Adelaide Wailing Blackjack wrote: » Does the garage have to be next to the house? Buy the house you want and let him buy the garage he wants with his own money elsewhere. A lock up somewhere would be cheaper and do the trick. It also means it is not coming out of your pocket.
suicide_circus wrote: » well i dont think its unusual for one partner to contribute more to a house purchase than the other. in my experience and group of friends having bought with wives and girlfriends the men have always contribute substantially more, not only that but the wives and girlfriends have always had the major say in which house was purchased this wasnt an issue for any of my friends. reducing what should be a secure relationship to a balance sheet and who paid more for what doesn't bode well. i certainly wouldn't purchase with this man and i would queation whether the relationship is really what you want.
sportsfan90 wrote: » I'm finding it difficult to understand your post. You're saying that when it's the man paying substantially more and the woman gets a major say then it's not an issue and who contributed what is irrelevant. You then tell the OP that her partner isn't the type of person you'd purchase with. Is it because in this case it's the woman contributing more? If it isn't a problem to you when the man contributes substantially more why would it suddenly be an issue when it's the other way around? Apologies if I've picked you up wrong but if that is what you were saying then that's a bizarre attitude to have.
amcalester wrote: » Sounds like your boyfriend actually has 2 passions. Cars and spending €105K of your money.
HamSarris wrote: » The general consensus seems to be of an unequal relationship where the OP is of higher value than her partner. Hence all the suggestions that the OP needs to legally protect her assets from her partner and descriptions of the partner as unreasonable, selfish and some sort of feckless rogue who pissed all his money away at the weekend. Another perspective to take is that if the relationship broke up, the OP could potentially have more to lose than the partner. The OP seems far more motivated to settle down and the break-up of a relationship could delay buying a house for years, or be forced to buy a less desirable house on a single income. In comparison, the partner is under no rush and as a 30-something professional could probably find another women who’s more accommodating of his interests. People are focusing on the deposit and forgetting the massive future commitment of buying a house, this could be somewhere he spends the rest of his life and contributes up to 200k. I’d want some say in the house I’m potentially living in for the rest of my life; if I had a partner that completely dismissed my preferences I’ll tell them to search for another man to pay the mortgage. All things being equal the OP is in a stronger position but things are rarely equal in a relationship. High earning men regularly marry women who are ‘financial losers’ because the women’s physical attractiveness compensates for their financial drain. Imagine if the OP was a man on here dismissing his wife’s preference to live in the countryside because he wanted a house closer to work. You wouldn’t have half as many comments on here about how the wife is a loser and had too many nights out.
Peonie83 wrote: » I have to agree with your post, most girls that I know are 'financial losers'. Some are on very high salaries but blow it all on poor quality dresses, shoes, drinking etc. every week. I do buy nice things for myself as well but I always carefully consider all my purchases. Some people suggested that I did not enjoy my 20s. I never went traveling around the world but I've visited many many places in Europe and had fun. Travel is definitely something I like spending my money on. People often jump into conclusions - just because I said that my BF started saving properly only 2 years ago - they assume he's been living some sort of a crazy, expensive lifestyle. Guess what, we both do not drink, do not go out clubbing (dinner out occasionally), do not buy designer items and he does not spend much on car stuff every month. He has started saving regularly because now he has a goal - goal of getting a house. It was difficult for him (and his siblings actually) to understand that saving is a way of living for many (me for example). You save even if you do not have a clear goal. I don't think it's something they were taught when they were growing up, they are definitely lacking some sort of 'financial education' let's put it that way but now he is getting his head around money. I would like him to have a shed, but I do not think it's wise investing into a 2nd hand house with a garage - those often require require loads of money and time invested. Also, by focusing so much on a garage we are missing out on some really nice properties and continue paying rent. I want to spend next 5-10 years traveling as much as possible, not renovating another property. Also, realistically when is he going to be able to enjoy that shed while working full time? He's renting a shed at the moment and he's rarely there! Realistically, in terms of money, he will never be able to match my savings so what is it that you propose?
Peonie83 wrote: » He has started saving regularly because now he has a goal - goal of getting a house. It was difficult for him (and his siblings actually) to understand that saving is a way of living for many (me for example). You save even if you do not have a clear goal. I don't think it's something they were taught when they were growing up, they are definitely lacking some sort of 'financial education' let's put it that way but now he is getting his head around money.
Peonie83 wrote: » Realistically, in terms of money, he will never be able to match my savings so what is it that you propose?
Peonie83 wrote: » Also, realistically when is he going to be able to enjoy that shed while working full time? He's renting a shed at the moment and he's rarely there!
Ursus Horribilis wrote: » It's interesting that you mention him renting a shed at the moment and that he barely uses it. Perhaps he's like someone who buys a guitar, meaning to learn how to play but never does. Yet they think that if they went and splashed out on a top of the range model, they'l be playing like a virtuoso in no time. Has he explained why he rarely visits it? Past behaviour is often a predictor of future actions.
Ursus Horribilis wrote: » Where exactly do you propose they build this garage? Most new builds don't have the space around them to build such a thing.
salonfire wrote: » Isn't it time he grew out of the fascination with cars if he is talking about buying a house with a partner?
The_Honeybadger wrote: » There was a thread on fixer uppers in the accommodation & property forum not long ago and the consensus was that they almost never make financial sense because the vendors don’t reduce the price enough to cover the renovations needed, and especially not in Dublin in 2019. That is before you even get in to the cost of alternative accommodation while it’s being done up and the hassle of arranging contractors who are all crazy busy etc, and the fact that they never ever stay on budget. I wouldn’t touch a fixer upper right now personally unless I had exhausted all other options.
seannash wrote: » It's definitely tough right now but I always wonder who moves into a house and says this is exactly how I want it to be. A lot of people want to put their own stamp on properties and that can involved as little as painting a few walls to redoing the kitchen and bathrooms. I'm in the middle of a renovation and whilst it's not in Dublin it's in one of the commuter towns. It is doable although a little slower than I'd like. What it does mean is that I can customise it exactly how I want (obviously) Of this is a house you're going to keep for 10 plus years recouping your money by making it how you want it might not be of huge concern. (I know nobody wants to pose money but prices are sky high now so it's hard to predict if you'll ever get what you paid for anything in the future) I guess it depends on what approach you want to take. I can see huge value in both but personally a fixer upper appeals to me. OP besides the fixer uppers having the garage is there anything else that appeals to your partner about them? Bigger, more features, room to expand etc etc. Or is it simply the garage? I'd never consider a new build but that's just me.
The_Honeybadger wrote: » Sorry I wasn’t referring to a property that just needs some decorating. I’m talking about properties that need heavy maintenance works / renovations like re-wiring, plumbing, dry lining or insulation etc. Things you need to move out for. Those houses rarely make sense financially over a new house. We bought a ten year old house few years ago and have put down new floors and carpets everywhere, painted all the rooms etc. This is par for the course with any second hand house.
seannash wrote: » Yeah it probably does make financial sense to go for a new build although I've read an article recently that is saying they do not allow any room for growth of a family as you can't extend as all available space is used up. Perhaps that's one advantage of older homes, they allow that possibility as well as having larger footprints in general. My earlier suggestion was to have a reduced budget for any fixer upper property and do the work before you move in but I get the sense the OP is eager to get moved. I won't list some other advantages of old houses because that's not what the OP is asking about. Renting a garage is the best compromise I think
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b95e87bbdced94956d87d81f41edf00a.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7a1d0f49d56f52d3cfb2145c5b8cbe5a.svg)
