nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Saving issues.

mycro2013

Hi,
Not sure if this the right thread for this.

Currently in the process of applying for a mortgage. My partner of a number of years seems to think that as I have the deposit saved she should not have the need to save a contributory amount and that my funds should be used for the application.

I've said repeatedly that a house purchase should be a team effort. Any views on this will be greatly appreciated as it a source of disagreement. Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

wirelessdude01

Zebrag wrote: »

According to ILoveYourVibes, you just need independent money. Whatever that is.

Also known as handouts from the parents.

Zebrag

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Also known as handouts from the parents.

Would that be classed as a gift? I get some people would need to ask a parent/s for a little bit of help which I understand but surely the banks can't just assume money given is money seen as saved?

I need new parents so!

ILoveYourVibes

Zebrag wrote: »

I've had an apointment with a broker and a financial advisor in a bank branch and both have said equal contributions prove that one can carry on the payments of a mortage in case the other loses their job or for medical reasons. If not equal than, one might save (for a stupid example) €10 more than the other which still proves payments can be paid. So essentially, a couple HAS to have savings themselves, whether thats a joint or savings in their own accounts but either ways.

If I went to a bank and asked for a mortage from my own deposit and my partner wanted to be on the mortage with me with no savings, no contributions, I've been told that I would be seen as a single applicant as my partner would have no proof of saving therefore, not being able to afford that nice 4 bedroom house we could pay off as a couple but probably a 1 bed apartment (which still wouldn't be possible depending) as my salary wouldn't cover the lovely house we wanted even though my partner is living with me even though I want him on the mortage.

So now you're saying, as a broker yourself with many experiences and scenarios you've come across, that actually wait, if my partner can show he has independent money as you would refer it too, that that 4 bedroom house will be purchased because I've sweated my arse off to raise a deposit and my partner actually doesn't want to help at all? So if something was to happen to me and my partner, with no job, can't pay the mortage because he's an independent man who doesn't need a woman to tell him what to do with his money, that it's that easy to get a mortage?

Please. Send me a your details and sign me up to the first house we see because you sound legit.

The same was for my grandparents when they bought their first house way back when. They both had to have savings, my granddad did moreso but my nanny had to show she had something too and even at that it was close call as they were told my nanny wasn't earning enough. It wasn't a case of, the men had the money and the women done feck all.

This one has to be trolling

Im not trolling.

I wasn't A broker myself ..I worked for one.

And you are correct ..anyone whose name is on the mortgage etc ...we needed all their financial info.

You just need proof the other partner CAN. Not that they are going to.

Im sure the OP's GF could do that without her putting money IN actually ...if you understand me?

You just double your borrowing power.
Mortages for single applicants are common. And you can still have the otehr person's name of the other person on the deed. But its cumbersome because of liens etc. And you might need a quit claim in the future.

But single applicant mortages are common if one partner is not working ..or has bad credit. The fact that you are being TREATED as a single applicant ...kind of shows this.

Its not just earning power its how your spending is measured.

OP .....ask yourself this. Read my posts. Would you like to marry a woman like ME? If not ..walk.

Because she is like me.

ILoveYourVibes

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

They look at the savings of both when applying for a mortgage. There is no way the bank will just ignore no savings record.

No. They won't.

Often its actually best to go as a single applicant. Your partner's history could weaken your borrowing power to the extent that its best to.

Similarly even if they don't contribute much. Their spending or credit history could really help.

Keyzer

mycro2013 wrote: »

Hi,
Not sure if this the right thread for this.

Currently in the process of applying for a mortgage. My partner of a number of years seems to think that as I have the deposit saved she should not have the need to save a contributory amount and that my funds should be used for the application.

I've said repeatedly that a house purchase should be a team effort. Any views on this will be greatly appreciated as it a source of disagreement. Thanks.

I'd have a serious issue with this attitude OP.

Your partner needs a serious reality check, she's taking the piss big time.

If she doesn't stump up a sizable contribution then you need to start asking yourself if this the road you want to go down with a life partner.

ILoveYourVibes

Zebrag wrote: »

Would that be classed as a gift? I get some people would need to ask a parent/s for a little bit of help which I understand but surely the banks can't just assume money given is money seen as saved?

I need new parents so!

Don't worry just helps with deposit.

doesn't affect your borrowing power too much.

Unless your deposit is a huge part of the total sum!

screamer

And remember if you put her name on the mortgage, ( which I think would be nuts ) and she contributes nothing, the banks will expect you to pay it in full, but she will retain an interest in it, so would be entitled to her share of it, were it to be sold.
This type of situation is like a pair of handcuffs, unless you’re very sure you’re happy to basically fund her lifestyle, run. She won’t change.

jam_mac_jam

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

No. They won't.

Often its actually best to go as a single applicant. Your partner's history could weaken your borrowing power to the extent that its best to.

Similarly even if they don't contribute much. Their spending or credit history could really help.

Of course they do. They get bank accounts for both people applying for the mortgage. You think the bank just say oh no we don't need to know your banking history.

Seriously?

ILoveYourVibes

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Of course they do. They get bank accounts for both people applying for the mortgage. You think the bank just say oh no we don't need to know your banking history.

Seriously?

I just said they do.

That is WHY often its best to go as a single applicant.

Remember i worked for a broker not a bank.

Keyzer

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

She is probably contributing to the relationship in other ways. :rolleyes:

Different people bring different things to the table.

She brings herself.

His attitude is not acceptable in a grown man to me.

Lol... absolutely ridiculous statement.

His attitude is 1000% acceptable, her attitude stinks.

Women want equality but on their terms. You can't seek equality and then expect to contribute nothing to the deposit of one the biggest purchases you'll ever make in your life with someone you're supposed to love...

Then you go on to question if he loves her? Jesus Christ...

His OH needs to equally contribute to the deposit, otherwise, her name doesn't go on the deeds and she pays the OP rent (which she wont)...

As flippant as it sounds, this would be a complete deal breaker for me regardless of how long they have been together.

Zebrag

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I just said they do.

That is WHY often its best to go as a single applicant.

Remember i worked for a broker not a bank.

Why would you go as a single applicant on a mortage which the banks deems that you can't afford the repayment even though its the house you and your partner want? (with one deposit)

How is me telling a bank that myself and partner want to apply for a mortgage but I want to apply on my own even though I won't be able to pay the mortage with my one wage but I want my partner to live with me with no proof of being able to show we can both afford the mortage?

When if myself and partner are saving and going for a joint mortage being able to afford the mortage by proving that we can save together, have the deposit and steady income (one less or more, either or), so you're still saying to apply for a single application?

The person you worked for, was it Saul Goodman? Jesus Christ.

OP take the one advice this person gave you, don't get yourself involved in a person like this. Sit yourself and your girlfriend down and have a good long hard think about what it is you want to do. No one can make you make the decission but really think about future wise as well. If you love her and feel that this is what you want to do then by all means, I wish you the best but please think about it before you run with any rash choices.

Spudmonkey

Jesus the poor OP has had his original thread hijacked with some of the most outrageous nonsense I've ever seen.

Simply put OP this woman is a leech, if she has no interest in bearing any of the burden of putting a roof over her head but deems she is worth it in other ways she is delusional at best. If you still want to stay with her, get a mortgage on your own, get some place you can afford on your own and let her stay there sharing the bills with you.

As for ILikeYourVibes, sounds like you like to cherry-pick your equality.

ILoveYourVibes

Zebrag wrote: »

Why would you go as a single applicant on a mortage which the banks deems that you can't afford the repayment even though its the house you and your partner want? (with one deposit)

.

I will answer your question in good faith to the best of my ability.

It isn't about your earning power solely. Its a mistake a lot of people make.

Its your spending habits ...bad credit .. its why people have separate bank accounts for certain spending habits to try and 'hide it'.

It is about other loans you have or have had.

The sector one partner works in.

BTW married couples have to make a joint application.

Someone has said she was being treated like a single applicant anyway. That happens too. It has to be 'acceptable income'.

Bonus payments often not accepted.

But sometimes the lesser partners earning doesn't come into the equation. Social welfare etc often isn't taken into the equation.

Sometimes freelance work isnt. Income from Zero HR contracts often isn't.

More i can't think of.

Where are all the single female property owners? I know a lot of male ones.

I must admit i do cherry pick my equality.

I can acknowledge this.

Hannibal_Smith

Mod Note

Okay, I've just gone back and deleted a bunch of off topic posts. I think I got them all, but feel free to report any I've missed.

ILoveYourVibes Most of those off topic posts were yours and for that reason I'm asking you to not post in the thread again. I think you've had sufficient say and to be fair the OP should be getting their own financial advice.

Everyone else, please remember to advise the OP when replying. It's okay to disagree, but do so in a manner that offers advice to the OP and its then up to them to take whatever advice applies to them.

Thanks

HS

Tork

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Where are all the single female property owners? I know a lot of male ones.

I bought my first house as a single female and off the top of my head I can think of half a dozen more. If I think about this for longer I'm confident I'll remember more.

OP, if you want to continue with this relationship and buy the house, that's your choice. Just be aware that your partner won't be working and she'll be spending your money. Finances are one of the main reasons relationships fail, so be careful. You could end up not just single but emptier of pocket and tied to her forever if you have kids.

HildaOgdenx

OP, couples sort out their finances different ways. The key thing is, it has to be the way that suits both people involved. This approach by your partner, spells trouble straightaway, in my opinion. At least you know this now, before you progress any further with a mortgage and house purchase.

Sad but true, issues about finances, and how to arrange them, can make or break a relationship.

qwerty13

qwerty13 wrote: »

Did she grow up in a very traditional role household?

Have her parents been so generous to her that she expects others to just fall in line with whatever she wants?

Is she generous in other ways, like she does the bulk of the cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping (and paying for it) etc?

How does she deal with any conflict (I know she makes you feel like the bad guy about the money discussions). But in general is she willing to talk things through, or compromise?

While it is possible to contribute in ways other than money, my concern would be that she sees absolutely no need to adjust her lifestyle in order to contribute some money - and is happy for you to work double her hours so that you contribute more money to compensate for this. And then worse, makes you feel bad about even asking her about this.

Is just sounds like she was everything on her terms. If you were to get married, does she intend working afterwards? I know it suits for many reasons for 1 partner to be a stay at home parent - my fear would be that she has no intention of continuing to work regardless of parenting, and sees her income as ‘money for her’ - and your money as ‘money for house / bills / kids’.

I’m afraid it doesn’t sound good OP

Tork

All of this makes me wonder what your family thinks of her. The people around you see more than you think they do and they can by very perceptive. Family don't like to interfere in people's love lives but I bet they have thoughts on your partner.

I'm not sure your should even buy this house, much as you'd like to. Your entire relationship needs a rethinking and that's going to be very tricky once she's living in your house. I think you've sleepwalked into the position you're in and it'd be foolish to continue without stopping and thinking about where this is heading.

HamSarris

This set-up where the guy pays the bills and the woman keeps her own money is more common than people think. A much higher proportion of women work part-time, feel that their wages just cover their own expenses and allow the guy to pay for everything else. And many women who start off in full time hours often move to part-time with kids and gradually let the guy take over paying the bills. Many guys can be happy to conform to the traditional provider role.

At least the OP knows what he’s getting into. It’s really a case of how much you value the relationship relative to the financial cost. Is there something special enough about this relationship or woman that you would be willing to sacrifice 100K+ over the next few decades? Is this a person you enjoy coming home to every evening and want to have kids with? Or is it more a mediocre relationship with a mediocre woman and you could easily get a similar or better relationship with a financially independent woman?

You could try to negotiate with your girlfriend but I find it’s very hard to change people’s perspective around money. If you do go this route make sure you get clear evidence that your partner is willing to save and contribute. Set a target for something manageable like 10 grand. If your girlfriend can’t even save this much you can assume she’ll be a permanent financial drain on your finances.

A2LUE42

I didn't mention gender in the examples I was talking about. There seems to be a tend in the thread that mirrors the OP's genders. The ones I was talkig about are where the guy in the relationship has abdicated financial responsibility, so it isn't just the 1950's man/woman division. In all cases, they are the ones who have to have the latest phones/gadgets and make their partners guilty for brnging up and finance related issues. They think nothing of spending money needed to pay(normall catch up on overdue) bills on over the top gifts for all and sundry and they don't understand why their partner is at their wits end and having sleepless nights about owing money left right and center. They genuinely don't see issues with being a grown adult and having someone else fund their life. Similar to the comment before about living the champagne lifestyle on lemonade income.

I am really thankfull that my partner and I are on the same page finance wise, as to me it is an indication of the respect we have for each other ,as partners, in the relationship.

ManOfMystery

I think it's been fairly well established by the stage that she wants to have her cake and eat it.

Her not paying a contribution to your deposit is not a massive issue in itself, so long as she makes up that contribution in other areas. But if she is reluctant to do that, and even worse, reluctant to even consider/address this huge disparity in the contributions that you're both making to your future together - then you have a problem.

It's a sign of a pattern that many of us will have seen many times before, and which will no doubt define your relationship over years to come - she wants to keep her money for spending on herself, and 'your' money for bills and mortgages and all the expenses of living.

Just for argument's sake, when my now-wife and I had been going out for a couple of years we decided it was time to live together. I was renting an apartment, she had a house which she'd already bought years prior and was living in by herself. It made more sense for me to move in with her than the other way round. She was on a good wage and didn't want me to pay any rent, but I felt it very unfair that I would be living there rent-free so instead I took the £600/per month I would have been paying and it went into a savings account towards our wedding. There was a decent lump in there a few years later when the time came to withdraw it.

I think if your partner is unwilling to contribute a lump sum now, she's going to have to acknowledge the unfairness of this and the only way forward would be a monthly saving like I had done, and this could be used for future expenditure.

cannotlogin

The issue here is whether or not you want to be financially responsible for the two of you for the rest of forever.

She's told you who she is, she's told you what she wants and she's demonstrated this by her behaviour for the avoidance of any doubt.

She will never contribute financially to your household.

Whether you consider that acceptable or not is up to you. Every couple has a choice in how they run things and often women contribute more domestically than financially after having kids which works for a lot of people.

Your situation is different. She is basically saying I want to be a non financially contributing kept woman for the rest of my days. Your call OP, either accept what she is presenting or walk because she's never going to change.

[Deleted User]

mycro2013 wrote: »

My partner of a number of years seems to think that as I have the deposit saved she should not have the need to save a contributory amount and that my funds should be used for the application.

I've said repeatedly that a house purchase should be a team effort. Any views on this will be greatly appreciated as it a source of disagreement.

My partner isn't great at saving either.

When it came to getting a mortgage, I had enough saved up for the deposit and he basically had nowt, even though he was on about twice my wages.

A mortgage was going to be less than our rent, so I proposed to him that I would pay the deposit, and that going forward he could pay more onto the mortgage than me until he had essentially paid me back for the deposit. I really wanted a house, so I had to decide whether or not I trusted him to square things up eventually. I think the fact that he could comfortably pay more money than me without it being more than our previous rent made the deal seem like a win-win.

I did basically all the work on getting the house, so there was definitely a point at which I questioned whether I was a mug. But, by the time we were ready to buy, he actually had saved up about €9k to put onto the deposit. He's also paid the agreed amount onto the mortgage every month. So happy ending overall.

I guess the main point I'm trying to make here is that it required a lot of trust on my part, and some concessions, in order to get the home I wanted. However, at no point was it necessary to explain why I was suggesting he pay me back. In fact, there was even a point where we discussed the time value of money and how reasonable it would be to attach interest to the money he 'owed' me.

When you eventually sign docs with the solicitor, you'll have to select whether you want to own the place together or if you each own a different proportion of the house. If she wants to be equal owner, you'll need to put your foot down about equal contribution. If she genuinely can't understand that, then as others have said, it's likely you'll struggle with finances as long as you're together.

hayoc

OP - the biggest question I have for you is why are you working twice the hours and paying more than twice than your partner?

Is she contributing to your lives in some other less tangible way, looking after children, looking after the chores/shopping etc so you never have to do any housework?

From what you have outlined she is frankly a gold digger.

I literally know NO ONE where this would be considered the norm. Most of my female friends owned their own properties before they settled down or if they didnt, they worked full time and contributed to a joint purchase financially.

Sure, I know couples where the wife then gave up working when they had kids - but thats because she was raising the kids and saving them the costs of childcare etc.. (in fact, I dont know anyone who gave up completely, but went to part time).

I was the higher earner throughout my marriage (Im female) and we bought a property using an inheritance left to me before we married that I had invested so had a sizeable chunk for the deposit, plus I had my own property before we started going out. My husband NEVER tried to get a better job, although I asked him to many times. Then he walked out and it turned out he had a long term mistress and was using prostitutes - with MY money. And after all that he is now fighting me legally to get 50% of the family home AND a piece of the property I already owned, even though I paid a huge chunk for the family home deposit and as the higher earner I was paying more of the mortgage payment each month than him. I was basically financing his lifestyle for 15 years, that later turned out to be spending money on other women.

Dont be me. Dont think "well its ok if I contribute more, I earn more". Because if it all falls apart, that higher contribution will be ignored.

qwerty13

At the very least, your takeaway from this thread OP should that you’ve raised a very valid issue with your GF, and that money issues can be incredibly hard to resolve the longer they’re left. So please don’t take any brushing it under the carpet from her.

It’s also about respect - she’s not even listening to your point of view at the moment, much less doing anything about it. She’s content to have you work extra hours and worry. If she tends to be like that in other areas of your life together then I’d be thinking long and hard about your future with her.

robindch

mycro2013 wrote: »

I've said repeatedly that a house purchase should be a team effort. Any views on this will be greatly appreciated as it a source of disagreement.

Easiest thing is that she gets a share of the house in proportion with the cash she invests. Your lawyer will be able to create a co-ownership agreement which will allow this to happen and the agreement will give you both the certainty you look for, while also preserving each person's investment and commitment.

The idea that she gets 50% of the house without contributing 50% of the cash is not an idea I would entertain as it incentivizes gold-diggers.

99nsr125

hayoc wrote: »

OP - the biggest question I have for you is why are you working twice the hours and paying more than twice than your partner?

Is she contributing to your lives in some other less tangible way, looking after children, looking after the chores/shopping etc so you never have to do any housework?

From what you have outlined she is frankly a gold digger.

I literally know NO ONE where this would be considered the norm. Most of my female friends owned their own properties before they settled down or if they didnt, they worked full time and contributed to a joint purchase financially.

Sure, I know couples where the wife then gave up working when they had kids - but thats because she was raising the kids and saving them the costs of childcare etc.. (in fact, I dont know anyone who gave up completely, but went to part time).

I was the higher earner throughout my marriage (Im female) and we bought a property using an inheritance left to me before we married that I had invested so had a sizeable chunk for the deposit, plus I had my own property before we started going out. My husband NEVER tried to get a better job, although I asked him to many times. Then he walked out and it turned out he had a long term mistress and was using prostitutes - with MY money. And after all that he is now fighting me legally to get 50% of the family home AND a piece of the property I already owned, even though I paid a huge chunk for the family home deposit and as the higher earner I was paying more of the mortgage payment each month than him. I was basically financing his lifestyle for 15 years, that later turned out to be spending money on other women.

Dont be me. Dont think "well its ok if I contribute more, I earn more". Because if it all falls apart, that higher contribution will be ignored.

Save yourself the lawyer fees and give him the half he is entitled to.

JeffKenna

hayoc wrote: »

OP - the biggest question I have for you is why are you working twice the hours and paying more than twice than your partner?

Is she contributing to your lives in some other less tangible way, looking after children, looking after the chores/shopping etc so you never have to do any housework?

From what you have outlined she is frankly a gold digger.

I literally know NO ONE where this would be considered the norm. Most of my female friends owned their own properties before they settled down or if they didnt, they worked full time and contributed to a joint purchase financially.

Sure, I know couples where the wife then gave up working when they had kids - but thats because she was raising the kids and saving them the costs of childcare etc.. (in fact, I dont know anyone who gave up completely, but went to part time).

I was the higher earner throughout my marriage (Im female) and we bought a property using an inheritance left to me before we married that I had invested so had a sizeable chunk for the deposit, plus I had my own property before we started going out. My husband NEVER tried to get a better job, although I asked him to many times. Then he walked out and it turned out he had a long term mistress and was using prostitutes - with MY money. And after all that he is now fighting me legally to get 50% of the family home AND a piece of the property I already owned, even though I paid a huge chunk for the family home deposit and as the higher earner I was paying more of the mortgage payment each month than him. I was basically financing his lifestyle for 15 years, that later turned out to be spending money on other women.

Dont be me. Dont think "well its ok if I contribute more, I earn more". Because if it all falls apart, that higher contribution will be ignored.

Why did you marry him in the first place if you were constantly putting him down by telling him to get a better job? Be interesting to hear his side.

qwerty13

JeffKenna wrote: »

Why did you marry him in the first place if you were constantly putting him down by telling him to get a better job? Be interesting to hear his side.

I don’t think that’s necessarily fair on the poster you’re referring to, as it seems that her husband got all the benefits of her financial prudence, but didn’t contribute much money.

I think there’s a spectrum in that scenario (which sounds like it could apply to the OP too), as in its all very well for one party to have their dream job, or a very easy job compared to their partner - but if the other party is working a lot of hours, or in a job they dislike or find stressful, then it’s not fair for the other partner to reap all the benefits of one partners financial responsibility but continue to do their dream or easy job. As with so many things about relationships, it’s a question of balance/compromise. I would have a problem if one party wanted the other to get ‘a better job’ if it was purely for fancier lifestyle reasons, but I don’t think it’s fair to have one partner putting everything in financially and in terms of hard work, lots of hours and stress, while the other partner gets all the benefits from that and coasts along/just does a job they are plodding along in. It’s not a fair arrangement.

Of course if the non-financially contributing partner contributed in other ways, which were agreeable to both parties, then happy days. The OP hasn’t clarified what other contribution their partner makes though - as in the bulk of the housework, paying for groceries/utilities. Somehow I’m suspecting that is not the case. So I don’t think it is unreasonable for the OP to ask that his GF gets a part time job in order to contribute more money - or to ask that she spends less on herself, and puts more money towards their future.

StinkyMunkey

If anyone gets a mortgage with someone not willing to contribute anything at the start, they need to get their head examined.

There are serious red flags here, OP who do you think will end up paying the mortgage and bills on their own while someone is out living the life?

Save yourself a life of misery and either give her a reality check or run for the hills, don't let yourself get taken for a ride.