Boyfriend moving in to home that I own - how to manage finances?

Dial Hard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118953597#Comment_118953597

A court won't see it that way. So yes, legal advice is probably a good idea for the OP.

ON one hand you’re saying it’s still early in the relationship. Then on the other you’re saying it’s very possible you will buy a house together at some stage in the not too distant future . Something doesn’t add up here.

I have a gut feeling from your post that your boyfriend is rubbing his hands and the thought of low rent, the potential for joint ownership of a house in the future with tons of equity and a low mortgage.

What exactly is his financial situation? It sounds very much like you’re considerably more well off than he is- not paying his way from a rent perspective is just taking the piss in my view-protect your asset and don’t let this relationship cloud your judgement- after all it’s you that said it’s still early in the relationship. Who knows, after a few months of living together you might want rid of him. I’d discourage him from moving in for the moment- let him live with Mammy and save his pennies

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118953599#Comment_118953599

This. Theres a show on netflix called Worst Roommate Ever. Give it a watch.

cj maxx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118953981#Comment_118953981

I know. So it’s better to avoid that situation.

CreadanLady

I was just looking at Section 172 of the Civil Partnershop / Co-habitants act 2010. That describes the criteria for what a qualifiying cohabitant is. But it all seems rather wooly and vague.

Like, in practice where would the court draw the line on what is or is not a cohabiting relationship.

In my hypothetical scenario I wonder what would happen......

John and Mary are a couple and live together in Mary's house but as a precaution agree to draw up a licencee arrangement with john paying mary monthly rent and they maintain separate finances and so on. The break up. John now wants a a slice of the house cake and mary refuses and so john takes her to court. John says they were a committed intimate couple and that he is owed a cut of the house. Mary says that no, they were just "friends" and she rented him a room in the house with bill contribution - and here are the signed documents to show it. Mary says they were not a committed couple, just friends, and that john's has developed some sort of irrational delusions that their former "friendship" was a committed intimate relationship when it was actually not, insofar as Mary saw it.

What would happen there? It is basically Johns word against Mary's, plus Mary has signed paperwork to back up her side.

I think, since courts are in reality biased in favour of women when it comes to family law, that Mary would prevail here.

seamus

What would happen there? It is basically Johns word against Mary's, plus Mary has signed paperwork to back up her side.

Yeah, more or less. The signed paperwork may be relatively meaningless in the same way that a pre-nup is. That is, you cannot sign your statutory rights away in a contract. That's what makes them statutory. If John has statutory rights as a cohabiting partner, they can't be signed away in a rental agreement.

3rd party witnesses are relatively rare in civil cases, but if John had documentation to demonstrate a meaningful relationship - booked holidays, photos - as well as sworn affidavits from friends about the nature of the relationship, it would be very difficult for Mary to lean on the "just friends" claim. Civil cases are decided on the balance of probability, so without a decent counter-explanation to John's documents, the court is likely to rule in his favour. Male/female has nothing to do with it.

It's quite difficult to fake a committed relationship, which is why immigration carries out detailed checks looking for citizenship scams. By the same token it's very difficult to fake not being in a committed relationship unless you're meticulous about it from the very start.

pleasant Co.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118955258#Comment_118955258

A normal, cohabiting, couple would very easily be able to prove they were part of a normal, cohabiting, couple and not "just friends". These days there would be a digital paper trail of bookings for hotels, holidays, dates, intimate messages between the two, photos, friends who would have been witness to a very real relationship, and on and on - it really would not be hard to disprove the lie that John had "developed some sort of irrational delusions that their former "friendship" was a committed intimate relationship".

Your fantasy is poorly thought out and the conclusions drawn rely on the lie element being true, ie. that John and Mary maintain a degree of separation both financially and intimately that they in fact were not in a relationship.

Wabbit Ears

A bit late to this discussion but when I bought my house I had a female Tennant initially. We did end up hooking up and I had some concerns and I did speak to my lawyer about it. We did end up married so this never became an issue.

The short of it is once you start sleeping together any and all tenant arrangements are null and void so getting them to sign tenancy arrangements is pointless, they aren't tenants in any legal sense, you are a cohabiting couple.

There is no automatic right to a specific amount or % but they do gain equity. Major household purchases contribute to that. So If they pay for a new suite of furniture or a kitchen or major upgrades, these are all taken into consideration (including depreciation etc). A friend of my dad lived with a woman for years. She owned the house ( inherited) but he paid for considerable renovation and extension. When they split he actually owned more than she did despite her name being on the deeds ( So the house was, say, worth 100k and he spent 200k on renovations/extensions) so she had to buy him out.

You may have to lawyer up to argue what you're owned if you cant agree a figure and its usually gets sorted through mediation rather than a court case.

General advice was do not let them buy any major house purchases, keep a clear record of all money that would be considered part of equity (so anything deemed as 'rent' or helping pay the mortgage). Money contributed and used for household expenditure, food, utilities, etc etc does not count towards equity so there should be a joint account for that sort of money.

So big difference between having a tenant who is contributing to mortgage through rent and the associated tax breaks for rent a room scheme and a BF who's paying towards the Mortgage and is gaining some amount of equity from doing so.

Hopelessatlife

Just be careful too... of course you hope that this is long term and that there won't be issues where things don't work out but from personal experience I would bear in mind to protect yourself no matter what. If you own your property and have been in a relationship and living together for minimum 5 years and partner has been contributing towards the house there are rights there that they would have in terms of the house. It sounds bad but I'd be asking for paperwork declaring those rights are waived just incase things ever went bad.

Spanish Eyes

Would you consider selling your house and you both renting together to see how it goes? If it works out you could both save hard and get a mortgage together for a joint property. If you put more equity in for instance a big deposit, get a legal agreement drawn up to ringfence that + any profit made if you split up and sell the joint property. Alternatively you could rent out your house, although that is not for the fainthearted these days. Look at all your options EXCEPT him moving into your current property for the time being. A test run if you like!

Dial Hard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118981236#Comment_118981236

This has been addressed numerous times in the thread already.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118981236#Comment_118981236

Draw up a prenup equivalent for living together. Could be popular in the current housing crisis. What would you call it?

Precohab

Pregaffshare

Preshackup

Preliveinsin

marilynrr

I don't think it's worth the risk for a newish relationship.

You said you have discussed buying together in the next year or two, but are you even certain he would be in a position to buy? It's unlikely you know all of his credit history etc. if it's a new relationship. Also who knows what the housing/lending situation will be like in a couple of years, a lot can change between now and then. A year or 2 could easily turn into more and then he might have an interest in your house.

If you are sure you see a future with him and want to buy with him I would definitely recommend you live together for a while first, but not for long enough for him to secure an interest in your home.

JayPS 2288

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118981342#Comment_118981342

Ridiculous idea.

Spanish Eyes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118982113#Comment_118982113

Maybe to you, but if you would like to explain why it might help others overcome my stupidity.

I do, by the way understand that renting is very expensive and might not give much wriggle room for saving for deposit, but it can be done over time, especially if the OP contributes a substantial deposit from the sale of her home. Renting together at first also gives time to get used to living together, bills, housework, finances, compatibility etc. And the OP's investment is secure. Sounds like there are a lot of minefields involved in the partner moving in to HER home, which may involve costly legal consultations to secure the OP's situation anyway.

As others have said, slowly slowly catchy monkey.

notAMember

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118943083#Comment_118943083

You're in a good position, and I think what you've said here makes some sense.

I was in a similar situation many many years ago.. I owned a place, and my BF moved in, had a lodger paying on rent-a-room. We agreed to try it out, the living together thing , and take stock every 10 weeks or so to see how we were doing. both still happy with the arrangement etc.

What I did rather than set it aside, was overpay the mortgage with the token rent he gave me (not full market rate). I tracked it anyway, just in an excel document so I knew what he was paying and also it was on the bank account, in case of any dispute. There was no tax due under rent-a-room.

He had his own place too. Had it gone sour, we had agreed up front that he would go back to his place, and the money was rent. That way nobody owed anyone anything, we were all square. In a few years we got married, sold his place, bought another family home in a different location with a joint mortgage.

CreadanLady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118981236#Comment_118981236

That is just plain wrong, impossible and stupid. You cannot sign away or waive rights you have under legislation. Sure, you can agree with your partner to waive the rights and have a fancy written agreement, but at the end of the day when the shít his the fen one partner can chuck that agreement and say well I want what i gotta get. The legal entitlement under legislation will always trump whatever contracts people make between each other.

Tea-a-Maria

Have a look into cohabitation agreements. It would most likely mean getting a solicitor involved but sounds like it could be an option here.

marilynrr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118982507#Comment_118982507

I'm not the poster who called the idea ridiculous but did read your post and think it wasn't the best advice.

The OP said the relationship is not very old and that they had discussed buying together in a year or 2. That seems like a reasonable time scale, still risky I suppose but all things like this are, but your post read like she should sell her house sooner and start renting with him.

If I had a friend in the OPs situation who had a home which was now her own after buying out her ex and she said she was going to sell to rent with a new boyfriend I'd think she was being foolish. If she wanted to rent with him but not sell her house for a year or 2, or let him move in for a while (but not long enough to secure an interest) I would think that made sense, but to sell her house before they have even seen how living together goes would be a huge risk I think.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118942614#Comment_118942614

Personally i think its a bad idea... get a new tenant for a year... by then you will know where you both at and you either come to an arrangement as regard living together... its difficult to have finance in a relationship in my view... someone will always have the upper hand in my view...

ABSOLUTELY no way involve a solicitor involved in your personal life... this is belong to you ONLY...

Sorry if this sounds blunt..

OP, whose idea was it for him to formally move in together? Yours or his?

TBH, I'm thinking if you intend to buy together in a year or two, why not stay as you are now, until you do that? It would also give you a chance to see if this fairly new relationship will stand the test of time.

If he lives with his mother he is probably only paying a contribution towards rent to her, so should be able to save?

Nothing to stop him staying over, or spending time at yours, while you continue your current arrangement with renting a room to a licensee.

Horn_of_Africa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118942520#Comment_118942520

The bank doesn't own the house, the OP owns the house. The bank can take possession if the terms of the mortgage are breached.

Salient Verb

Too risky to let him move in with you soon in these circumstances.

My friend ended up having to pay her ex boyfriend thousands because of something like this. He just refused to settle until she agreed to pay him more and she was paying £xxxx on legal fees all the time. He cheated on her, didn't move out for ages and then used the money she paid him as a deposit for the house he bought with his next partner (the one he cheated on her with).