Moving in girlfriend...

irishguy1983

to my house - been together a year...

It is my house and I have a mortgage - no one else here...

Looking to hear thoughts/stories...

Do people generally ask their OH to pay rent? Is there a standard out there? How do you work this out? Or maybe they just live their for free? Maybe that is the normal?

Do you look at current market rates?

I presume bills at least are halved?

I haven’t a clue so just looking for thoughts/ideas...

Paulw

It's a case of whatever works for you. There are no rules. It depends on your relationship, your finances, etc.

Contributions to food, bills, mortgage, etc ... it's down to you two discussing it and making your own arrangements.

Spanish Eyes

OP you should also think about the potential entitlement of GF to an interest in the property if things don't work out. Depending on her contributions to your house.

She will never be a house sharer or lodger given your relationship so that's out.

I don't know the answer to that one, but would be interested to know just the same.

Westernyelp

This is more appropriate to the relationships forum. It shouldn't be looked at as a business transaction imo

A_Sober_Paddy

Westernyelp wrote: »

This is more appropriate to the relationships forum. It shouldn't be looked at as a business transaction imo

Yes and no.

If the girlfriend starts to make contributions to the house, it needs to be clear what the money is for. If she pays towards the mortgage it can open up issues down the road if it goes to pot

Addle

Know her rights OP.
You can love someone and still protect yourself.
I'd get legal advice if I was in your position.
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/problems_in_marriages_and_other_relationships/redress_scheme_for_cohabiting_couples.html

DivingDuck

There are two sides to this: the personal side, and the legal side.

On the legal side, you need to consider your property rights. A rental contract does not mean she can't speak rights to your property if the relationship ends, since a partner cannot be your licensee or tenant in the traditional sense where they have no long-term ownership rights. Even if she did agree to pay rent, you're still a co-habiting couple as outlined by the link above, so this is something you need to factor into your decision when you're deciding whether or not to let her move in.

On the personal side, it depends on the couple. I can't imagine sharing a home with someone that only one of us owned; I don't think I'd ever feel comfortable, either as the owner or the "guest". You and your partner may feel differently, though. I don't think there's any set rule which applies to everyone, just be informed about potential legal vulnerability and make the decision that feels comfortable to you and which makes your partner comfortable, too.

Eric Cartman

DivingDuck wrote: »

There are two sides to this: the personal side, and the legal side.

On the legal side, you need to consider your property rights. A rental contract does not mean she can't speak rights to your property if the relationship ends, since a partner cannot be your licensee or tenant in the traditional sense where they have no long-term ownership rights. Even if she did agree to pay rent, you're still a co-habiting couple as outlined by the link above, so this is something you need to factor into your decision when you're deciding whether or not to let her move in.

On the personal side, it depends on the couple. I can't imagine sharing a home with someone that only one of us owned; I don't think I'd ever feel comfortable, either as the owner or the "guest". You and your partner may feel differently, though. I don't think there's any set rule which applies to everyone, just be informed about potential legal vulnerability and make the decision that feels comfortable to you and which makes your partner comfortable, too.

Christ, so bar getting a partner to buy half your gaf off you and pocketing the cash, theres no way to live with your partner and not lose if it goes sour ?

Spanish Eyes

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Christ, so bar getting a partner to buy half your gaf off you and pocketing the cash, theres no way to live with your partner and not lose if it goes sour ?

Just don't be the owner of the house in the first place, be that partner :P

It would appear that a partner sharing a property owned and mortgaged by the other partner may have some rights if they have contributed to the mortgage, or to refurbs like a new kitchen or extension or the likes.

I was in the UK for a few years and this was the result. Yep. So be careful out there folks.

Love is blind, but can cause endless hassle if things don't work out and that happens too even though you never think it will.

DivingDuck

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Christ, so bar getting a partner to buy half your gaf off you and pocketing the cash, theres no way to live with your partner and not lose if it goes sour ?

It's not just your house:

If you are a qualified cohabitant, you may apply for orders such as maintenance orders, property adjustment orders, and pension adjustment orders and related orders such as attachment of earnings orders.

Basically, if you're living with someone for more than five years, you might as well be married. They don't have an automatic right as in the case of a marriage, but they can seek them on all sorts of things.

If you're going to live with someone long-term, you'd want to be very confident in the future of your relationship.

badboyblast

Jaysus, roll with it....

Eric Cartman

considering this update, OP do not move your gf into your house, or if you do be ready to toss her out after 4.9 years.

gozunda

Let out your gaff and rent someplace together and go halves on costs 50/50

beefburrito

The last guy I know who moved his other half in ended up handing over 200,000 after 6 years...

She started paying half the mortgage,it went bad when she made a new "friend"

She went off with said friend.... after 4 year's...

He took her back,she still ended up having to buy her out....his inheritance out the window....

I know it doesn't happen to everyone,but myself having a farm and old estate and being single had a great think about it.....

In happy out single, have my son who's 18 im 42 and probably destined to enjoy the single life.

Not out of selfishness or fear, just because I roll better that way.

I have a loving external family,that's enough

James 007

I was going to suggest the same, this is the most sensible option, and then move in when you intend to marry etc.

Wesser

Half of the mortgage plus half of the bills

gmisk

I have been with my partner over 5 years living together for under 2. It is my house I am paying mortgage he pays well below market rent we split bills. I pay for all the home improvement things (house needed a lot of work and lived here for a year or so before he moved in) We are looking to buy together in next couple of years...honestly had no clue about 5 year rule but tbh in our case we will likely be getting married in next couple of years.

professore

Holy sh1t I had no idea this was the case.

Spanish Eyes

Moving in sounds great. But for whom at the end of the day? Sorry for being so pedantic, but you would probably spend more time on the phone about your house/car insurance.

Research it. And take the blinkers off.

It can go wrong, plan for that. If it goes great, no worries then. No shocks.

Spanish Eyes

Wesser wrote: »

Half of the mortgage plus half of the bills

Contributing to the mortgage can give the contributor an interest in the property. Big NO NO imo. Bills and maintenance charges 50/50 no problem.

Spanish Eyes

professore wrote: »

Holy sh1t I had no idea this was the case.

Well it is the case. After five years if your partner can prove s/he is or was dependent on you, it is going to happen. And remember that's two years if there is a child involved.

If they contribute to the mortgage, they are building up an interest in the property also. Regardless of the two/five year rule and dependance.

Be careful out there.

Eric Cartman

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Well it is the case. After five years if your partner can prove s/he is or was dependent on you, it is going to happen. And remember that's two years if there is a child involved.

If they contribute to the mortgage, they are building up an interest in the property also. Regardless of the two/five year rule and dependance.

Be careful out there.

Who decided to bring this in ? it just seems to me like somebody went "people aren't marrying anymore because they lose half their stuff, how can we still make that happen without a wedding"

Bob24

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Who decided to bring this in ? it just seems to me like somebody went "people aren't marrying anymore because they lose half their stuff, how can we still make that happen without a wedding"

Sounds a bit crazy indeed.


The very fact that people need to have a legal discussion on this forum to balance the risks and liabilities of letting their partner move in with them shows how overboard this stuff is. I mean ... as a side effect the OP might not let their partner move in even if they want to, or rent out their own property to rent another one just for the purpose of being covered.

A couple just deciding to move in together shouldn't have to face these questions ... obviously they don't want that kind commitment yet or they would get married.

Spanish Eyes

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Who decided to bring this in ? it just seems to me like somebody went "people aren't marrying anymore because they lose half their stuff, how can we still make that happen without a wedding"

It was brought in at the same time as the Civil Partnership Act.

For equality I believe at the time. Opposite sex couples did not have the same rights as same sex under the CPA. Nor could they enter into a Civil Partnership with all the protections that brought.

Hasn't changed AFAIK, because CPs do not have to get married even though they can now.

BEWARE!

Spanish Eyes

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/problems_in_marriages_and_other_relationships/property_rights_and_the_breakdown_of_a_cohabiting_relationship.html

Spanish Eyes

Near enough 2,000 views for this topic. Good on you OP for starting it, but I think your questions did not envisage all this extra stuff either!

It is a hidden issue for many in the throes of love.

.......

This post has been deleted.

DivingDuck

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That's what renting is, and we consider that acceptable.

IMO, where children are involved, this should absolutely be the case— it's completely unfair that some girl could quit work to raise their children, and then be turned out on the road some years later with no means to support herself or them.

That it applies where there are no children is insane to me; all of this should be handled by legal agreement and common sense, i.e., if you're contributing towards the mortgage but your partner won't put you on the deeds, they are treating you like a tenant, but if you get to live rent-free in someone's house for years, when the relationship ends, you don't deserve their property.

But opinions are irrelevant: the law is what it is, and all you can do is be aware of it and factor it into your decisions when you're making them.

Eric Cartman

DivingDuck wrote: »

That's what renting is, and we consider that acceptable.

IMO, where children are involved, this should absolutely be the case— it's completely unfair that some girl could quit work to raise their children, and then be turned out on the road some years later with no means to support herself or them.

That it applies where there are no children is insane to me; all of this should be handled by legal agreement and common sense, i.e., if you're contributing towards the mortgage but your partner won't put you on the deeds, they are treating you like a tenant, but if you get to live rent-free in someone's house for years, when the relationship ends, you don't deserve their property.

But opinions are irrelevant: the law is what it is, and all you can do is be aware of it and factor it into your decisions when you're making them.

+1

if no kids are involved then out on your ear you should go.
Ireland also seriously needs to recognise pre-nups and faulted divorce. Its a scary thought for a lot of people (mostly men) that picking the wrong partner can easily lose you half of your wealth / the family farm etc...

Spanish Eyes

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sorry but it was brought in for equality reasons.

The Civil Partnership Act meant that same sex couples would have more rights than opposite sex couples, so it had to be done at the same time, and rightly so.

Spanish Eyes

Depending on your committment to each other the best move is to NOT allow cohabitee to contribute to the mortgage surely?

Otherwise just get married and that's that sorted.

Heart Break Kid

May be wortgwhile looking into her rights as a cohabiting couple. If she moves in and you later split she is entitled to claim an allowance from you to maintain her standard of living. Consider a waiver that she must sign to void this entitlement.

Spanish Eyes

I suppose we are all overthinking this now and it will all be grand. How dare we say that romance has its downfalls.

Ursus Horribilis

This auld living in sin business isn't as simple as it used to be.

Nermal

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You got to live in it, didn't you?

This piece of legislation was a really bad idea, it blurred the line between marriage and casual relationships.

Ursus Horribilis

Nermal wrote: »

You got to live in it, didn't you?

This piece of legislation was a really bad idea, it blurred the line between marriage and casual relationships.

Maybe people in casual relationships shouldn't move in together?

Problem is you can't legislate for the different types of cohabiting couples. It runs the gamut from casual arrangements right up to people who've got the kids and the dog. Depending on what side of the fence you are on, it's a great piece of legislation or it's a horror story that hasn't yet been written. I wonder how many cohabitants are aware of this law?

Sierra Oscar

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Well it is the case. After five years if your partner can prove s/he is or was dependent on you, it is going to happen.

I think a little balance is needed in fairness. I mean, five years is a pretty decent stretch of time all the same. If a relationship lasts five years then marriage is probably going to be on the cards regardless, especially for those in their late 20's / early 30's for when this sort of a situation arises. If you're married you face the same, if not worse, of a situation with property being split should things go south.

If the relationship ends within five years then the partner doesn't really have much of a claim on anything, assuming a child isn't involved.

Going by some of the suggestions in this thread it would seem people should never enter into relationships. That's not much craic though, is it?

gozunda wrote: »

Let out your gaff and rent someplace together and go halves on costs 50/50

That's certainly worth considering. On the other hand the OP needs to weigh up whether they want to actually be a landlord and deal with all the issues involved with that.

Also the OP could be creating a situation where the rent from the property is just covering the mortgage, and then you have to pay rent for a separate property on top of that. The alternative is for the OP to let the partner move in with him, allowing them both to save what they otherwise would be spending on rent. Who knows, maybe the saving will help with paying for a nice wedding?

Of course the OP should be aware of the implications, but keep in mind we're talking about a five year period before the redress scheme becomes applicable. If the OP doesn't feel right in the relationship three or four years down the line, then it's probably time to ask some questions regardless of the accommodation situation.

fritzelly

Just to add to the above she is also legally a tenant regardless if she is contributing to the "rent", so there is that to think about should a break up be down the road...

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/problems_in_marriages_and_other_relationships/property_rights_and_the_breakdown_of_a_cohabiting_relationship.html

super_sweeney

Ah it all gets very confusing. It is a conversation worth having those as mature adults and seeing what the best is for both parties to protect them both best. 
I had the personal misfortune of being tired of paying crazy rent in Dublin and the gf at the time was unemployed so i decided to buy. At the time she was very upset as i wouldn't put her on the mortgage ect but the banks wouldn't have given me a mortgage if she was a dependent and also I didnt really see a reason why as she didn't contirbute to deposit nor had any intent on paying rent. She went on and on about it. The shortly before the house was ready we split and I found out she had been seeing some other dude for 9 months. I had been with her for two years so clearly thought she was legit. 
But in hindsight one has to ask now with all the fuss of getting on the mortgage that she was clearly just out for half the gaf... So take from that what you...

But either way an Adult conversation should be had and no one can tell you whats right and wrong for your personal circumstances its all just opinion.

shakencat

I moved in with my other half...
He owns the house..


Living together X years, have two dogs,
I pay half mortgage, half bills and pay for refurbs or things we need etc as does he!
Whatever is needed we pay, whoever has the extra cash at that time.
We've both been randomly out of work through the years and we supported eachother, knowing it will all work out in the end..

I didn't know about the 5 year rule, but do know a child changes things, but we've decided for it (not trying to trap him! Like some would say!) - we'd also be married If we had a spare 20+k!
But we've put it into the home!


Luckily all has worked out, all the thoughts you're thinking of passed both mine and his mind too!!

We're both open and chat about it though -
And with a little one on the way it has all worked really well.

Could be the same for you trust your gut!


On another note, if things went sour, I understand it's his house..
But I know some girls see things differently.
Let's hope you don't have one of them...

Peregrinus

shakencat wrote: »

I moved in with my other half...
He owns the house..


Living together 4 years, have two dogs,
I pay half mortgage, half bills and pay for refurbs or things we need etc as does he!
Whatever is needed we pay, whoever has the extra cash at that time.

On another note, if things went sour, I understand it's his house..

You're part-paying for him to buy a house for himself? That's extremely generous of you. I hope he's properly appreciative of it.

shakencat wrote: »

But I know some girls are mad bats and would fight for it!!

There's a large middle ground between "women who are not as recklessly generous as shakencat" and "mad bats".

super_sweeney

You're part-paying for him to buy a house for himself?  That's extremely generous of you.  I hope he's properly appreciative of it.  

I am always puzzled when people say this.... isnt that what rent is yet we dont mind doing that? Like surely its better to pay more than likely less to someone you know than some poor random landlord? and also live seperately...

shakencat

I've changed the wording on that

Also, the mortgage is less than average rent, so I am paying less than 'the norm'

Peregrinus

super_sweeney wrote: »

I am always puzzled when people say this.... isnt that what rent is yet we dont mind doing that? Like surely its better to pay more than likely less to someone you know than some poor random landlord? and also live seperately...

There's a big difference between "paying rent", and "paying half the mortgage and half the refurbs".

It seems to me that you and he are jointly paying the cost of buying this house, but he gets to own it.

Which, as I say, I'm not criticising; it's very generous of you, but we do generous things for people we love.

It's just I think it's worth noting that it is very generous of you. And, while we can applaud your generosity, I don't think we can assume that other people who pay off mortgages in this way are intending to make a similarly generous gift, or that if they aren't we can call them "mad bats".

(And, yeah, I acknowledge that you have thought better of that particular phrase.)

super_sweeney

yeah thats fair enough everyone is entitled to their own opinion. 
My view being a home owner is that i have taken the financial risk and put my savings ect and out myself at risk taking the mortgage out. I would by no means expect someone to pay half if I met someone and they wanted to move in. but 2 points. 
1. If we did agree on a some "rent" then i would not think this would entitle them to anything at the end. (just my view)
2. If we could not come to an agreement on it. I would simply just remain living separate. For me if your not willing to share a portion of cost with the person your seeing then perhaps we should live separate. Until we can both afford to buy a new place where we split deposits/ costs there and then there would be equal ownership and equal Financial Responsibility. 
For me those are the two routes. Of course there are exceptions.... but thats a different discussion.

FishOnABike

shakencat wrote: »

I didn't know about the 5 year rule, but do know a child changes things, but we've decided for it (not trying to trap him! Like some would say!) - we'd also be married If we had a spare 20+k!

It doesn't have to cost 20+k to get married. Marriage fees / costs start at €200

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/getting_married/civil_marriage_ceremony.html
http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/list/1/bdm/MarriagesinIreland/Fees.html

after that it's just a question of how much you want to pay for a party or how much you want to put to building your lives together.

shakencat

I could very easily say, ok..

He pays the mortgage, and I pay for food and bills..

Either way, payment has to be made!!

shakencat

Ah I understand that it can be alot cheaper, not disputing that!!

And yes, we've decided the money go into the home..
And we will marry down the line..

As I said..

It has worked for us and we will have a family soon,
I know/understand it's not the same for every one

Peregrinus

shakencat wrote: »

I could very easily say, ok..

He pays the mortgage, and I pay for food and bills..

Either way, payment has to be made!!

And either way the result is the same. Either you pay some of the mortgage directly, or you bear different costs that he would otherwise discharge, thus enabling him to make mortage payments that otherwise wouldn't be possible, or at least would be much more painful for him. Same outcome; you're subsidising his purchase of the house.

Look, you say it works for the two of you and that, ultimately, is the only test that matters. But generalising to other couples, I'd suggest there are two rules.

One: you need to talk about this, to ensure that the two of you have the same understanding about how this is going to work. If you don't have a shared understanding, it certainly won't work for you as a couple, and you may find that out the hard way.

Two: you need to keep this under review as your relationships and your circumstances change. It's one thing to move in with your current Reason For Living and pay them rent for six months or a year, at a time in life when you would otherwise be renting a small flat or a room in a share house, and you don't know where you'll be in 12 or 24 months. But four or five years down the line, when you're still together and intending to make it permanent, you've paid a substantial amount cumulatively. But for your relationship, you would probably now be looking to save for or be actually a couple of years into buying your own place, but instead you're paying someone else's mortgage. At that point it's reasonable to ask whether, as a couple, you should be continuing jointly to carry the cost of buying a house which only one of you will own. Is it now appropriate to think about re-jigging the arrangement to one where you will jointly carry the cost of buying a house which you will own in equal shares, or in shares proportionate to your respective contributions to the cost? That would look like an arrnagement more appropriate to the circumstances in which the couple now are.

To an extent, this decision is made for the couple, since if they break up after five years together (or if they have a child) then all the assets of both of them are "in play"; the court can divide them up however it thinks fit, having regard to their circumstances and needs. But of course that only comes into play if the couple break up; if one of them dies, for instance, the property outcomes may be very different from what they would have wanted, had they thought about it.

So, yeah, couples who are together for the long haul and whose financial affairs are so closely intertwined so that they are, in effect, jointly bearing the costs of a mortgage on the house they both live in, really need to think hard about who ought to own a house purchased in this way. But, I stress, it's the couple who ought to think about this, and the solution that works for them is the right solution, even if it's not the solution that others might like.

beertons

I knew of a guy who met a girl, she moved in quickly, got pregnant, moved out a year and a day later. He had to sell the house, give her half. She did this to 2 other guys, once before him, once more after. Exactly a year and a day for all. This all happened from 2003/2004, but it always stuck with me.

Peregrinus

Curious. There is no legal significance to the "year and a day" period. And you say she was doing this years before the 2010 legislation which gave cohabitants the right to seek property adjustment orders on the breakdown of the relationship? So, on what basis did this guys have to sell their houses and give her half?

Did this by any chance happen in a country other than Ireland?