Owning house outright before relationship and breakup consequences

Zero_Sum

Lokolo_2 wrote: »

I sense everyone has differing views on this, I would see it as unfair personally, having worked hard for years to be in this position.

The answer is probably to find someone who has the same outlook as me and isn't offended by me wanting to protect what I have saved years to build up!

I can imagine more and more people are becoming more savvy to avoid losing their assets and will probably keep their finances separate from their partners and marriage will become rarer, but that is for another thread!

I would say thats completely different to what I said. I too also want to protect what assets ive built up. But realistically once kids come along it doesnt work like that. I think my OH does understand the big gap & that the house is mine.

But being pragmatic about things & understanding that if one half earns more to a certain extent they will be subsidising their OH's lifestyle. Even if when you initially get together you're earning similar amounts, at some point in the future one will probably get more promotions that the other. Someone with the same outlook doesnt mean they have similar assets either. Much will depend on age & opportunities.

And charging rent for a house you own outright is not protecting your assets, its just pure greed.

unholyangel

Lover_of_Lycra wrote: »

:huh:

Legally speaking a tenant is nothing like a live in partner in any way, shape of form.

They're the same legally as being a live in partner gives you no special rights in law, the law treats it the same as it would a stranger. Taking rent from them (whether stranger or partner) does not create a beneficial interest. What creates a beneficial interest is the owners intention that the other person gain a beneficial interest in exchange for something else (doesn't have to be money). Which is why a written agreement is the only way to secure your position - because its the only thing that shows there was no intention for them to gain that interest.

[Deleted User]

unholyangel wrote: »

They're the same legally as being a live in partner gives you no special rights in law, the law treats it the same as it would a stranger. Taking rent from them (whether stranger or partner) does not create a beneficial interest. What creates a beneficial interest is the owners intention that the other person gain a beneficial interest in exchange for something else (doesn't have to be money). Which is why a written agreement is the only way to secure your position - because its the only thing that shows there was no intention for them to gain that interest.

Legally, a tenant is nothing like a live in partner. For starters tenants have far more rights and legal protections.

You are contradicting yourself. If the law treats a live in partner as nothing more than a stranger why would you need a contract stating that the live in partner who is paying off your mortgage has no claim to your property?

[Deleted User]

OP, I’m curious, you say you’ve worked hard for years to be in this position. Did you receive an inheritance or gift from family that gave you the lion’s share of the purchase price?

Lokolo_2

Lover_of_Lycra wrote: »

OP, I’m curious, you say you’ve worked hard for years to be in this position. Did you receive an inheritance or gift from family that gave you the lion’s share of the purchase price?

Hello, no inheritance yet, I did get 40k towards a deposit but all together I saved the rest up myself, I have been working since 17 and always saved every month, house value is 267k, so 227k of that through saving over the past 13 years! I am not in some highly paid job either, making between 30-40k a year, it's just lifestyle choices, I have compromised on social life and indulging on stuff for myself a lot to achieve this.

Lokolo_2

Zero_Sum wrote: »

I would say thats completely different to what I said. I too also want to protect what assets ive built up. But realistically once kids come along it doesnt work like that. I think my OH does understand the big gap & that the house is mine.

But being pragmatic about things & understanding that if one half earns more to a certain extent they will be subsidising their OH's lifestyle. Even if when you initially get together you're earning similar amounts, at some point in the future one will probably get more promotions that the other. Someone with the same outlook doesnt mean they have similar assets either. Much will depend on age & opportunities.

And charging rent for a house you own outright is not protecting your assets, its just pure greed.

I agree with the first 2 paragraphs, though you are talking about the later stages of a relationship. It is quite likely as you say, that I could find someone with a similar outlook, or higher earnings but less assets.

I want to thank everyone for their views thus far, my thinking is to just charge half the bills as being the best option, maybe I am too frugal at times and some of the thoughts have given me a slap to get back to reality!

[Deleted User]

Lokolo_2 wrote: »

Hello, no inheritance yet, I did get 40k towards a deposit but all together I saved the rest up myself, I have been working since 17 and always saved every month, house value is 267k, so 227k of that through saving over the past 13 years! I am not in some highly paid job either, making between 30-40k a year, it's just lifestyle choices, I have compromised on social life and indulging on stuff for myself a lot to achieve this.

I'm not doubting that you have made some lifestyle choices that have allowed you to pay off your mortgage early. I just knew that you have received a considerable chunk of money to help start you off and that it wasn't purely down to your hard work.

unholyangel

Lover_of_Lycra wrote: »

Legally, a tenant is nothing like a live in partner. For starters tenants have far more rights and legal protections.

You are contradicting yourself. If the law treats a live in partner as nothing more than a stranger why would you need a contract stating that the live in partner who is paying off your mortgage has no claim to your property?

My initial point - which has been skewed in the back & forth - is that posters on here seem to be of the view that being someones partner gives you some special entitlement in law - it doesn't.

The tenant point was that tenants also pay towards mortgage, repair, maintenance, decorating etc and don't gain an interest. In that regard, a live in partner is no different. You can quite legitimately charge them rent without them gaining an interest.

The simple fact is that most relationships don't last. Even around half of marriages end in divorce (and a greater percentage break down and either die or never legally divorce). Therefore prudent to make provisions in the event of a break down. Much easier to do when the going is good than it is after it sours.

thorsoak

Lokolo_2 wrote: »

You may be right about the last bit, it is why I have decided to stay single up to now, so that I could build up my financial security as a partner would mean a lot more spending, dates, days out etc!

I never mentioned in the original post but I am male, not that it makes any difference but my prospective partner would be a woman!

I partly agree about it being wrong to profit from your partner, but then aren't they profiting from you on the other hand if they live rent free in a place?

Having read this thread, I think that it is extremely likely that you will stay single.....even the allure of you owning your own mortgage-free house will not necessarily mean that any woman would wish to share her life (and her own income and independence)with you whilst your attitude remains as it is now.

[Deleted User]

unholyangel wrote: »

My initial point - which has been skewed in the back & forth - is that posters on here seem to be of the view that being someones partner gives you some special entitlement in law - it doesn't.

The tenant point was that tenants also pay towards mortgage, repair, maintenance, decorating etc and don't gain an interest. In that regard, a live in partner is no different. You can quite legitimately charge them rent without them gaining an interest.

The simple fact is that most relationships don't last. Even around half of marriages end in divorce (and a greater percentage break down and either die or never legally divorce). Therefore prudent to make provisions in the event of a break down. Much easier to do when the going is good than it is after it sours.

Your tenant point is still as weak as a kitten and comparing apples with oranges. Tenants pay money in exchange for exclusive occupation of a property based on a contract enshrined in law. Tenants don't form a household with their landlords or build a life together with their landlord unlike live in partners who don't get exclusive occupation even when helping to pay off their OH's mortgage.

If you want to make the point that beneficial interest isn't a given then fair enough but lay off the tenant comparison because it's not very good.