My partner wants to buy half my house

[Deleted User]

gettingtheresometime said:

Lover_of_Lycra said:

MFWannabe said:

Googler51 said:

I bought my house 18 months ago. My partner moved in 6 months later. We have lived together for 12 months and shared the bills, but I have paid the small mortgage and he had rented out his bought house. No mortgage on his house. We are both in our 50s. Therefore he has made money from the rent of his house whilst living here.
He wants to buy half my house, which will then pay off the mortgage, at the original purchase price. I've paid over £5000 in mortgage payments and made improvements to it using the insurance money after it was flooded. As he has lived here for 12 months and helped with decorating, suffered as a result of the flooding etc. he feels it should be at the purchase price. I don't agree. What do you think?

Is it more of a question if you want him to own half your house? 

He gains significantly by buying half your house as he also owns a house, so is he going to give you half that house and the rent? 

Yes you would benefit by the mortgage being paid off and the interest saved but you’d only own half a house. 

In your shoes I wouldn’t want to do it. Recently divorced and not ready for marriage commitment; houses are the same commitment imho. This forum is full of couples who have split up after buying property 

Personally I would stay as you are until in a few years time when you’ve been living together longer and are sure you’ll last and then look at everything as a whole package 

I don’t see how the op would be worse off. The op currently has about 50% equity and a mortgage. The mortgage would be gone and the op would still have 50% equity except now the money that was been spent repaying the mortgage could be invested. 

Well in your scenario, what happens if the partner 'buys' 50% of the OP's home making it their home and then subsequently splits up ?
OP is left with 50% of her home whilst the partner has his rental property and 50% of this property.

OP what I don't understand is why the rush. You've stated that both of you have been through divorces before so are a bit hesitant about marriage, surely this proposal should be no different? Personally unless you're prepared to lose 50% of the property value, I'd put this idea on the back burner for at least another 2 yrs

The partner would have paid for 1.5 houses so of course he'd end up with 1.5 properties in the event of a split.  The OP would have paid for 0.5 houses and would still own 0.5 houses.  In the event of a split the OP would have the same options as any other joint owners following a relationship breakdown, buy the partner out, be bought out or sell.

The partner buying half the property isn't what the dispute is about anyway it's how much the partner should pay for that half.  The OP's legal costs are the sunk costs of buying so I don't see that partner owes for that.  Half the property value when the OP bought the property or half the current value is the sticking point and I think half the current value would be fair although I wonder if the OP would feel the same way if the flooding means the property is valued at less than when (s)he bought it.

lookstraightahead

What we did when we met with different kinds of baggage is throw everything in the pot and share it out together to help us both out. That was equity, debt, houses, kids, junk, tears, elderly parents, and any other issues. Hubble bubble it all worked out in the end, warts and all.

GDB2222

lookstraightahead said:

What we did when we met with different kinds of baggage is throw everything in the pot and share it out together to help us both out. That was equity, debt, houses, kids, junk, tears, elderly parents, and any other issues. Hubble bubble it all worked out in the end, warts and all.

That's fine, as long as you stay together, but an even bigger mess if you don't.

RAS

Googler51 said:

As he has lived here for 12 months and helped with decorating, suffered as a result of the flooding etc. he feels it should be at the purchase price. I don't agree. What do you think?

OP, regardless of how many houses he owns or you own, there are two big issues:

1. If you transfer 50% of the ownership to your BF, you lose the right to determine what happens to the future of your house (and your life). You may be forced to buy him out if the relationship fails, or forced to remain living there if he refuses to agree a sale at some point.

2. He's already got two failed marriages behind him and is pretty assertive regarding the rights that he feels he is entitled to after 12 months living in the house.  You need to be very careful NOT to enable him to claim a beneficial interest, even if you don't share the ownership.

He must not contribute to the mortgage, or pay for improvements on the property, and you need to be careful about sweat equity. Split the monthly bills but do not allow him to pay towards the house at this stage.

if he does not like that, it suggests he is rushing the relationship, and perhaps not listening to your concerns. In which case maybe he needs to rent somewhere else while your both think about this relationship.

lookstraightahead

GDB2222 said:

lookstraightahead said:

What we did when we met with different kinds of baggage is throw everything in the pot and share it out together to help us both out. That was equity, debt, houses, kids, junk, tears, elderly parents, and any other issues. Hubble bubble it all worked out in the end, warts and all.

That's fine, as long as you stay together, but an even bigger mess if you don't.

Fair enough, it's been 20 years now so I can't even remember whose kids are whose 😂

AlexMac

Googler51 said:

We are building a life together, decorating and other refurbishments to the house.... We are both hesitant about marriage currently because of our divorces. Yet want to still build a life and contribute equally to a shared home together...

You haven't been on here since 9am Googler51, so maybe you've had all the advice you need to plan your future...?   But given that I was in an almost identical situation - ooh - over 30 years ago, here's some anecdotal stuff, whether or not it helps? 

Both of us divorced or divorcing, after 16 and 19 years of marriage respectively (you got hitched young in them days), 'er 'aving bought 'im out so the place was all 'ers on a mortgage she could afford solo, me sitting on a bit of cash, but recently redundant so uncertain about future prospects.  But we were really sure about each other, so I simply moved in with her and we  didn't really bother about the details of the financial relationship that I can recall.  All a bit more passionate than fiscal!

And I didn't even think about counting the hours of (my) DIY or the shared cost of improvements; fitting French Doors, moving bathrooms & kitchen, complete internal re-decs, bills, groceries, holidays, etc...  We didn't even bother merging bank accounts, although I think most expenditure was fairly equally shared. 

We then made things even more like your situation by me buying in effect a second property (although I didn't at that point own a first, or even a share in one. )   And then I bought another little BTL; an auction wreck as a refurb project... which made things even more complicated when we started thinking about things like inheritance and wills (we were knocking 50 by then).

So we bumbled along for a couple more years, then, as we fancied moving and buying a house together,  decided things would really just be simpler if we go married.  Which we did.  Who says romance is dead? And, as property transfers between spouses don't attract CGT, we eventually transferred all three (or was it 4 by then?) properties into shared names; as "joint tenants" rather than messing about with % shares as "tenants in common".

Fast forward to now, well over 30 odd years after the initial spark, and coming up to our "China+1" wedding anniversary, and the relationship's still rock-solid (and solvent) ...  Let's hope yours will be.  And even if we were to separate through divorce, being married would really simplify the divvi-up.  Whereas our mates who buddied up around the same time, bought houses together - including a holiday home, but didn't actually marry, fell apart recently. Legal and financial nightmare!  Thousands of pounds wasted on lawyers

But in terms of commentary on your dillemma;  I fear that if we'd spent our first 18 months haggling over a few thousand pounds either way and spreadsheeting percentage shares, even allowing for the shadowy hangover of the then rawly recent divorces, we might not have lasted so long?  Couldn't your partner be persuaded to just go with the flow, take it slow, defer decisons (about money and property, not life and love?) and see how the relationship pans out.  Sometimes, procrastination is the best policy...

Or, on the other hand, does it matter?  If he's really adamant and wants to push you to a decison now because he was burned in a previous life; what are you risking?  As I say above, a few thousand pounds?  Only you know if it's worth betting that stake on what you already feel could be a start on 

"building a life together...  and contribut(ing) equally to a shared home together...

Good luck! 

saajan_12

People are getting confused by 2 issues:
1) Past, So far, OP has provided accommodation for the partner. Instead they could have rented together / lived in partner's house etc, where partner wouldn't be getting free accommodation. Note I mean the actual cost of living somewhere, separate to bills / CT. Personally, I think the equitable thing to do would be for partner to something towards the actual accommodation.. perhaps based on half the market rent, perhaps in the amount of the mortgage interest, or perhaps in help decorating.. whatever they agree. 

2) At point of partner buying in,
   a) This resolves the above issue as partner will now be living in the 50% of property they own. The lost return on the value of that 50% is effectively their rent. 
  b) Re how many houses everyone owns: If OP sells 50% of their house, then they gets £x in cash (incidentally used to pay off her mortgage, but that's by the by). Partner will own 1.5 houses, but has paid for 1.5 houses. OP will own 0.5 houses, having only invested cash for 0.5 houses. So from that point on, its perfectly fair.
  c) The transfer should be based on the value at the point of transfer, no need to backdate it to a value 18 months ago or 18 years ago. The difficulty is in working out this value without putting it on the open market. You can ask a few agents, but they can be off and may overvalue to get the job. You can get a valuation survey, but that'll cost money. So failing those, you can look at a recent valuation, and think about whether / how much it would have changed in that time. 

3) Future
Partner buying in would be perfectly fair equitably, but it may not be super wise due to the level of commitment.. Either of you can't just renovate your 50%, or sell your 50% of the house. So if you disagree or break up, one may have to buy out the other, or continue living together if you can't afford.. I'd say its a bigger commitment that marriage. 

GDB2222

lookstraightahead said:

GDB2222 said:

lookstraightahead said:

What we did when we met with different kinds of baggage is throw everything in the pot and share it out together to help us both out. That was equity, debt, houses, kids, junk, tears, elderly parents, and any other issues. Hubble bubble it all worked out in the end, warts and all.

That's fine, as long as you stay together, but an even bigger mess if you don't.

Fair enough, it's been 20 years now so I can't even remember whose kids are whose 😂

My wife has been pleased to donate some of her relatives to me.

avawat20

It sounds like you value money more than your partner so I wouldn't suggest you do it at all. Even if he pays what he's suggesting, he has helped with redecorating based on what you've said but either way you will now be mortgage free and you'll get to save that money.

If you go ahead then get legal advice and a deed of trust. But it sounds like you should reconsider your relationship to be honest.

Googler51

Thanks everyone for the laughs as well as taking time to consider my issue. I think I'm convinced that the value of the house isn't an issue and for my partner to buy it at half what I paid 18 months ago is fine, particularly because of the flooding. I feel a clause would be helpful that if we do split, it is agreed to sell it to me at the market value at that time so I dont lose my home. We can then get on with renovating it, creating a lovely home and life together.