Buying a house with partner. He's paying deposit. We have 2 children.

Kynthia

If you didn't have children then I'd agree with him. You aren't married and therefore you can protect your assets and acknowledge relationships fail.

However you have children together and hace made a family. He has been very happy for you to make sacrifices for the family by working part time and therefore earning less money and potentially hampering your future career and earning potential. However when it comes to him showing he's fully committed by investing more than half the money in the family home he doesn't want to. This shows he doesn't value your contributions and only values financial ones. I hate to say it but this is a big reason why marriage before children is better as then the whole issue of non-financial contributions to the relationship and personal sacrifices are already valued and both parties are protected. Now that you have children and he is treating you this way you are at a disadvantage as you can't make him treat you as if married and even if you leave him you won't get a fair financial split and there will be an emotional fall out.

So unless you can get him to see your contributions and sacrifices and change his mind you either agree to an uneven split knowing marriage will change that in the future (there's no guarantee he will propose), split up as now you know he's not prepared to act as if you are a fully invested family unit you now feel differently about him, or pull out of the purchase until you are married (which could result in a split also). I hope you resolve it but I can understand your hurt and disappointment in him.

badmemory

After 8 years and 2 children he is still not prepared to make a commitment. Sounds like a really nice guy! I am prepared to bet he doesn't have a will written in your favour either. Any life insurance to protect his kids future? If you go ahead with the house purchase make sure you have a will and that your share is left to your children not to him.

Spendless

*max* wrote: »

Scenario B would be a moot point anyway, if they have been married that whole time. His deposit would be part of the pot.

Indeed, which is why I'm wondering why it is such a sticking point at the minute.

FBaby

Why have you both waited 8 years to marry and he is only planning to propose next year? Do you mean YOU have been waiting all this time? It doesn't make much sense.

I think there is more to it all than what has been shared. If you marry, considering how long you've been together (I assume living together for most of the 8 years) and you divorce and therefore sell the house, you could fight for 50/50 anyway, if not getting the 50% of the deposit, getting the equivalent in another way.

So it makes you wonder whether he feels the need to protect that deposit because he sees it as his father's money rather than his. I can understand that. If say your relationship has ups and downs, and he doesn't feel totally secure in what you might do, he might be prepared to risk his investment for the sake of committing to you, but he might feel oblige to protect his father's money.

Of course, even if you do 50/50 but as tenants in common, he could opt to write a will to leave an element of his 50% to a family member rather than you.

Happier_Me

I have potentially two large inheritances coming my way at some point in the (hopefully) very distant future, which I will share with my husband. He's put up with me for 22 years after all, married 16 of them, two children together and we started out with nothing. My husband is unlikely to inherit anything. It is absolutely right to share in this scenario and I wouldn't have it any other way. But he will benefit from this money because of his association with me... if I were to die first, these inheritances would bypass my husband and benefit our kids.

But if we were to separate for whatever reason I would be very protective of my financial assets in a future relationship and that of any inheritance I receive. I see this as a sensible thing to do. I also intend to be one of those horrible MIL's who will help my children financially but will do whatever it takes to protect that financial help from a future relationship breakdown. We have both worked very hard, and still do, for our money I want to see this go to... and remain with... my children. I can see and separate the emotional aspect of this situation from the practical.

If you had inherited this lump sum would you genuinely not want to protect this, in the unlikely event the relationship ends?

System

I look at it as what is mine is his, what is his is mine but if we split up i agree with this.

if we were to separate for whatever reason I would be very protective of my financial assets in a future relationship and that of any inheritance I receive. I see this as a sensible thing to do.

pollypenny

If I was the OP I'd be looking for a full time job asap and ensuring my own future.

The guy sounds very half-hearted about commitment in spite of their two children, her support of his career and putting her own career on hold.

Mojisola

pollypenny wrote: »

The guy sounds very half-hearted about commitment in spite of their two children, her support of his career and putting her own career on hold.

Or he could have agreed to the pressure of being the main wage-earner because the OP didn't want to go back to work full-time but is now feeling that he'd prefer to ringfence his inheritance.

We don't know how the present situation came about.

maman

JReacher1 wrote: »

How much are we talking here? If it's 10% deposit it probably doesn't matter. If it's 75% deposit it's probably more of an issue.

I'd say it matters a lot however much it is. This couple have been together 8 years and for the first 5 presumably both worked but haven't saved enough for a deposit in all that time. This sounds like an opportunity he wouldn't have had without his father. I can see why he sees it as a personal gift to him from his dad.

Mojisola wrote: »

Or he could have agreed to the pressure of being the main wage-earner because the OP didn't want to go back to work full-time but is now feeling that he'd prefer to ringfence his inheritance.

We don't know how the present situation came about.

So pleased you put an alternative point of view mojisola. I've come across a number of women who make a lifestyle choice of staying at home with children. It's the easy option IMO.


I have great sympathy with men as the financial odds are stacked against them. If this couple marry and the relationship doesn't last then he stands to lose close contact with his children, his home, his inheritance and a big chunk of his wages for the next 17 years+. I don't blame him trying to protect this last gift from his father.

hazyjo

maman wrote: »

I have great sympathy with men as the financial odds are stacked against them. If this couple marry and the relationship doesn't last then he stands to lose close contact with his children, his home, his inheritance and a big chunk of his wages for the next 17 years+. I don't blame him trying to protect this last gift from his father.

Totally agree. I'd want to protect it in his shoes too.


I've known several blokes who have ended up barely able to afford to rent a small flat, let alone buy, when their marriages have ended as they have to pay a lot to their exes who look after the kids and get to stay in the family home (would also count as a second home meaning they'd be clobbered with the higher stamp duty). Not begrudging what the wife gets, but it doesn't usually leave the husband with much. If he can have that chunk of money, however big, to use as a deposit or whatever, I don't blame him.