Am I being unreasonable charging partner a token rent?

seven-day-weekend

My son and his partner each put the same amount into the communal pot to pay bills and expenses. Some of it goes towards paying the mortgage. My son's partner is not on the mortgage. This was a decision taken when he bought the flat as he has an immaculate credit history and she has not. This arrangement works well for them.

However, I think the OP feels a little resentful towards his partner. It is not so much what he is asking her to pay, but his attitude towards her, calling her a 'lodger' and her contribution 'rent'.

I think h perhaps needs counselling so that he can move on from his previous relationship.

warby68

So if something happens to your partner, you're fine financially but what if something happens to you OP, what happens to your partner? Who gets the house?

This might be a sign of how much a partnership this is.

If I owned the house and for some reason didn't want my partner to but still felt they were my life partner, I'd at least want them to have as much security as possible for future 'what ifs' not be building up my asset base even further at the expense of theirs.

Not convinced OP is genuine though - provocative wording repeated.

YoungBlueEyes

I understand where the OP is coming from.

My friend Clare used to go to the cinema about 20 miles away and would often miss the last bus home. She’d ring me and I’d go pick her up. I was a night owl so the time wasn’t an issue, and she always gave me a tenner.

Just because it didn’t cost me a tenner to do it was neither here nor there. It was a lot less than a taxi would have charged her. She was paying for the ...service/privilege?

pinkshoes

OneHalfMortgageFree wrote: »

No you're right.

What an animal I am for asking for a 10% payment towards her lodgings when of course she should only ever have to pay 50% of the bills; no more, no less. I mean, who pays rent anyway?

I shall also of course ask for 50% of all interest/dividends she receives from her savings and investments, given she only had those monies given she hasn't had to spend anything* on somewhere to live

*£200 a month adjusted, of course.....

This doesn't make sense.

You start by saying you got stung financially by your ex, yet with the new partner you have essentially been allowing her to pay towards the mortgage, giving her a financial interest in property.

She should ONLY have been paying 50% of bills. As she is your partner (not a lodger) then anything else would be seen as a contribution to the mortgage, so should you split, then she could have a claim on your house.

I would give back ANY payment she has made over 50% of bills as a 'surprise' and tell her you have been putting it aside for her!

Honeylife

YoungBlueEyes wrote: »

I understand where the OP is coming from.

My friend Clare used to go to the cinema about 20 miles away and would often miss the last bus home. She’d ring me and I’d go pick her up. I was a night owl so the time wasn’t an issue, and she always gave me a tenner.

Just because it didn’t cost me a tenner to do it was neither here nor there. It was a lot less than a taxi would have charged her. She was paying for the ...service/privilege?

But she is your FRIEND not your lover and partner!
If my husband/partner/lover charged me a tenner every time he picked me up cause I missed the last bus home ... well he wouldn't, but he would get short shrift from me! :mad:

YoungBlueEyes

Perhaps it wasn’t the best comparison...

Yes she is my friend, and a husband/partner would have been different. She offered me a tenner when it became a regular and frequent thing (ie 2 or 3 times a week sometimes) that I was driving to the outskirts of Hull at near midnight.

unholyangel

pinkshoes wrote: »

You start by saying you got stung financially by your ex, yet with the new partner you have essentially been allowing her to pay towards the mortgage, giving her a financial interest in property.

She should ONLY have been paying 50% of bills. As she is your partner (not a lodger) then anything else would be seen as a contribution to the mortgage, so should you split, then she could have a claim on your house.

You can charge a partner rent - just its wise to get them to sign something acknowledging that they're not gaining an interest in the property so that if relations ever break down, they can't then try to claim an interest in the house.

Not having that doesn't mean they'll definitely be able to claim an interest. It would depend on who the courts believed taking into account relevant circumstances. So for example a partner who maybe pays a portion of home building insurance, portion of rewiring costs or new central heating etc. Versus a partner who doesn't pay anything towards property costs - even if they are contributing to decor or appliances (because tenants normally are liable for those, not the owner).

FBaby

The issue is the concept of making a direct profit off your partner.

The irony is that when you still had a mortgage to pay, her contribution went towards the mortgage so you were not making money towards her but she was potentially gaining an interest towards the house.

Now the house is paid, you are earning an income from her yet her argument towards an interest on the house is lower as he is clearly not paying towards the mortgage any longer.

It's this concept of making money off someone you claim to love and care for that is appearing callous by most posters. If ultimately you end up using that money to treat her, then it shows a control issue. If you genuinely feel that it is totally acceptable to make money off a partner for you benefit, then your morals are quite questionable, hence why I wouldn't never want to share my life with someone who defended such action as reasonable.

takethemon

I am not sure if this post is a wind up.
If it isn't then I think your actions are very mean minded.
You have been together several years, are mortgage free and financially comfortable ( by my standards ) going on the figures you are quoting.
Is it really worth risking fracturing your relationship for money that you don't need, other than to set a point of principle?