Am i paying too much

burlington6

paddy's_mum wrote: »

Not when they have created a family, a home and a life together over several years, it isn't!

His time for opting out was before he started taking her money and giving very little back. She could be a professional housekeeper, doing far less than now, be respected for her skills and contribution and get paid good solid money into the bargain.

In my view, accepting or creating a family and then taking responsibility for only the woman is akin to the concept of "a slight touch of pregnancy". :rotfl:

No, the child is not his responsibility unless he want that.

The mother could be getting huge sums from the ex for all we know. Either way, it's up to him if he want to contribute financially to that child.

Once again, the women on the MSE board are out for blood. If the roles we reversed and the man was expecting his wife to bring up a child from a previous relationship it would be a different story

Double standards

StuC75

since the op hasn't divulged what the mortgage payments are and how much exactly is being overpaid...

How much is the OP's partner paying for the mortgage each month, and how does this compare to what rent they might be realistically paying instead?

How would peoples opinion change if they the op was renting instead, and the op's partner was paying the full rent; with the OP then paying the bills side of it instead.. and say that amount for the bills was a lot less than the equivalent rent would be?
e.g. £800 combined rent and council tax combined, with the other bills amounting to £400.. and the other half say earnt double so they were contribution a similar percentage of there earnings..

Many posters are quick to jump on whether the partner may have equity in the house? but what say prices go down - would they be quick to say the OP should contribute to that shortfall?

A lot more financial clarification needed here to see the full situation. we don't know how the bills compare to what the housing costs are \ should be realistically..

Since the OP is wanting 50/50 on the bills, how would the finances look if it was 50/50 across the full housing costs / or in line with the 66.6/33.3 earning split.

What other options does the op have re earnings? was the reduction in hours for school run to cover her oldest child or does it impact care provisions for the child they have together?

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Can I suggest that you cancel everything that is not strictly essential - the SKY, internet, phone, TV Licence (so no telly), stop buying the youngest's clothes and only cook for yourself and the children/only do their washing? 'Oh, I didn't have enough to cover all the bills, so I had to cancel them, as they're only here because I arranged them', 'No, I didn't have enough left over for shopping after I had to get the kids a pair of shoes each. There's a tin of beans in the cupboard if you're hungry - no, the kids have already eaten. Oh, and we're out of washing powder because I topped up the dinner money account and bought their set texts for English whilst I was at it, so couldn't get any more'.

If he wants a house with a lodger, then he becomes responsible for all those things, plus, as an absent father (if he did the 'well, move out of my house' thing), he'd be liable for 10% of his gross salary straight off. Also, with his child there, it would be less likely that a court would order you out and make his child homeless.


I'm not saying leave him - but if he thinks that you're getting a good deal at the moment, he needs to have it explained to him in a way that allows for an angry knee jerk response, that he's actually the one getting the best deal.

fierystormcloud

StuC75 wrote: »

since the op hasn't divulged what the mortgage payments are and how much exactly is being overpaid...

How much is the OP's partner paying for the mortgage each month, and how does this compare to what rent they might be realistically paying instead?

How would peoples opinion change if they the op was renting instead, and the op's partner was paying the full rent; with the OP then paying the bills side of it instead.. and say that amount for the bills was a lot less than the equivalent rent would be?
e.g. £800 combined rent and council tax combined, with the other bills amounting to £400.. and the other half say earnt double so they were contribution a similar percentage of there earnings..

Many posters are quick to jump on whether the partner may have equity in the house? but what say prices go down - would they be quick to say the OP should contribute to that shortfall?

A lot more financial clarification needed here to see the full situation. we don't know how the bills compare to what the housing costs are \ should be realistically..

Since the OP is wanting 50/50 on the bills, how would the finances look if it was 50/50 across the full housing costs / or in line with the 66.6/33.3 earning split.

What other options does the op have re earnings? was the reduction in hours for school run to cover her oldest child or does it impact care provisions for the child they have together?

Nice straw man argument.

If the OP's partner was paying rent, of whatever it was, that would be different.

The fact is that she is paying for EVERYTHING while he is paying for nothing except shedloads off the mortgage on HIS HOUSE.

There is literally nothing in it for her whatsoever.

She is paying for EVERYTHING, while he pays off HIS HOUSE.

Nice for him. She is getting nothing out of it; no security, no equity in the house - nothing. She is not even a lodger; she is a convenient pawn to pay his bills while he pays chunks off his mortgage. If he loves her and values her, he will put her name on the deeds, so the house is 50% hers.

I would ask him to do this (I have a feeling he won't) but I would ask, and if he says no, I would pack my stuff and leave tomorrow if I were her. Let him pay his own flippin' bills and buy all his food himself as well as paying huge amounts of his mortgage! AND he can fork out for their child too!

Flipping cheek.

She needs to wipe the footprints off her head.

paddy's_mum

burlington6 wrote: »

No, the child is not his responsibility unless he want that.

The mother could be getting huge sums from the ex for all we know. Either way, it's up to him if he want to contribute financially to that child.

Once again, the women on the MSE board are out for blood. If the roles we reversed and the man was expecting his wife to bring up a child from a previous relationship it would be a different story

Double standards

Not a double standard at all or if it is, it's one the courts over most of the Western world apply during matrimonial proceedings of many different kinds.

It's usually termed as "child of the family" and judges care not one jot exactly how that child came into its family (ie issue from a previous relationship, adoption, long-term fostering of, say, a niece...) All they are concerned about is that the needs of the child are considered and met.

Are you saying that the OP's partner is at liberty to (in effect) re-home a pet that is no longer wanted?

Think how many adopted children would be thrown out like a bit of rubbish if all a man had to do to abandon responsibilities he had knowingly and willingly taken on was to say "it's not my child..."!

I'd also point out in response to your comment about bringing up a child from a previous relationship that there are thousands upon thousands of people in this country doing exactly that, knowingly, willingly and lovingly.

I respect your view but would repeat that in my opinion, the time for this man to have opted out was long ago, not when years have passed and she has given him everything.

rachy182

Paddys mum everyone has a right not to be responsible for another persons child (regardless of gender). Adoption is another story that person has a legal obligation to look after the kid, they chose that path.

The ops partner seems not to want to take responsibility for her child, which is fine, she knew that when she moved in and had another child with him. However most parents when they become serious/ move in with someone new they make it clear that they come as a package and you cant have one without the other and the new partner would have to take some responsibility for the previous child both financially and emotionally.
Personally i wouldnt want to be with a man who wouldnt support both me and any children i had (currently childless). I would not want my previous children to feel unwanted and wonder if he would be as uncaring with kids we had together.

cookie3030

Hi thanks for all your comments

I can say that I do not receive maintenance for my son.

And as for the mortgage it is £684 a month but my other half pays £1,100 a month, leaving him with £240 a month left over from his wages once everything is paid out, i.e fuel insurances, pension etc.
I am left with £110 approx a month.

I also forgot to say he has a property he rents out and receives an income of £265 a month once everything is paid, but I'm not allowed to include that extra income as that goes into a seep rate account for repairs etc

cookie3030

*seperate account

Person_one

Its over a month since you last posted.

What have you done about this? Have you had a conversation with your partner?

Guest101

cookie3030 wrote: »

Hi thanks for all your comments

I can say that I do not receive maintenance for my son. - Why not?

And as for the mortgage it is £684 a month but my other half pays £1,100 a month, leaving him with £240 a month left over from his wages once everything is paid out, i.e fuel insurances, pension etc. - Are you otherwise happy in your relationship, do you see marriage down the line? If he's paying £1,100 a month off the mortgage, that could be very beneficial in a few years time.
I am left with £110 approx a month. - Do you have any need for more than this?

I also forgot to say he has a property he rents out and receives an income of £265 a month once everything is paid, but I'm not allowed to include that extra income as that goes into a seep rate account for repairs etc- presumebly tax etc also come sout of this account? Wisely he saved it up as he'll shortly be paying more tax on it.

It sound like you want a bit of security rather than anything else.