Where do I stand in this situation regarding house?

LegacyUser

Hope this is the right forum! I'll try keep it short.

I've been living with my boyfriend for about 6 months. It's his house, he built it himself. The mortgage is high, around 1200 a month, and I pay half. Since moving in I've also put a lot of money into the house through painting, furnishings etc. He is also in arrears with his mortgage like many others, I know.

He has a 10 year old daughter too. Now here is where my uncertainty lies. We are building a life together, a home, we're talking about marriage etc but I feel like I'm in a very precarious situation. If anything should happen to him the house goes to his daughter, or her mother until she's 18. He has said on numerous occasions that he built the house for her etc. Now I'm not being greedy at all, I'm financially stable in my own right but I'm putting so much of my money and effort into the home and I don't know if I'll ever have any rights to it. If we break up in the morning and he tells me to leave I have to.

I've broached the subject with him but it's a very touchy one as he had lived there with his ex before (not the mother) she also had a son and she said similiar things to him, if anything happened to him, her and her son would be left with nothing. He put her and her son on the insurance which is included in the mortgage and the mortgage went up considerably. They have been apart for 4 years now but he still has to pay for her life insurance and that of her son, in fact I am too by contributing to the mortgage but it can't be changed.

I hope that's not too confusing and someone can offer some advice

MagicMarker

Technically you have no rights concerning the house, but because you’re contributing to the mortgage then a court may decide otherwise if it were to come to that.

You really have to speak to him on this tbh and come to some kind of agreement. If I were you I would be just as concerned but if I were him I wouldn’t be so eager to sign away half of my home.

ash23

Ok, few separate points here.

One : the house. The mortgage and the house are in his name. His daughter is his next of kin (assuming he and the childs mother never married), so she will get everything. You are effectively paying rent to him so don't put money into the house.

When you moved in, were you of the understanding that you would be paying rent or were you thinking you were paying for half the house which would one day be yours?

If you marry, you will be in a better situation. Until that time, unless he is willing to put you on the mortgage and deeds, you need to negotiate what you are willing to pay for. Agree rent based on local rental costs and pay half the utilities. He is then responsible for maintenance of the house, insurance, repairs, household appliances, furniture etc. If you want to buy something make it know YOU are buying it and that way if things end you know what YOU own and what HE owns.

I found when splitting with my ex the main arguments were about things bought jointly or bought by one person but for general household use (washing machines, dryers etc).

Two: the life insurance. He may be confused but the life insurance has nothing to do with the house/mortgage. It is necessary to have life insurance to have a mortgage as banks insist on it usually.

He has his own life insured so in the event of his death the mortgage is covered. This will be all the bank want (provided the mortgage and house are in his name alone).

He added the ex and her child so that in the events of their death, there would be a payment made. However this is nothing to do with the mortgage as she and her son are not on the deeds or mortgage. There is no need for him to be paying a life policy for her and her son. He is not obliged to do so unless there is something I am missing and she is in some way connected to the house and deeds etc.

You both need to seek independent financial advice.

Miss Fluff

By law you have no rights to the house. If you want to then you'll need to go to a solicitor and then draw up an agreement pertaining to same. Ploughing money into the house and contributing to its upkeep won't suffice so you've every right to be worried about the arrangement being precarious.

zxcvbnm1

Yes - you are effectively a tenant - and you shoudl look on him as your landlord.
You don't contribute to the mortgage as such - you basically pay rent.
So ensure you are paying no more than market rates for rent.
Is the 600 you are paying market rate?

Where you also have to be careful is about buying things like washing machines etc.

If you go halves on things and you then break up one person will presumbaly have to give the other person an agreed amount to buy them out of those things.

jimmycrackcorm

There have been a few cases where the courts ruled that a non-spousal partner was not entitled to a share in the property but was entitled to recover the money they put into it.

irishdude11

Aruella wrote: »

Hope this is the right forum! I'll try keep it short.

I've been living with my boyfriend for about 6 months. It's his house, he built it himself. The mortgage is high, around 1200 a month, and I pay half. Since moving in I've also put a lot of money into the house through painting, furnishings etc. He is also in arrears with his mortgage like many others, I know.

He has a 10 year old daughter too. Now here is where my uncertainty lies. We are building a life together, a home, we're talking about marriage etc but I feel like I'm in a very precarious situation. If anything should happen to him the house goes to his daughter, or her mother until she's 18. He has said on numerous occasions that he built the house for her etc. Now I'm not being greedy at all, I'm financially stable in my own right but I'm putting so much of my money and effort into the home and I don't know if I'll ever have any rights to it. If we break up in the morning and he tells me to leave I have to.

I've broached the subject with him but it's a very touchy one as he had lived there with his ex before (not the mother) she also had a son and she said similiar things to him, if anything happened to him, her and her son would be left with nothing. He put her and her son on the insurance which is included in the mortgage and the mortgage went up considerably. They have been apart for 4 years now but he still has to pay for her life insurance and that of her son, in fact I am too by contributing to the mortgage but it can't be changed.

I hope that's not too confusing and someone can offer some advice

So you are unhappy that you are not getting a % of the house for your 600 a month? Start renting somewhere else and see if they will give you a % of the house...

By the way, if the house was in negative equity of 200K, like loads of them are these days, would you be looking to get a % of it for paying rent? So you would be strapped with a debt of tens of thousands in the event you broke up. Would you be looking for a % in that situation as well or is it just because it benefits you that you want a piece of it?

common sense brigade

You cannot expect any rights to the mans house until your married and have had children with him. if your unhappy with the situation stop spending cash on decorating and tell him you will pay 400 a month rent but your not paying the full half the mortgage.
if you marry and have children. then im sure he will leave his house to be equally split between all his children.
You must understand your only a girlfriend at this stage. His daughter is far more entitled to the house.

username123

Contrary to what other posters are saying, you DO have some rights in law - since 1st Jan this year in fact.

See here and specifically here - the redress scheme for cohabiting couples.

You may well be married before any of this effects you - it is to protect cohabiting couples of 5 years or more, or if they have a child together, 2 years or more.

MissFlitworth

irishdude11 wrote: »

So you are unhappy that you are not getting a % of the house for your 600 a month? Start renting somewhere else and see if they will give you a % of the house...

You seem to think the OP is just greedy & worried about getting a chunk of her partners house? In the situation the OP is in she should be thinking about stuff like this - she is effectively a lodger in her own home. If her partner turned around in the morning and told her to get out she would have no choice but to leave! It's not the same as renting at all. Added to that, unless the house is a mansion, she is probably paying a lot more than market rent for her area in order to help her partner out with his mortgage, as well as putting money into house improvements. It's not greedy or selfish to be concerned when you're in a situation like that!

OP I think you & your partner need to sit down with a solicitor & work out what would happen in the event that you split up or he died, obviously you wouldn't be entitled to the house but maybe you could be entitled to get back some of the money you had put into it? It might sound mean but I don't think you should be paying fully half of his mortgage either

MagicMarker

username123 wrote: »

Contrary to what other posters are saying, you DO have some rights in law - since 1st Jan this year in fact.

See here and specifically here - the redress scheme for cohabiting couples.

You may well be married before any of this effects you - it is to protect cohabiting couples of 5 years or more, or if they have a child together, 2 years or more.

That would make no difference to the OP as she's only living there 6 months, it doesn't sound like she wants to wait 5 years before she has any rights.

ash23

username123 wrote: »

Contrary to what other posters are saying, you DO have some rights in law - since 1st Jan this year in fact.

See here and specifically here - the redress scheme for cohabiting couples.

You may well be married before any of this effects you - it is to protect cohabiting couples of 5 years or more, or if they have a child together, 2 years or more.

She has no rights. That applies to people co-habiting for 5 years or two if they had a child. She has been living there for 6 months. For a redress order to be made the co-habitant has to prove they were financially dependent on the deceased person, neither of these apply to the OP.

As a parent who is not with the father, if I bought a house I would want it to be left to my child. If I were seeing someone and we wanted to move in together, I would make it VERY clear that they were not moving in unless they were aware that the house was mine and mine alone in terms of ownership. I wouldn't expect them to pay anything other than a contribution (rent) and utilities.
Of course things are ever changing and evolving and it may happen that I marry this person or we have a child together in which case things would be reviewed and changed.

But after 6 months living there I would not be happy about someone trying to stake a legal claim in my house.

OP, you may have to accept that it's unlikely your OH will give you a share in the house just yet which is understandable and probably in your own interest as negative equity may apply. Do not contribute towards anything in the house that you cannot take with you. And check out rental prices of similar houses and pay half that.

mikemac

Get a ring on your finger girl

Ah no, what you're doing now is paying rent.
Now you should be paying market rate, and 600 is high. Look around and see what the rate is.
Certainly buy things for the house if you wish but that's things you can take with you. I's his job to sort out painting and plumbing and such.

And be thankful there isn't farmland involved here, family feuds have been started over less!

username123

ash23 wrote: »

She has no rights. That applies to people co-habiting for 5 years or two if they had a child. She has been living there for 6 months. For a redress order to be made the co-habitant has to prove they were financially dependent on the deceased person, neither of these apply to the OP.

The original post talked about what would happen - in the future - the OP didnt specifically seem to be asking about what would happen today if she broke up with him. The redress order does not just apply to deceased people, it also applies to seperated people who were cohabiting but not married.

In the context of the original post I thought it was relevant information for the OP to be aware of.

I dont get the impression the OP is trying to stake a legal claim to his house - I get the impression that she is (rightly) thinking about the future and where she would stand down the line in the event of unforseen events.

She also has some rights as laid out here specifically to do with rights to the property.

However, if your relationship breaks down and your name is not on the title deeds to the house, you may still be able to show that you have some ownership rights in relation to the house. These rights are based on the fact that you made a contribution to the purchase price of the house with the intention of gaining a share in the ownership of the house.
Contributions to the purchase price of the house can be direct or indirect. Direct contributions include contributions to the initial down payment for the house or contributions to the mortgage installments. Indirect contributions may include paying some of the other day-to-day household expenses or unpaid work in the legal owner of the house's business. It has been held by the courts that working in the home looking after children and money spent or work done on home improvements are not contributions that give you any right of ownership in relation to the house.

She has been making contributions to mortgage installments.

Its not as black and white as - you have no rights.

If I were the OP I would make the mortgage contributions via direct debit and not using cash to have a record of such contributions.