Hopefully you can help resolve this argument one way or another!

LeesArt

gettingtheresometime wrote: »

I don't normally stalk posters as to what they've written on other posts but something you commented on another thread I thought was useful in the argument that you're having now :


I go for the silent treatment. The OH and I are both really laid back so arguments are really rare. We ave one every 7 years lol

This being said, if i get my dander up i go from sweet, pleasant and chilled to a massive thundering temper - huge. I mean erupting volcano type of outburst - made all the suprising as i am normally very quiet and gentle.

So massive that it takes a while for me to simmer down. I am not talking the days or weeks people on here have mentioned but a day or so.

I love my wonderful OH and wouldn't want to say the nasty horrible things that rise to the surface when my temper is raging - its not fair or right. but my temper has a itchy trigger finger for a few days.

So i shut up and avoid until the lid is back on the box.

As we are adults we can talk about it later so he knows this is my coping mechanism, its not a punishment or a rebuke.

(he sulks, really sulks - uggh. Luckily, as said before its rare we argue - thank goodness as it brings out the worst in both of us)


At the moment it seems that you're both determined to 'get your own way' so the heat needs to come out of the situation. Agree not to discuss it for a week in which time you can both think of solutions to how you can maximise your income and minimise your outgoings...and what each of you are prepared to compromise on and what you're not.


each of you also has to think of the cons against your particular pov and come up with a workable solution - so in your case would there be an increase in buildings / contents insurance? How would you ensure your privacy.

Nothing wrong with stalking, quite relevant, but if you are going to do it please use the quote button so we can actually see who you are quoting.

Seems to me that is this as I said, a failure to comminicate, in fact I would say that this is dysfunctional comms.

LeesArt

I wonder if it is something he is doing at home that is the problem.

He knows OP's routine so can carry on around it, but a lodger complicates things, maybe they will say something.

gettingtheresometime

LeesArt wrote: »

Nothing wrong with stalking, quite relevant, but if you are going to do it please use the quote button so we can actually see who you are quoting.

Seems to me that is this as I said, a failure to comminicate, in fact I would say that this is dysfunctional comms.

I should have made it clearer in the post that the bit highlighted in red was what the OP wrote on another thread but will alter my post to reflect that

Sayschezza

LeesArt wrote: »

@Elinore

"What we have here is a failure to communicate" Cool hand Luke

Here is my tuppence worth...

1. You are both failing to communicate, him about change of mind, you about WHY you are paying into your own account.

2. You are both using the Joint Account wrongly.

Overall I am on your side, so here is how I would suggest joint accounts are used.

As others have said there are many ways to share expenses but I detest joint accounts, they open both sides to abuse and are horrendously hard to close without consent.

So what is the basis for your shared expenses?

If partner1 earns £120k net and Partner2 earns £60k net, how should this be split up?

Does Partner2 have automatic divvy on Partner1's earnings over £60k?

I think NOT.

My approach is that a budget should be created of shared expenses that both parties should contribute to equally but not equally pound for pound. So in above scenario, household income is £180k or £15,000 a month, P1 £10k and P2 £5k. If they live in swish Canary Wharf Apartment that costs £9000 a month then P1 should pay £6000 and P2 should pay £3000, the same ratio of their respective net income.

Now @Elinore I think it is entirely reasonable that you say HE has moved the goal posts, he has, you selected and bought this house on an agreed basis of an element of the income come from having a lodger. Now you are having to take a 3rd job just to have a few things you deserve.

So you could pay the income from new job into the Joint account and then take it right back out again, but I would sit him down and say "I think we need to have a chat about our finances".

You create the spreadsheet showing all the outgoings, and split these on a pro rata basis according to income. You count the income from the lodger as a joint income 50/50.

By reneging on the agreement to have a lodger he has taken money from your pocket, so you can show that as a cost to you of £300 but also as a further £300 to paring down the mortgage or to a new car fund or whatever. This is reasonable as the property was bought on that basis, to reduce your joint expenses.

My feeling is that once the agreed joint expenses have been allocated and made, you ONLY pay those amounts into the Joint Account, after that it is his business how he spends his disposable income and your business how you spend yours. Any additional expenses are paid on the same ratio to the income.

I think the AirBnB idea was a good one, just to get him used to the concept.

I would ask him what his biggest objection is, if it is the lack of a separate front door is there a way to resolve that by having them use a rear entrance or getting one done?

If you choose the right lodger it can work out very well, a busy rep who is travelling a lot, a Doctor or Nurse who works all hours.

Firstly you need to understand his objection, ask him IF he were to have a lodger would he prefer male or female, this simple question lowers his barrier, instead of it being Lodger or No Lodger it becomes Male or Female.

Next ask him what he things the biggest incovenience would be; noise, food prep, loss of amenities, loss of privacy? Then consider ways to reduce those, could they be made almost self contained (be careful here, if they are fully self contained you need to protect deposit and create an Assured Shorthold Tenancy rather than a Lodgers Agreement. You have to share some space for it to be a lodger.

Remind your partner that Lodgers have virtually no right of tenure, just reasonable notice, which could be a week or two weeks at most, make sure this is specified in lodger agreement as say 14 days. So if you get some nutcase you can quickly move them on.

Obviously you would restrict smoking, guests, food in their room (if there is a space for them to cook and eat elsewhere) and so on.

Give him "buy in" to the decisions about the lodger, this may bring him around or at the very least communicate his objections, then those can be dealt with and you can have this £600. Personally, I think he should be paying £600 extra if it is he that is the blocker, why should you have to work a 3rd job because of HIS about turn on having a lodger.

Do your budget spreadsheet on all expenses being shared by income ratio (counting the lost £600) and propose the Joint Account is used differently, i.e. Only to cover shared expenses.

After that you can spend your money on hair do's and he can spend his on anal bleaching if that is his hearts desire, it will be none of your respective businesss

Agree with this 100%. It works for us and we have never ever had an arguement about money in 30+ years.

gettingtheresometime

LeesArt wrote: »

I wonder if it is something he is doing at home that is the problem.

He knows OP's routine so can carry on around it, but a lodger complicates things, maybe they will say something.

Or perhaps he just wants to hubby dance in his underpants without upsetting the lodger!

Red-Squirrel_2

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

I've seen a woman pay the same as me, as she was ahead of me in the queue at the barber. Had hers cut shorter than I do though (one all over versus my four on top, two back and sides) and no wash / blow dry / styling product / highlights / colour / perm / kitchen sink thrown at it.

She looked amazing when it was done too.

Are you suggesting the OP should shave her head to keep costs down?

Red-Squirrel_2

fairy_lights wrote: »

It sounds like quite a grand house, and if you're both working multiple jobs to afford it then it sounds like you've massively overstretched yourselves in buying it. Is selling and moving somewhere cheaper an option?

If they only bought the place recently I'd be very surprised if they really couldn't afford it, mortgage lenders are pretty strict on affordability these days.

They are overpaying it, for some reason. They would probably be absolutely fine without a lodger and without either needing to work three jobs if they stopped doing that, at least for now. Most people don't overpay.

Elinore

Thank you everyone for your further comments. Ill take on board your feedback and shave my hair to save costs


Stalking in this instance is fine - My comments of that thread related to (if memory serves) how people dealt with people who say they fine or sulk after an argument.


And as it notes we don't argue very often! honest!


*and to repeat we are overpaying as a short term thing to help our LTV - so when we re- mortgage we can get off this horrible FTB rate and open up to a better market of lenders . Full affordability was done but just after we got hit was some very big bills - most will be paid by next year so come this time in 2018 we will be much much better off

Mrs_Z

Ahh... the art of compromise
Very difficult situation, as others have said - you are both right. However, clearly you need to find a way forward that is at least somewhat satisfactory to both parties.

First of all, I would separate the two issues – 1) household economics and 2) lodger and tackle them separately. First of all, sort out the finances and then tackle the lodger issue couple of months later.

If you have an agreement to contribute 50/50 to household expenses regardless who earns what – then that’s quite simple. You work out a monthly sum that you both pay into a joint account but more importantly, what this money can be used for (food/household bills only but not personal items; hairspray etc). Then any money left over would be for keepers for the one who has earned it. Works for us. By nature I’m much more MSE than my OH and it would drive me crazy if we poured all of our earnings into the same pot. I would be forever criticising his spending! This way I can close a blind eye to his personal spending and feel free to spend/save/invest my personal money as I see fit.

With regards to the lodger. I can understand both view points. It is not clear why he has changed his mind. Maybe he gave it a bit more thought and realised that he did not want to have a stranger in the house after all even if it meant being £600 better off each month. Fair enough.
However, where does that leave you? There was an agreement beforehand to have one and now he is not honouring the agreement. In this light, could you not agree to have a lodger on a trial basis? For a fixed 6month period and then review the situation after? Would it be possible to have a Monday-Friday lodger? Maybe somebody who commutes to different town at the weekend, so you could then have the best of both worlds – extra income but also the house for yourselves at the weekends?

Wishing you a best of luck with the negotiations.

ska_lover

You are living a nightmare in my opinion. Five jobs between you in order to pay the mortgage on a house that you barely spend any time in cos you are always at work and are stressed to the balls to pay for the house that you barely get to spend any time in you are missing out on life


I think you should get a lodger , tenant, whatever you call it. I would be unhappy in your position - as your lifestyle has changed due to your partner changing his mind, seemingly without much reason, and you aren't given any input into it, just expected to go along with