Partner's rights on property in my name

armchaireconomist

Hi, I'm in a similar position. My house 100%, girlfriend wants to move in. Only fair way to do it is to split bills 50/50 with exception of the mortgage. You can't expect him to pay for your property.

armchaireconomist

Rather more worryingly though how can you morally have him pay for your house for no benefit of his own? Even then, you're seeking legal advice on a partner who quite frankly needs to wise up as he's being taken for a ride...

Runningfast

armchaireconomist wrote: »

Hi, I'm in a similar position. My house 100%, girlfriend wants to move in. Only fair way to do it is to split bills 50/50 with exception of the mortgage. You can't expect him to pay for your property.

I agree with this. I own a property and my partner currently rents. We have spoken about her moving in with me. Our plan is for me to continue paying mortgage and upkeep etc. We will then split all living expenses 50/50 such as utilities, tv, food, entertainment etc.

I could never ask her to pay towards my property.

purplebuzz

armchaireconomist wrote: »

Rather more worryingly though how can you morally have him pay for your house for no benefit of his own? Even then, you're seeking legal advice on a partner who quite frankly needs to wise up as he's being taken for a ride...

That's wholly inaccurate, I am not taking him for a ride. I explained that actually I want him to be able to protect himself financially if he is contributing 50% mortgage or otherwise.

I wasn't especially seeking legal advice for this, it's just par of the advice that they have mentioned because they know someone else will be living there.

If it was an option for him to be on the mortgage then he would be but it isn't at this stage.

Pixie5740

AFF8879 wrote: »

So taking in a lodger is immoral?

Being a lodger is very different to building a life together with your partner.

It does seem a bit odd that the OP is buying somewhere and wants her partner to move in from the get-go yet doesn't want him on the mortgage. Perhaps a fairer solution would be for him to put the equivalent of half the mortgage payments in a savings account each month and then eventually get a joint mortgage with the OP further down the line.

purplebuzz

Pixie5740 wrote: »

It does seem a bit odd that the OP is buying somewhere and wants her partner to move in from the get-go yet doesn't want him on the mortgage. Perhaps a fairer solution would be for him to put the equivalent of half the mortgage payments in a savings account each month and then eventually get a joint mortgage with the OP further down the line.

We already live together in the house that I own now, that is also just in my name, he moved in after I bought the place, we are just moving on, together. It's not that I don't want him on the mortgage, he can't go on there at the moment. Can do what you're suggesting about putting in savings, but we both think we should benefit for having more spare cash each month to live on as well as save some of it for the future.

Bossypants

purplebuzz wrote: »

I can still afford everything 100% on my own and don't actually need him to contribute.

In that case, you paying 100% of mortgage and property upkeep (while splitting other living expenses 50/50) might be the cleanest way to do it. He can put aside what he would otherwise be contributing to the mortgage in a separate account. That way, if you split up he will have a deposit to put on a place of his own, and if you stay together you will have a lump sum to invest or put towards your new purchase.

purplebuzz

Bossypants wrote: »

In that case, you paying 100% of mortgage and property upkeep (while splitting other living expenses 50/50) might be the cleanest way to do it. He can put aside what he would otherwise be contributing to the mortgage in a separate account. That way, if you split up he will have a deposit to put on a place of his own, and if you stay together you will have a lump sum to invest or put towards your new purchase.

Cleaner how? Given that he is still contributing, as I understand it, he can then still claim he had contributed and get something back should we ever split up in the future. It's swings and roundabouts really, anything he did put aside he would agree that we could both use as savings if we chose to.

[Deleted User]

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Being a lodger is very different to building a life together with your partner.

Couldn't have put it better myself! :T
Ask your solicitor for the difference between being 'Joint Tenants' and 'Tenants in Common'.

You can still protect your sole initial investment if you wish, which may be considered fair depending on the amount of commitment you have to each other along with other factors.

Bossypants

purplebuzz wrote: »

Cleaner how? Given that he is still contributing, as I understand it, he can then still claim he had contributed and get something back should we ever split up in the future. It's swings and roundabouts really, anything he did put aside he would agree that we could both use as savings if we chose to.

It's cleaner if you split: You keep your place, he take his money and goes, end of discussion. If he's contributing to mortgage payments, on the other hand, the place needs to be valued, his percentage needs to be calculated, and you need to find liquid funds to pay him back. That all sounds simple enough typed out, but in the middle of an acrimonious split, getting that far can be very difficult (since you need to agree on it all) and may sometimes require lawyers to become involved, which is expensive for everyone.

Of course, I hope that you don't split, in which case, as you say, it's all ultimately one and the same. I'm just putting it out there because *a lot* of couples don't survive their first five years living together (you have only to look through threads here and on the Relationships board for example upon example). That's in no way a criticism of the people involved, it's just factual that living together is a big change from living separately and some people just aren't compatible in that way, no matter how much they might love each other. Being prepared for the worst even as you hope for the best, especially when there are potentially significant sums involved, is a kind and loving thing to do for each other.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that you keep it set up like that forever - at some point you have to have faith in your ability to sustain the relationship - just for the first few years, until the dust from moving in together at the same time as making a life-changing purchase (you first?) has settled.