, as you've made clear he's not a tenant/lodger.

Let's face it, if the genders were reversed there'd be !!!!ing uproar.

Huh? He's paying for a roof over his head, just like he would if he were living elsewhere. He has savings etc - that is his investment, which I have nothing to do with. It's always been clear in our relationship that I own this house, that it is my investment, which is why he doesn't get involved when repairs need doing or the fridge breaks and a new one needs to be bought.

I don't think there'd be uproar. Why does it matter what gender? I thought times had moved on?

As I said, I don't think I'd be comfortable living for free or paying a nominal amount just so that I don't get a share of the house on selling it. Would you?

I haven't made clear here either way so far, but yes I guess he is a lodger. Agreement to be made/discussion to be had in due course...

samba

Newlyboughthouse wrote: »

Huh? He's paying for a roof over his head, just like he would if he were living elsewhere.

If I was him that's exactly what I would do - live elsewhere. At least you would both know where you stand.

FBaby

The problem is, if he was putting that same amount towards rent, he would have much more rights than he has now. He certainly wouldn't be able to be told to get out that evening if you decided you didn't want him any longer. Paying for some level of security is a big aspect of renting. Paying for even more level of security is part of paying towards a mortgage.

At the moment, you expect him to pay as he would if he was paying towards a mortgage or rent except he gets none of the benefits at all.

I personally believe that if he is happy to pay towards 'having a roof over his head' as you put it, then it shouldn't be anything more than 1/3rd of the mortgage, the difference making up for the loss of security.

Newlyboughthouse

FBaby wrote: »

The problem is, if he was putting that same amount towards rent, he would have much more rights than he has now. He certainly wouldn't be able to be told to get out that evening if you decided you didn't want him any longer. Paying for some level of security is a big aspect of renting. Paying for even more level of security is part of paying towards a mortgage.

At the moment, you expect him to pay as he would if he was paying towards a mortgage or rent except he gets none of the benefits at all.

I personally believe that if he is happy to pay towards 'having a roof over his head' as you put it, then it shouldn't be anything more than 1/3rd of the mortgage, the difference making up for the loss of security.

You make an interesting, valid, point to be fair with regards rent buying security. Never even considered that.

BlaEm

I think a well drafted living together agreement would also afford him some security
Also, depending on whether half the mortgage is less than half the cost of what it would cost to rent, he may well be getting the cost benefit already.
Just my opinion - obviously it's your OH's opinion that matter, not ours. Hope your conversation goes mutually well!