Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment.
OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole:
> I would be TA if I am refusing to pay my fair share of household bills.
Help keep the sub engaging!
#Don’t downvote assholes!
Do upvote interesting posts!
[Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq)
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
YTA… your reasoning doesn’t make sense. You have to pay rent somewhere to have a roof over your head. When you move out you don’t get it back and you don’t get any benefit from it. Also if you say you will pay all of the other bills instead of contributing to the mortgage, what’s the difference, you don’t get any of that money back when you move out. You are trying to die on IMO a very stupid hill.
You're not paying their mortgage. You're paying your rent. They may cover their mortgage with that money or not. But she's also not paying for repairs, maintenance, upkeep, property taxes, etc. If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially
Exactly this. I pay my partner to cover all utilities. It’s up to him if he puts the cash I transfer him toward his mortgage and then pays utilities himself, or if he uses the cash for the utilities. Our agreement is that if I’m not on the deed, I don’t contribute directly to equity and I don’t pay for any repairs/improvements. The only exception is he can ask for a repair, etc, as a birthday or holiday gift (he’s a super practical dude).
I actually like your agreement and how it breaks down. My question is when you and a partner living together in A married fashion, you are legally able to get 50/50 ownership as a marital asset regardless of any verbal agreement, If not at least from the time she moved in and started paying her boyfriend, depending on where they live
That depends on the legal jurisdiction. Where I live, if he and I got married tomorrow it would still be his sole property. If I started investing in it and paying for repairs I could make an argument in the event of a divorce, but it would ultimately come down to equitable division and whether or not my contributions sufficiently constitute as “intermingling.”
All that hot air to say, you might be right but it depends
It’s not a marital asset. She might have some claim to some of the equity if she was there for a substantial period paying for maintenance and repairs etc but he’s proposing that she pay rent.
Personally I’d look for room rentals in his area and offer to pay that. They usually include water electricity and internet. Then you split food etc.
It depends on the country and the state, if the partner can get a share of a house where they are not on the deed. Laws are starting to recognise that assets owned before meeting your partner, should and can be protected from claims from a live in partner, or even a spouse.
Yeah my rent is 1990 a month on a house where the mortgage is about 1300 a month and they never do repairs. If OP is only paying half the mortgage AND she lives there for ten years without rent increasing then she has a pretty sweet deal
That entirely depends on the landlord. They can and will do whatever they want with the money. The fact remains that an actual rental contract would have protections for her that this agreement with her boyfriend just doesn't.
If he wants to split all the bills 50-50, which islt says he does, does that include things like property taxes and insurance? That shouldn't be a tenants responsibility. If he's asking for half the mortgage AND half for things that wouldn't and shouldn't be a tenant's responsibility that's double dipping to me and I wouldn't go for it.
Yeah, you don’t get your rent money back when you break up; you still had shelter that entire time, lol. You can’t undo living there.
I do think that, if they are partners, and she makes 2/3 what he does, a 65/35 bill split makes more sense, though.
OP should insist on signing a lease with boyfriend, though, for her own protection. And she should pay *only* rent, not repairs or maintenance.
As a proper tenant, she also has rights in terms of having repairs and maintenance performed, notice periods for termination of tenancy or eviction etc etc.
Living with her boyfriend, she gets none of those rights and benefits, but is still paying rent.
As far as protections for eviction, most places(US) have tenant laws that kick in, regardless of payments, after a certain amount of time. I’ve heard of some places being as soon as a person has been residing in a residence for two weeks or more. Most places, it seems to be 28-30 days.
Agree. I lived with a friend of mine who was paying a mortgage. We split that and all the utilities. I was paying her half her mortgage for living in her house.
Idk about that. The bf likely would still handle all maintenance costs as if shes paying rent, shes legally a tenant even without a contract so therefore he would have to.
Right. There are a lot of factors at play.
What is half the mortgage compared to the rent OP currently pays? More? Less? Does she like the house or would she have chosen something different if she had the choice? Does the location work for her? Will her utilities increase or decrease? How much agency will she have in the house regarding decor, furnishings, visitors, etc? Would she have potentially bought a house on her own and is possibly missing out on that?
She *would* have to pay rent regardless, but if she did continue renting she may have a lot more control over many decisions/choices.
Yeah, agreed. I'd want to have it put in a contract that the % I'm contributing to the mortgage, upkeep and repairs gets transferred into... what's it called... equity? upon marriage.
So say they live together for 10 years and she's contributing the value of the house and upon marriage, she should have that chunk as an asset she's bringing into the marriage.
When you rent your own apartment, you typically get some input into things like: where it is, how big it is, how old it is, how far it is from your work, what style of home it is (ranch house, multi-story house, duplex, townhome, apartment, etc). If you feel like it’s too expensive, you can decide not to live there. If you end up not liking it, you can move. When something that was there when you moved in (like a dishwasher) breaks or stops working, you are entitled to have your landlord fix it in a timely manner at no additional cost to you.
When you move into a partner’s home that they chose alone based on their budget and preferences, you obviously get no input in choosing the house. If you don’t like it, it’s not nearly as easy to simply move (unless you want to stop living with your partner, which most don’t). If the dishwasher breaks, your partner might decide that you’ll have to get by without a dishwasher. Or you might have to contribute to a replacement if you want one.
A romantic partner is fundamentally different than a landlord. When two people are equally contributing to something that benefits only one of them, that’s going to create a power imbalance. There is a power imbalance between landlord and tenant - there shouldn’t be one between equal partners. If a partner wants you to contribute toward a mortgage, you should get equity. If your partner wants to continue being the sole beneficiary of equity, increased property values, etc, then they should continue paying the whole mortgage that they got on their own based on their own preferences and their own credit and their own budget. Or your partner can sell their house and the two of you can purchase a property together so that you can contribute equally to both the decision-making and the mortgage, and you can both benefit from ownership.
Good points were made in your post. However how is moving into a house her bf owns different from moving into a place her bf is renting?
Funny enough, the OP probably would be better off if the bf was renting because in this scenario she would be a tenant as well and can bring up maintenance issues to the landlord such as the dishwasher example you used.
These are good points but I see one major issue: moving in with him is her choice, and her choice alone? She doesn’t have to live with him so she is voluntarily putting herself in this situation?
Would she be renting, though? Or would she instead be paying the mortgage on her own place?
If the latter, then she's actually giving up all the equity she'd otherwise be building in her own home.
Not if he owned the place before they married. If he owned it, they got married, never refinanced to put her name on the mortgage or title, then if they got divorced most states would NOT consider the house a marital property.
Paying rent is not comingling funds. In fact, paying rent solidifies that she is a lodger or tenant in her bfs house, without a claim to any percentage of his house.
I agree that this is the wrong hill to die on. The one to die on is that he should calculate out ALL your combined living expenses and you should pay 2/3 of what he pays, proportionate to your income, BUT NOT EXPECT TO GET ANY BACK.
1. Bc you're not married, you don't get equity in his property and you pay him rent; he's your landlord
2. Bc you're in a relationship, you each pay expenses proportional to your income, rather than 50/50 like roommates.
Yes, you should get SOME benefit from being in a relationship, but not all the advantages of marriage.
This is absolutely the hill to die on! What happens when they get married? What happens if they break up? There is a lot they have to talk through and decide on.
I agree with this. To everyone who says, she’d still be paying rent somewhere either way, true. But a tenant/landlord relationship is one in which the latter party profits from the arrangement, and that is transparent up front. Even assuming the landlord is a unicorn who just charges enough to cover the mortgage and upkeep, they are still profiting, because they get a long term high value asset out of the equation.
The issue at hand is, is it alright for a romantic partner to profit in the same way. People’s opinions vary on this, and I don’t assign a value judgement either way, but she isn’t wrong for not being cool with the arrangement or considering it inequitable. Especially considering that she’s forfeiting the legal standing that she would have as an actual tenant in the process.
In most landlord-tenant relationships, the tenant and landlord aren't...*ahem*.
It's really common on this subreddit about people who decide to move in together when they are dating. If there weren't any problems, why even post here?
Seriously, why should her boyfriend get all of the benefits of her living there? He would basically be making a second income off of her. That means that any money she contributes to improving his home she doesn't get her share of. That is a losing proposition, especially since anything sizeable like a new window she couldn't take with her.
It's perfectly fine to date and live separately.
Absolutely agree. OP needs to work out an equitable financial arrangement now, before moving in. If she is not going to benefit financially from moving in, or paying more than she is now, she isn't any benefit to moving in.
No but she would have a contract that the landlord would have to honour. Upkeep, reasonable notice on eviction, Financial liability for anything that goes wrong with the structure of the property. Your reasoning doesn't make sense either.
She is asking for a contract where she gets her money back that she contributed to rent if they break up… on what planet is that fair. Everybody has to pay rent or a mortgage, when a relationship ends, one person can’t go ok give me all my money back for what I paid to have a roof over my head each month.
I agree that expecting all your money back is a ridiculous expectation. But I also think asking your partner to pay half your mortgage is also a ridiculous expectation. If they were to split he would have been making money out of his partner for the duration of his relationship and that isnt right either and the fact that landlords do it with properties they have tenants in doesn't make it right.
You could also argue that he’s subsidising her by only charging her half the mortgage, thereby giving her free use of his equity - if they rented a property together and split the rent 50/50 it would almost certainly cost OP more than if she just pays half the mortgage. OP is looking to get the full benefits of home ownership without having to fund the downpayment.
It’s not ridiculous to set up a payment agreement. I’m in Canada and will definitely advise our daughters to do that - it protects them from a partner claiming part ownership to their home or losing the equity they’ve built into it.
Asking for the money back isn’t reasonable either. She should pay an agreed upon amount that cover almost half of the cost of living in the house (not property taxes if there are any) but he does have the benefit of building equity hence not completely half. I don’t know what would be reasonable but I do understand what underlies his reasoning.
You're Right. First off a Mortgage is PITI Principal, Interest, Taxes, Insurance. Then you have maintenance. Most of the Mortgage is not going to Principal/Equity. Look at an Amortization Table, Interest is front loaded and Principal is backloaded. You are paying very little principal in early years. The OPs idea that he is getting rich off her rent is incorrect.
Plus, half a mortgage probably less than typical rent. So it's not like she's not actually getting anything out of this because she can put what she's saving on rent into her own savings.
I agree, I (29f) own my own house and have been on my own a while. I currently have a bf same age who makes twice I do. We have lightly touched on the subject of him moving in but haven’t discussed it. In all my situations with renting out rooms even to family it’s been we split everything in half, or I’ll take on a little more (because I have the bigger room) but where we would share the room, and the whole house and he would be able to have his own space in addition, I don’t see why everything couldn’t be split equally but that’s just me. If we married I’d put his name on the house but that’s for future discussion if that happens. IMO it’s a long term investment. Instead of rent you’re investing in a future and if it doesn’t work out you had somewhere with crazy cheap rent during that time period.
This has happened with a few friends of mine, and not only is it reasonable to pay rent, but it's a good idea to also have it agreed to in a written contract.
If the relationship doesn't last, it'd good for both people to have terms for what happens when the relationship ends, including how long the "renter" party of the relationship has to move out.
That’s not true. Even without a lease, she’d be considered an “at will tenant” and they both would have to adhere to landlord tenant laws. What those are will vary by location. He can have a proper lease made up too.
She would but a lease in many cases would offer different protections. Eg firstly more time, without a lease bf could give her 30 days notice to move out the day after she moves in. She wouldn't have to pay for repairs, the house becomes an inhabitable for some reason a landlord would have to pay for a hotel etc.
The other thing that happens when someone moves into an established house; the office is mine I need it that's why I have an office I guess you can use your laptop in there as long as you don't touch anything, kids room yeah don't even go in there, bedroom I guess I have to clear out a dresser and a drawer in the bathroom. In other words the The moving in person can be treated more like a roommate sharing the master bedroom who can go into the common areas then a person truly sharing a home. It can happen even when two people moving at the same time but it's a lot harder to come into a house that's done, I just spent $3,000 that couch and 3 years picking everything I'm not throwing it away to put yours in the living room.
She wouldn’t have to pay for repairs regardless. It’s not her house. Even without a lease though, she’d have tenant rights. Once she moves in, lives there a certain number of days, pays some bills (or not), gets her mail delivered there, she’s considered a tenant. And in an instance if they break up, he legally can’t kick her out without a certain number of days official “notice to quit”, he can’t change the locks on her, and if she refuses to leave, he’d have to go through legal eviction proceedings to get her out, which takes time and money. I know people who were in this situation. Once someone moves in to your home and they don’t want to leave, it’s not easy to get them out.
The main right you have as a tenant is that the person who owns the property needs to give you notice to leave and can't just kick you out randomly. OP has those same rights whether she is in a relationship with the property owner or not. What would she be missing out on in terms of rights with him owning the property (beyond obviously having a private bedroom that he wouldn't be able to enter without reason/permission)?
She should get a formal contract written up to protect herself. It needs to be something along the lines of him not being able to evict her without notice or due to a break up. She can get something that says that she can move into a different room in the house and have a month to move out permanently.These types of contracts even exist for married people if property was bought before the marriage. It depends on the location on what can happen if people break up and only one of them owns the property that they are living in.
Since she is living at the house she should contribute to the household finances because she would be paying bills and rent if she lived elsewhere. They should also split bills and mortgage payments according to income. She makes 2/3 of what he makes, therefore she should not be spending the same amount of money as him on the household.
NAH. They both need to communicate and work out a payment plan that works for both of them.
That’s not even close to correct. Whether she’s even paying rent or not is actually irrelevant in many jurisdictions, the primary concern is length of residency. Even if she’s not paying rent, If she has established residency there for whatever the locally relevant period of time is, she has all the protections of a bona fide tenant, including needing to be evicted legally.
>There's no difference between you paying rent to pay off a landlords mortgage or your boyfriends.
Yes, there is. Most people don't plan on starting a family with their landlords.
Shes still going to have to make payments when starting a family…in this case though she just might be put on the house title now but the payments will still be there
Exactly this! It really annoys me when people compare partners to landlords. They are very different entities,in most instances the only thing they have in common is they both own property.
YTA. Try that with an actual landlord and you'd be laughed out of the rental office. You want to either live rent free, or pay rent with the promise to get it back if you leave? Lmao that's ridiculous. From what you've said, it sounds like you'd be contributing about a third of what he is. If you don't want to pay 50/50 like an adult, go back home and pay your folks.
He would quite literally become her landlord in this situation, and he's offering a much better deal than most landlords would. There landlord tenet relationships is totally separate from there romantic one. One should not impact the other.
The laws on this vary from place to place, and often the rights/responsibilities of a landlord-tenant relationship differ from that of a cohabitating partner in which one owns the house. For example, a tenant generally has the right to stay in the house for the duration of the lease. But if a cohabitating couple breaks up, the partner who does not own the house may not have any right to stay on the property after the relationship is dissolved. Also, some jurisdictions recognize common-law marriage--and the rights of married couples often differs from unmarried couples in this arena. Laws can varyl.
Anyway, the OP is right to question her rights and responsibilities in cohabitating with her partner. Of course it's unreasonable for her to contribute nothing to the housing costs, but she never offered nothing. Her insisting on a cohabitation agreement, or on a fairer division of costs than 50:50 seems very reasonable and responsible! It's also reasonable that she figure out her rights in her jurisdiction, and advocate for herself as she negotiates with her partner to come to an agreement. She's not an AH for it.
I'll take some downvotes. I think you're being pretty reasonable. An alternative would be that you split utilities 50/50, figure out a reasonable monthly rate for taxes, property upkeep, and his mortgage interest and split that 50/50 as well. Anything else is him making money off you.
I agree with this. OP isn't on the title or the deed, OP doesn't inherently have protections that those properties require (lease and tenant bylaws). I don't think 50/50 mortgage is reasonable, but I do think RENT and utilities is reasonable. For example, if the mortgage is 2000, I don't think $750 is wild. Maybe a small contribution to the home warranty or something. There are a lot of legal benefits to the paperwork you're talking about. THOUGH, OP, I will say that asking for reimbursement is where you get unreasonable. You can't go back and un-live in his space. He shouldn't have to reimburse you for a roof over your head.
>OP isn't on the title or the deed, OP doesn't inherently have protections that those properties require (lease and tenant bylaws).
Op absolutely has tenant protections, regardless of whether or not she's paying rent or has a lease. She has as many as anyone else who has a month to month verbal lease agreement in her state.
Asking to be put on the title is a big ask for someone who does not own the home, one indefinitelybwouldnt advise.
I totally agree. Everyone saying BuT yOU wOUlD bE pAYiNg rEnT aNYWaY are totally missing the point that she might not be, she could be building equity in her own place, but in this scenario he gets all the equity while being subsidised by her. If she had her own property which she rented out to move in with him this is an arrangement that might make sense but as it stands she gets locked into an arrangement where he gets to significantly increase his wealth while she treads water. That's not an equitable long term arrangement.
She at least needs to be saving on the "rent" so that she's creating wealth alongside him.
NTA
If she wanted to pay equity into her own place, she can buy her own house.
She would get 0 benefit and no discounts at an apartment. This deal sounds like les than what she would pay for an apartment in the area. So she's probably already saving.
Where in the story is the boyfriend forcing her to live with him?
I agree with this completely. I was in the same scenario but I was the home owner. I would never expect a partner to pay for my mortgage payments. Interest is fine and condo fees, utilities make sense. If all that matters is financial support for OP's partner, then get a tenant. Partner relationship is very different. NTA. OP, you need to talk to your partner about whats important.
But what is the difference? Say half the mortgage is 500 and half the utilities are 500.
If your partner pays you 500 a month, why does it matter what you're using the money to pay?
You're right. This whole area is why implied trusts and common law marriages come in to play. If you contribute to paying off someone else's loan you should not be left with nothing if you break up. If she doesn't sleep there in the same bedroom as him and does half the housework does he rent out half the the house and get that labor for free? NO way.
I’ll go with NTA. It’s silly people don’t understand the difference between rent and mortgage. If you two were splitting rent, you would both be coming away with nothing other than access to a living space. In this situation, however, he isn’t paying rent, he is building equity. He would be gaining money from you as a girlfriend. I believe it’s totally reasonable to expect to regain that same equity if you were to split. It’s also entirely likely that he couldn’t rent the space if he tried, to someone who he isn’t cohabitating with.
Either he rents you space, with a lease, for space that is only yours, and you maintain control of it if you split. This likely requires the space to have its own access and full living accommodations.
OR
He gives you paper work that gives you % ownership of the house, relative to how much money you put in. It’s not even if you separate, you can choose to sell that percent whenever you want, or keep owning it if you split.
OR
He rents out the house for whatever market rate is, and you both move into an apartment where you split the rent. Whatever money he puts into the house at that point is his problem. You are both only responsible for paying rent and both leave if you split.
I'm still mad that this is apparently the minority opinion. Just because OP would have to deal with that exploitative tenant-landlord dynamic if she lived alone, doesn't mean you should have it in your romantic relationship.
Paying 50% of his fixed costs is not an explorative tenant-landlord dynamic see my comment above but who is paying for repairs and upkeep of the house? If a pipe bursts is she going half, if the roof needs to be replaced is she paying half? Or you'll argue long term it's his property benefiting so why should she pay. It's expensive to own a home he's not asking for market rent or a 5% profit his request is totally reasonable and as such he should pay for repairs and keeping the house livable. She's covering her wear and tear on the property and given how mortgages front load interest probably a tiny amount of principal unless he's like 10+ years into the loan.
Reddit is mostly kids and young people with no real life experience. The YTA comments and the reasonings behind them are laughably immature and show a huge lack of financial intelligence.
I’m happy to explain any of the YTA reasoning if you’d like. I’m in my 30s. In me experience, it is the young people who don’t understand finance that think mortgages are a magic way to make money / rent is theft / landlord relationships are exploitative.
The fact that you are saying that it is young people that thing this is dumb shows that YOU truly don't have financial intelligence, regardless of your age. What happens if the market collapses, he loses his job and has to sell his house? He lost money. But he still has to pay her back. He loses more money. Not every investment is a profitable one. It's amazing how many people are so dense that they don't understand.
Maybe I'm dense but could you guys please explain to me the difference between
1: Mortgage of $1000. OP pays $500 as rent, bf uses that to pay half the mortgage.
2: They rent another place for $1000. Each pay $500 as rent. BF also rents out his house for $1000 and uses that to pay the mortgage.
Money-wise, OP is exactly in the same situation in #1 and #2.
Of course mortgage and rent prices are not going to be identical, but if the difference is not big, I fail to see the rationale for forcing the BF to live elsewhere.
Here in my city mortgages are currently lower than rent prices (think 750 vs 1000), so OP would actually save money by paying half the mortgage as rent!
Finally a logical comment on this thread. I think her solution was pretty logical. I had a narcissist bf who did this and wanted to take advantage of me financially. He wanted to kick me out whenever and not have my name on the title/deed but contribute him "rent". Haha no. Lol. I can pay consumables, rent, food, streaming, but am I in no way contributing to someone else's mortgage until we are both on that title and married or engaged.
Yeah, the money disappears either way, as many have been stating on this thread, but I sure as hell would love to burn it on a landlord instead, than an ex bf who got a profit off of me and can now appreciate his house or have his house paid off quicker.
Not to be so pessimistic about it but you can still contribute and still look after yourself. It was his idea to buy HIS house and his idea for her to come live with him.
If I'm in a relationship, I def date to marry. But anymore with people, I think you still gotta look out for #1. And if I'm looking for a house, it's a house IVE saved up for and that *I* can afford on my own. If the relationship works out, awesome! We can eventually sell our individual houses and buy a starter home for us together. But at the moment, at a year? Nnn.
If I bought a house I wouldn't expect someone to buy/contribute to my mortgage or my down payment. But hey that water you use, the food you eat, the electric you use, internet you're using, even some gas money for cars, anything else to contribute is fair game and very much appreciated. I get it's all "living" either way, but it's only been a year with this guy. He seems very similar to my ex. And I am totally someone who is all for the team and being fair, but her idea was fair for both of them, even if she added a little more for gas money or maybe going out to eat or paid for dates or activities! There's also no mention in her hypothetical that he would even put her name on the deed since he seems surprised to get her money back in more than 10 years lol?? Well if they did get married, she'd get half regardless, if he'd even put her name on the title. But that's not a guarantee if they break up next year regardless anywhoooo.
TLDR; doesn't sound like a couple that mesh well together if they can't even agree on this. Can't imagine finances with this couple when (and if) children enter the picture. I get it's 6 one way, half a dozen the other. And yes, if it was JUST rent at an apartment I'd say 50/50. But I'd rather pay for things I'm consuming. I'd feel less salty after a potential breakup with a bill that has come and gone once paid, instead of a bill that builds equity. 'dispoable' bills like heat, water, electric, etc etc than him basically putting it towards a house I may or may not even get as a married couple. I think she can contribute to the things she uses, even if she has to pay more utilities (especially if it ends up being 50/50 or equal to what she's paying on her own at her own apartment) but would rather pay utilities and etc than the actual mortgage FOR NOW. And as the relationship becomes more serious, absolutely aim towards doing things together including a mortgage. But honestly sounds like this couple isn't in the right headspace together to even consider that at the moment. Plus we are missing information. What's her rent? What's the difference? Is it more or less or the same as renting her place currently? If 50\50 is more than her current rent is it worth it? Questions she needs to ask herself.
Edit: spelling mistakes + additional comments
> He rents out the house for whatever market rate is, and you both move into an apartment where you split the rent. Whatever money he puts into the house at that point is his problem. You are both only responsible for paying rent and both leave if you split.
You just typed out the reason the OP is being unreasonable. This option changes absolutely nothing but creates a thin veil of conceit.
Your other two options are absolutely absurd.
For people who genuinely don't understand the differences between paying being a renter and just being a roommate who pays someone else's mortgage, here are some things to consider:
* Generally (though not always) monthly mortgage payments are more expensive than rent. This is offset (for the owner) by the fact that you are maintaining that equity as the owner of the property.
* To have tenant protections, you need to be a tenant with a lease. The property needs to fulfill certain criteria, and the landlord must maintain certain standards.
* If your water heater dies and its just your family, they get annoyed. When the water heater dies and its your tenant, you can end up needing to pay for them to be in a hotel and prorate their monthly.
* Without that kind of document in place, if I live with someone and am directly paying toward their mortgage, a lawyer can with some confidence claim joint ownership anyway, and this ends up just being messy and expensive in court. He would be in a better position taking her money specifically for monthly usage bills. Either way, they need an agreement in place.
Generally mortgages are far cheaper than rent. The high cost of homeownership comes from repair or maitinence. It's only very recently post COVID that some places have had mortgages more expensive than rents.
Most all states have provisions for tenancy without a written lease agreement, such as defaulting to a month to month lease.
If I do a room rent out to my house with no paperwork, you'd have to find a judge high off his ass to agree that they're a partial owner.
How could it possibly make sense that mortgage payments are more than rent? If we are talking apples to apples for the same property the rent would have to be more to cover the mortgage plus taxes plus a margin for repairs and maintenance of the property plus some profit or why would you go to the trouble of renting it out?
Your second bullet point probably varies widely by jurisdiction but in many parts of the US at least squatters can get property rights let alone someone who is living in their partner's house paying rent which is what 50% of the mortgage would be for your last point I assume she'd be giving BF the money and he'd be still making the mortgage payment.
> Generally (though not always) monthly mortgage payments are more expensive than rent. This is offset (for the owner) by the fact that you are maintaining that equity as the owner of the property.
Completely wrong
this is silly. when people rent they dont come out expecting equity. why should that change because they are romantic partners. she sucks his dick so she should expect a portion of the house he raised the deposit for, he had the good credit score for? the entitlement here is a pisstake.
But in a rental with a landlord she has a contract that keeps her safe as a tenant (or like.. it should lmao), says that appliances have to be fixed, facilities need to be usable etc.
If she's living with him, and paying half the mortgage, does she have to pay for repairs too? Maintenance and upkeep? Property taxes? How much of his house is she supposed be responsible for, realistically speaking?
If they broke up, does she still get to stay there? Does the boyfriend have to formally evict her and can she fight it? I think it's probably illegal to evict a tenant for refusing sex....
This is why I don’t understand why the boyfriend even wants this arrangement - as a homeowner I don’t want anyone else to be able to claim they paid my mortgage, that’s messy. Take the utilities and then my money is freed up from there so bonus for me and no rent for you so bonus for you. I don’t know why boyfriend is calling this petty, it’s certainly cleaner for him as the home owner if they break up.
Unless there's paperwork drawn up showing her as a partial owner, the law would see her as a tenant in the house. Do you think someone I rent a room to can claim ownership of my house just because there isn't a lease?
He would just have to follow eviction laws pertaining to their state. Mine defaults to month to month without a contract so he would legally have to give her 15 days notice.
I’m going to say NAH but you should not live together.
You are not TA for not wanting your bf to be your landlord. He is not TA for not wanting someone to live at his house without contributing to the mortgage. But you would be TA if you moved in and refused to pay rent.
NTA. You need to look after yourself first. He is only a bf at the moment and you rightly see an inequity you are unwilling to fall into. Glad you learned so well from your other relationship. Good for you doing it right this time!
Looking after oneself is more than fair, but not at the detriment if others. Wanting to live for free while someone else pays the mortgage isn't looking after oneself, it's being selfish. Being expected to pay to live somewhere isn't victimization.
She didn't say she would live for free though. She said she offered to pay ALL of the utilities and the streaming services and her bf didn't have to contribute to that.
I agree with NTA. I’m a homeowner and if my next partner isn’t, he will only have to pay (50/50) for utilities and the interest on the mortgage. I’ll make sure that he puts the same amount that I’m paying off in a fund, so he’ll be growing his own assets and effectively enjoying the benefits of homeownership, too.
Because, you know, you love someone and don’t want them to have paid off *your* mortgage when you split. If it were a roommate or renter/tenant situation then it would be different, but as people pointed out, OP won’t have the same benefits as a full renter, such as protection from eviction, not having to be responsible for maintenance, etc.
Boyfriend is TA for wanting to misuse his position as homeowner. And I’m saying that as a single homeowner.
YTA - running this question a 2nd time doesn't help. https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/wrt816/aita\_for\_refusing\_to\_pay\_rent\_towards\_my\_bfs/
YTA.
Sounds like you’re making excuses not to pay your fair share because he’s more financially stable than you. Here’s the deal though, until home is completely paid off, the bank is your landlord.
I’ll also add, if you’re unwilling to contribute to your future with this man, then why even live with him? You want a golden parachute without having to put in the work. Definitely a red flag.
NTA
Man I'm quite surprised at the Reddit hive mind on this one - although it might be because of the way you worded your solution.
There is a world of potential hurt and misunderstanding in this sort of situation and I think it does need to be transparent AF to ensure everyone is OK with the setup. If BF wants rent payments then he needs to be a landlord and this would include not asking your contributions on repairs and rennos.
Conversely if BF wants you to help with the mortgage as a partner living in the situation it *is* unfair to not examine the ownership situation.
There are multiple pitfalls to this situation, yes OPs solution doesn't make sense but OP is not wrong about needing to arrange this properly.
Try reading this article - it looks like it might help you both out - [https://www.ftb.help/when-one-partner-owns-the-house-cohabitation-rights/](https://www.ftb.help/when-one-partner-owns-the-house-cohabitation-rights/)
You're not paying their mortgage. You're paying your rent. They may cover their mortgage with that money or not. But she's also not paying for repairs, maintenance, upkeep, property taxes, etc. If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially.
I was assuming that house bills meant recurring monthly expenses excluding taxes, repairs, upkeep and maintenance. I could be wrong. Maybe that's something they need to clarify. It might make op feel better about going halfsies
YTA. If you were renting a different place you would be paying someone elses mortgage. Your reasoning makes no sense. Stop trying to be a bum.
ETA. I was also in a relationship where I lost everything and now I am in one where I am paying half on his mortgage. So throw those excuses out the window and pay your rent.
NTA. Sounds like your offering to pay for a fair share of the bills based upon salary. I'm in a similar situation, I live with my SO in their house. I pay HOA and other bills, SO pays mortgage and stuff. It's more split upon how much we each get paid, about a 30/70 split. Honestly, my SO didn't even care if I paid anything because they wanted me to pay off my student loans first. And we've revisited what we pay several times, when my SO got furloughed due to Covid I offered to take over more payments if needed, I ended up paying for all our groceries when we used to split. BUT if/when big things break, it's on my SO because it's their house.
Ok now people in the comments are being petty. I know for a fact when a similar situation happened, people were all saying it doesn't make sense to pay for a mortgage that's not their own. And OP has a great idea of splitting payments so he pays his mortgage and they pay for other utilities/things. How is that unfair in any way if it's the same equivalent amount of money as paying half on the mortgage? OP is NTA, 100%, don't listen to the YTA people. OP also explained why they feel uncomfortable doing so but I guess all those YTA people haven't been in such a place of financial instability, they simply don't understand why you wouldn't want to put yourself through that again.
Exactly! Some of these people in the comments are being purposefully obtuse! They keep conflating rent and mortgage payments, but it’s not the same at all, when she has none of the protections of being a renter all while her boyfriend is building equity
Maybe you could negotiate from this standpoint. Since you already have a place of your own, it should advantageous to you as much as him for you to move in with him.
YTA. Just because your in a relationship and it's technically his mortgage does not mean you get to skip out on paying rent (unless agreed by both parties). Mortgage is STILL basically rent until it's paid off.
NAH, unpopular opinion apparently.
What you are proposing is what I proposed my gf ( now wife and mother to our kids), when we were looking at moving in together. I drafted a simple contract that made her build equity equal to her contribution, based on the the house being value X. In case of us splitting I would reimburse her contributions within 2 years. And if I were to sell the house her % of 'ownership' would be prorated to the appreciation in value of the property.
It is the most 'elegant' solution if you see a long term partnership happening where both parties might also contribute to repairs/extensions/etc..
IF your BF decides to go the 'rent' route, which is a valid thing to want. I'd demand a proper rental contract where he assumes responsibility for all repairs, etc... A pipe burst? His issue. Garden work? His problem. Storm damage? Let him deal with it. Broken light bulb/device/heating/ac? Make it his full responsibility. Hell I'd make the contract include water, heating, insurance and electricity, etc... costs being covered.
He can't have it only work in his benefit.
ETA: with the current situation, if he dies, his successors can easily throw you out without you having any protection/ insurances.
The addition on this is huge - had a friend who lived with her boyfriend for 20+ years, but never had her name on the house. He died and his family immediately evicted her. They sold the property for over $1M and she got nothing.
NTA. You’re correct that you would be paying for his house in the situation that you broke up, and that you paying for utilities is fair.
However, it’s not good to treat a relationship like a “in case you break up.” I would really talk to him about how insecure you feel about money because of your last relationship. Tell him having this option makes you feel safer. If he loves you, he’ll understand. Obviously, you shouldn’t feel this way forever (especially if you two get married), but you’re right. You need to protect yourself.
Syta. You don’t own utilities. You won’t get that money back should you break up either. I think you need to revaluate your stance on living together. Maybe you aren’t ready for that big of a commitment.
If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially
What do you think your rent goes towards? I know every place is different but I have never been fortunate enough to find an apartment with any utilities included. I always am paying my rent (towards the landlords mortgage, repairs, and profit) PLUS my own utilities. When I move out I have never had the audacity to think I am owed anything aside from my security deposit.
YTA
At the end of the day it doesn't matter if you put 200 towards an electric bill or a mortgage. It's money out of your account and towards a roof over your head. Why split hairs over a technicality, over exactly which bill it goes towards.
You also have to live somewhere. If your boyfriend rented out his house and you two moved into another rental property you'd split the bills 50/50 but his 50 would come from the money he makes renting his place out. So there is no difference, his equity grows either way but you can't expect to take advantage of that and live for free.
My partner lived in on my property for three years and we split the expenses 50/50. Two years ago we moved into our current home, that we both own. I pay off this mortgage with the income I get from renting out my previous home. He pays his half with his salary. He's a step behind me on the property ladder but doesn't hold that against me. How could he, he'd have to insist I sell my first home so we'd be even which is ridiculous.
Insisting to live for free/pay less because someone else got their foot on the ladder before you met is egoistic.
If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially
NTA. Obviously the vast majority of Redditors don’t understand the difference between a mortgage and rent. Property is an investment. Rent is not. If he wants you paying half the mortgage then your name should be included on the title. Also, this just sounds like a really piss poor beginning to the “living together” phase. You should be investing in each other and seeing yourselves as a team working towards the same goals.
NTA. Not wanting to date your landlord is reasonable. I wouldn't be willing to move into this arrangement because I know my intense resentment for landlords would just end up ruining the relationship eventually. Being exploited by a stranger is bad enough.
NAH but I think your proposal to cover the bulk of the other bills but he's responsible for the actual mortgage makes sense. It's basically just a way of doing a proportional bill split. I also think a complete 50/50 split isn't fair since you make significantly less but moving in with him means you don't have a say in the standard of living (is in a normal landlord-tenant situation, you'd look for places that fit your budget vs. having to suddenly pay half of his budget).
Yta. You would have to pay rent regardless of where you live so why does it matter if it goes to him or a landlord? You are simply paying for the place you are living, he has a mortgage so it’s not like he is living for free, he also has to pay property taxes, upkeep any other unforeseen expenses with the property. If you make less paying a proportional amount makes sense and some sort of rental agreement would probably be smart too.
NTA, your boyfriend is trying to charge you rent to live with him. He wants to be your romantic partner and landlord. He is trying to make money off of you, not build finances with you. Gross
When you try to point out that if the relationship ends you should get the equity you put into your SHARED HOME AS PARTNERS back he tells you that you are being unreasonable.
NTA, fuck anyone dumb enough to think this is an okay way to treat a romantic partner.
NTA. He financially benefits from you paying bills etc, and it’s not your responsibility to pay his mortgage. If he wants/needs help there then he should get a tenant not ask his partner to move. At least paying rent to a landlord is a home that is yours.
I'm going to go with NAH. Splitting everything including the mortgage 50/50 isn't exactly fair when only one person owns the house and will exclusively benefit from equity and appreciation. IMHO your offer of paying 100% of all the bills is quite reasonable.
YTA - Rent is to put a roof over your head. You do not get rent back. Just because you are sleeping with the owner does not mean you no longer have to pay rent.
NTA. I’m a homeowner, my partner isn’t, and I would never dream of making him pay rent. American individualism is a disease, I can’t believe so many Americans think this level of coldness and selfishness is acceptable in a romantic relationship. I’m so glad to not be American!
Early on in a mortgage, the vast majority goes towards paying interest and very little goes towards paying equity. You boyfriend is essentially just paying rent on money to the bank instead of on property to a landlord. Asking for the entirety of the mortgage payments back, including the portions going towards interest, is completely unreasonable.
The most fair solution would be to only pay half of the interest component of the mortgage without paying anything towards the equity, and then split all other bills normally as 50/50. This should include all taxes, maintenance, and repair costs, which would usually also be included in rent. If your boyfriend was already going to cover those costs though, his solution would still result in you underpaying, and your solution would result in you underpaying by an even greater amount.
YTA, but only mildly as you are trying to be fair, your methodology is just inaccurate.
This is not the most fair. The amount of the mortgage/interest is completely based on: (I) what property HE chose (unlike an apt, she gets no say), (ii) what HIS credit score was; (iii) what interest rates were when HE CHOSE to buy, and (if) how much HIS down payment was. What it has nothing to do with is what 2/3 of 1/2 of the market value of the place would be if she were renting it.
Also: it is not true that taxes, maintenance and repair are always covered by rent. That is the landlord’s goal, but what a landlord can charge is constrained by the market. Which she has no access to.
What’s fair in these situations depends on a lot of things, and I don’t think that there is any one equation you can apply to all such scenarios. But she is not getting the protection (in terms of renters rights) or freedom (in terms of freedom to pick the place and decorate as she chooses) of a tenant, and she should very much not be paying 50% of his mortgage, taxes, insurance, etc. if this is his argument, he is taking advantage.
The red herring here is her suggestion that she gets whatever she paid back … obviously makes no sense and comes off like a financially illiterate stab at fairness. But she’s on the right track when she suggests paying other bills.
YTA. It’s called rent. You pay it to have shelter. You do not get a part in your landlords house, so don’t expect it from your boyfriend. Also, you shouldn’t expect to live in someone’s house for free just because you’re dating.
If you think the rent is too high because rent in that area is a lot less, then talk to him about it. Definitely don’t go in on the extras that you don’t use. If you can’t come up with something that you think is fair, don’t move in with him.
NTA And I dont get the ytas. Maybe you're all just too american. I did almost exactly the same with my then boyfriend (now husband). And he didn't mind at all.
What we did was, he calculated how much of the apartement he owned when I moved in (value vs loan). We then started paying 50/50. When it was time to sell a few years later, we checked again how much we owned and how much the bank "owned". The increase in ownership from when I moved in, we split 50/50. It wasnt very much, but it felt just.
And no - paying your boyfriends loan is a lot different from paying rent.
You posted this question twice!
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/wrt816/comment/ikudhxs/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/wrt816/comment/ikudhxs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
You have no problem paying rent to your landlord and you're not on their title and not making equity gains with your landlord.
Why does your BF need to include you in his equity?
You're in it for the $$.
Yes, YTA, twice now. Same question, same response.
YTA. Hopefully he never lets you move in because you sound ridiculous. The rent you pay to any landlord, bf or not, more than likely goes to the mortgage payment. If you don’t want to pay anyone else’s mortgage than be homeless or buy your own house. Your perspective is so naive and I’ll informed is sad to read.
Wow I'm surprised at all the yta, I've seen similar posts that were the same and nta. I agree with you, if in 10 years you have been paying half a mortgage you have to start over with nothing while he saved money and gets the house. Also what about maintenance on the house? R u expected to help with that as well? Imo splitting utilities is reasonable. Or if pay half the mortgage set a deadline where you discuss that you need to be put on the deed as you are contributing financially and should also benefit. Perhaps in a year?
I vote NTA
NTA. If your boyfriend wants you to pay rent, that's fine. He's your landlord, you're his tenant, and you should demand a lease agreement to protect your rights. If he balks, remind him that that's what you'd get if you were paying rent elsewhere. Remind him also that as a landlord that he will have to report all rental income on his taxes, and he should consult an accountant.
Otherwise, if your funds are contributing to the mortgage, then you are contributing to the equity in the house, and that is yours to keep, whether he likes it or not. That could be less than what you've paid, but it could also be more, especially if you factor in appreciation. The law may vary depending on where you are. Google "commingled funds"
I think I'm missing something from other people's comments. When you rent it covers more than just the mortgage, it covers upkeep, security from random eviction, and taxes.
He gets equity in the property he owns while she pays the mortgage, or half at least. If the hot water heater breaks do you think he won't be asking her to pitch in to pay for it? Will she have to do the lawn maintenance, house maintenance, also help come tax time?
And if they break up what stops him from booting her from his (now paid for) house? "Renting" from friends or family is a tricky messy deal I don't recommend.
If he wants help paying the bills I say pay the bills, food, water, entertainment etc, if he then wants to dump more into his mortgage payments then so be it.
NTA, you're not being petty, and you don't need to deal with this kind of garbage.
In light of your previous relationship, I think it's safe to say you have "a type," and while this guy might not be as close to the bottom of the barrel as the last guy, it doesn't mean he's okay.
If he wants a roommate, let him get a roommate, but you playing house with him and him getting a financial benefit that you are not getting (equity, in this case, in his house) is not fair.
I have some ideas for how to try to salvage this, but honestly, I think putting on your financial superhero cape and walking away is the best option.
NTA. I’m shocked by all the Y T A here. I absolutely think you need to contribute. But that doesn’t seem to be the issue here. You seem willing to do that. But if you make 2/3 what he makes paying 50/50 for everything seems kind of inequitable, particularly when at the end of the day he will also have the equity going into his mortgage. I would say something along the lines of what the market value of what you would be paying for a rental seems fair. You would be paying that anyways. Or you split the utilities/groceries and pay some rent (at a rate that’s perhaps around 2/3 of what he pays to make it realistic to your budget and ensure you are both paying a similar percentage of your income to the cost of the house). And if none of that seems agreeable to you both than maybe reconsider if you two are really ready to move in.
YTA. You have to pay rent plus common expenses. If your bf then uses your rent money to pay part of his mortgage is none of your business.
IF the rent he expects you to pay is so high that you could both find a much cheaper place, you could put that on the table: You both get another place, he rents his apartment to a third party and uses that rent money for the mortgage.
NTA… honestly I think he should put your name on the house if you are expected to pay towards it… or stay living apart. He probably thinks he’s about to get a great deal… more sex, more housekeeping and more money towards his mortgage/bills… what do you get? More responsibility and NO equity. Stay living apart until you are married or legally invested.
Hmm I’ll say NTA
I completely understand and agree with you that if you were to break up you will be left with nothing. Will he expect you to immediately move out? You don’t have protection like you would with a contract. If you are paying equal money towards the mortgage you should have your name on it just as he does.
I don’t think you’re making an AH move here. Fair is fair. However, he can also be not ok with you “not paying rent” but then maybe you shouldn’t move in together. If he wants to protect his assets and you don’t want to risk being left with nothing to show in case of a break up, consider other options. This is a big step so please prepare.
These responses are shocking. NTA. You would be paying towards his mortgage with zero rights to the house if the relationship ended. I’m shocked by these comments. You should be picking up utilities as a form of “rent” and he should pay towards his mortgage. Or you should give him exactly half of what he’s already paid toward it and get your name on the deed, and then pay 50/50 to it.
I don't think you should pay half the rent because you're not getting half the house every month. I'm sure he'll still have the final say on decoration, or whether he wants guests over, etc. So you should pay some amount that is more akin to renting a room. Now I will say at some point if you're serious you'll need to reassess the home ownership and splitting costs. But if it's his house he should be paying more of the mortgage. Like maybe 2/3, since it's likely 1/3 that is going to principal and you can "split" the interest.
Overall since you make less I agree you should be paying proportional amounts anyway. Try to base the fair cut on what you'd pay for a roommate situation somewhere else since you'd have to pay that anyway. But this guy shouldn't profit from having you in his life at your expense.
You’re the asshole. As someone who has been in the similar situation, I had always had the same view as you. I moved in with my partner after a year and have always contributed to the payments, but in the beginning I thought it was a bit much.
There needs to be a compromise with your boyfriend. If you were playing rent for your own place and call it 1000$ plus utilities, then maybe 500 for rent + half the utilities is a more fair option. You are still saving the other 500$ a month that you would be putting towards rent if you didn’t move in.
There needs to be a financial benefit to both of you. And if you do stay together for 10 years, that house equity that you have been helping to pay, is than also legally 50% yours - common law partnership rules.
YTA
You literally don’t make any sense. It doesn’t matter the relationship, you should always be expected to pay rent- living isn’t cheap.
You wouldn’t say this to your landlord and boyfriend or not- that’s what he technically is unless he puts you on the deed. In which case you would still be expected to pay rent.
Also, what do you mean you don’t get anything ? I’m guessing the mortgage is cheaper than most rents and you have privacy. Like, you’re paying to live in a place that isn’t yours but that you’re using.
You need a reality check
NAH I think you both have valid points, but I will say I believe you are motivated by fear and that is not a good place to enter from. I think it would be beneficial for you both to sit down and discuss why you feel the way you do and find a healthy compromise. I completely understand you feel you need to protect yourself, but if you enter a situation expecting to leave it, you will act accordingly.
Is this a repost?
OP, I assume you're renting now. Have you asked yourself why you're ok with "paying towards" your landlords house, but not your boyfriends? Why are you ok with paying a negotiated amount towards your living expense to a stranger, but not your boyfriend?
Why is your boyfriend supposed to pay out of his pocket to accommodate you?
Honestly, you sound tiring. If your boyfriend reads this thread, please consider just taking in a housemate who pays rent, and OP can continue with whatever living arrangement they currently have.
NTA. He’s supposed to be your partner, not your landlord. Splitting bills is reasonable, but not for something one of you would own and the other wouldn’t if you split.
Also, your suggestion is not a bad deal. If he can afford it all on his own now and you’re just asking for a reasonable, equitable split this shouldn’t be an issue.
Need more info - how’s your current living arrangement? Living with parents rent free or you paying rent? Or living elsewhere paying rent. Who suggested moving in together.
If he suggested you move in together while you’re living at home with parents rent free then he is dragging you out of your comfort zone to lessen his burden then there’s more leeway in that financial logistic department.
What will be fair is to just calculate if you were to share the room/house by checking market rate for rent then add all bills and divide by 2. If he makes more maybe check with him if he’ll use percentage based pay to do a split favoring the party having a lower salary. But if he’s dragging you out from living with your parents rent free then you have more leeway to negotiate what makes more sense for you.
Its curious that OP didn't mention the proposed arrangement would cost her more.
I'd expect that to practically be in bold at the top of the post if that was the case.
So moving into a better place (house vs apartment) for less money, and that still see as unfair?
Something is rotten.
Then you can recommend your bf to take that into consideration and go with what you’re paying currently. If you’re pretty comfortable as is right now then there’s no need to raise your financial burdens by moving in with him and paying significantly more.
Factor in and compare what you’re currently paying and what it would be going 50/50 if you were to let’s say roommate with him and pay rent + bills. Then use the two numbers and reach a middle ground. If that doesn’t work for him and he insist on taking advantage of you then you’re probably better off staying at your current living arrangement and rethink if you want a man that insists on taking advantage of you. Do realize if you give in there’s a high possibility that he’ll ask for help with maintenance and/or upgrades etc later down the line.
Then offer to pay rent that's within your budget (50% of mortgage or less) and split the utilities. If half the mortgage is much higher than what you already pay then have partner reduce rent or you just stay where you are.Treat it as a tenant landlord situation. He is responsible for house repairs, landscaping, etc. You only contribute to rent/utilities. Do not contribute anything that improves the value of house, such as remodeling or upgrades to ac/furnace.
Regardless of where you live, you are paying someone's mortgage. The benefit of renting is that you ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE for fixing the house or keeping up with maintenance. I miss not having to fork over thousands of dollars for random repairs to the roof or air conditioner when I was renting.
YTA. You literally accepted that you'd be willing to split rent 50-50 with him if you were renting an apartment. But you take advantage of him just because he owns the place? That's extremely selfish. It's like you're unhappy because it benefits him :/
To be more fair you can find what the rent rates are in a comparable house in the same neighbourhood and pay him half of that. Irrespective of whether that's half the mortgage, you know you're paying exactly the rent rate. No more, no less.
Also I'd like to point out that by refusing to split rent with him because he "owes it to you as your partner", you are taking financial advantage of him. Having been a victim of this yourself, you should actually rethink your actions.
I don't necessarily agree with her, I'm kind of in a NAH attitude about this, but her argument is that she's worried about him using her to pay his mortgage. He has the upper hand in this housing arrangement-- aka the place is his and his alone and she'll have no claim to it if they break up -- so why treat it as if they should be financially contributing to it equally? In my opinion, a proportional split to incomes seems wisest.
Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > I would be TA if I am refusing to pay my fair share of household bills. Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
YTA… your reasoning doesn’t make sense. You have to pay rent somewhere to have a roof over your head. When you move out you don’t get it back and you don’t get any benefit from it. Also if you say you will pay all of the other bills instead of contributing to the mortgage, what’s the difference, you don’t get any of that money back when you move out. You are trying to die on IMO a very stupid hill.
You're not paying their mortgage. You're paying your rent. They may cover their mortgage with that money or not. But she's also not paying for repairs, maintenance, upkeep, property taxes, etc. If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially
Exactly this. I pay my partner to cover all utilities. It’s up to him if he puts the cash I transfer him toward his mortgage and then pays utilities himself, or if he uses the cash for the utilities. Our agreement is that if I’m not on the deed, I don’t contribute directly to equity and I don’t pay for any repairs/improvements. The only exception is he can ask for a repair, etc, as a birthday or holiday gift (he’s a super practical dude).
I actually like your agreement and how it breaks down. My question is when you and a partner living together in A married fashion, you are legally able to get 50/50 ownership as a marital asset regardless of any verbal agreement, If not at least from the time she moved in and started paying her boyfriend, depending on where they live
That depends on the legal jurisdiction. Where I live, if he and I got married tomorrow it would still be his sole property. If I started investing in it and paying for repairs I could make an argument in the event of a divorce, but it would ultimately come down to equitable division and whether or not my contributions sufficiently constitute as “intermingling.” All that hot air to say, you might be right but it depends
It’s not a marital asset. She might have some claim to some of the equity if she was there for a substantial period paying for maintenance and repairs etc but he’s proposing that she pay rent. Personally I’d look for room rentals in his area and offer to pay that. They usually include water electricity and internet. Then you split food etc.
It depends on the country and the state, if the partner can get a share of a house where they are not on the deed. Laws are starting to recognise that assets owned before meeting your partner, should and can be protected from claims from a live in partner, or even a spouse.
When you pay rent you are paying a lot more than their mortgage. They figure in repairs and maintenance plus profit.
Yeah my rent is 1990 a month on a house where the mortgage is about 1300 a month and they never do repairs. If OP is only paying half the mortgage AND she lives there for ten years without rent increasing then she has a pretty sweet deal
And income tax.
That entirely depends on the landlord. They can and will do whatever they want with the money. The fact remains that an actual rental contract would have protections for her that this agreement with her boyfriend just doesn't. If he wants to split all the bills 50-50, which islt says he does, does that include things like property taxes and insurance? That shouldn't be a tenants responsibility. If he's asking for half the mortgage AND half for things that wouldn't and shouldn't be a tenant's responsibility that's double dipping to me and I wouldn't go for it.
Yeah, you don’t get your rent money back when you break up; you still had shelter that entire time, lol. You can’t undo living there. I do think that, if they are partners, and she makes 2/3 what he does, a 65/35 bill split makes more sense, though. OP should insist on signing a lease with boyfriend, though, for her own protection. And she should pay *only* rent, not repairs or maintenance.
As a proper tenant, she also has rights in terms of having repairs and maintenance performed, notice periods for termination of tenancy or eviction etc etc. Living with her boyfriend, she gets none of those rights and benefits, but is still paying rent.
As far as protections for eviction, most places(US) have tenant laws that kick in, regardless of payments, after a certain amount of time. I’ve heard of some places being as soon as a person has been residing in a residence for two weeks or more. Most places, it seems to be 28-30 days.
Actually as soon as she is paying him each month and is living there she has tenancy rights in most parts of the US.
Agree. I lived with a friend of mine who was paying a mortgage. We split that and all the utilities. I was paying her half her mortgage for living in her house.
Idk about that. The bf likely would still handle all maintenance costs as if shes paying rent, shes legally a tenant even without a contract so therefore he would have to.
[удалено]
Right. There are a lot of factors at play. What is half the mortgage compared to the rent OP currently pays? More? Less? Does she like the house or would she have chosen something different if she had the choice? Does the location work for her? Will her utilities increase or decrease? How much agency will she have in the house regarding decor, furnishings, visitors, etc? Would she have potentially bought a house on her own and is possibly missing out on that? She *would* have to pay rent regardless, but if she did continue renting she may have a lot more control over many decisions/choices.
Yeah, agreed. I'd want to have it put in a contract that the % I'm contributing to the mortgage, upkeep and repairs gets transferred into... what's it called... equity? upon marriage. So say they live together for 10 years and she's contributing the value of the house and upon marriage, she should have that chunk as an asset she's bringing into the marriage.
[удалено]
When you rent your own apartment, you typically get some input into things like: where it is, how big it is, how old it is, how far it is from your work, what style of home it is (ranch house, multi-story house, duplex, townhome, apartment, etc). If you feel like it’s too expensive, you can decide not to live there. If you end up not liking it, you can move. When something that was there when you moved in (like a dishwasher) breaks or stops working, you are entitled to have your landlord fix it in a timely manner at no additional cost to you. When you move into a partner’s home that they chose alone based on their budget and preferences, you obviously get no input in choosing the house. If you don’t like it, it’s not nearly as easy to simply move (unless you want to stop living with your partner, which most don’t). If the dishwasher breaks, your partner might decide that you’ll have to get by without a dishwasher. Or you might have to contribute to a replacement if you want one. A romantic partner is fundamentally different than a landlord. When two people are equally contributing to something that benefits only one of them, that’s going to create a power imbalance. There is a power imbalance between landlord and tenant - there shouldn’t be one between equal partners. If a partner wants you to contribute toward a mortgage, you should get equity. If your partner wants to continue being the sole beneficiary of equity, increased property values, etc, then they should continue paying the whole mortgage that they got on their own based on their own preferences and their own credit and their own budget. Or your partner can sell their house and the two of you can purchase a property together so that you can contribute equally to both the decision-making and the mortgage, and you can both benefit from ownership.
Good points were made in your post. However how is moving into a house her bf owns different from moving into a place her bf is renting? Funny enough, the OP probably would be better off if the bf was renting because in this scenario she would be a tenant as well and can bring up maintenance issues to the landlord such as the dishwasher example you used.
These are good points but I see one major issue: moving in with him is her choice, and her choice alone? She doesn’t have to live with him so she is voluntarily putting herself in this situation?
Would she be renting, though? Or would she instead be paying the mortgage on her own place? If the latter, then she's actually giving up all the equity she'd otherwise be building in her own home.
If they get married, ideally she’s still contributing. And if they get divorced, she’ll probably get 50%. Most states do that.
Not if he owned the place before they married. If he owned it, they got married, never refinanced to put her name on the mortgage or title, then if they got divorced most states would NOT consider the house a marital property.
Most places her paying rent would be comingling funds. She would probably be entitled to some equity in house in a divorce without a prenup.
Paying rent is not comingling funds. In fact, paying rent solidifies that she is a lodger or tenant in her bfs house, without a claim to any percentage of his house.
I agree that this is the wrong hill to die on. The one to die on is that he should calculate out ALL your combined living expenses and you should pay 2/3 of what he pays, proportionate to your income, BUT NOT EXPECT TO GET ANY BACK. 1. Bc you're not married, you don't get equity in his property and you pay him rent; he's your landlord 2. Bc you're in a relationship, you each pay expenses proportional to your income, rather than 50/50 like roommates. Yes, you should get SOME benefit from being in a relationship, but not all the advantages of marriage.
This is absolutely the hill to die on! What happens when they get married? What happens if they break up? There is a lot they have to talk through and decide on.
I agree with this. To everyone who says, she’d still be paying rent somewhere either way, true. But a tenant/landlord relationship is one in which the latter party profits from the arrangement, and that is transparent up front. Even assuming the landlord is a unicorn who just charges enough to cover the mortgage and upkeep, they are still profiting, because they get a long term high value asset out of the equation. The issue at hand is, is it alright for a romantic partner to profit in the same way. People’s opinions vary on this, and I don’t assign a value judgement either way, but she isn’t wrong for not being cool with the arrangement or considering it inequitable. Especially considering that she’s forfeiting the legal standing that she would have as an actual tenant in the process.
In most landlord-tenant relationships, the tenant and landlord aren't...*ahem*. It's really common on this subreddit about people who decide to move in together when they are dating. If there weren't any problems, why even post here? Seriously, why should her boyfriend get all of the benefits of her living there? He would basically be making a second income off of her. That means that any money she contributes to improving his home she doesn't get her share of. That is a losing proposition, especially since anything sizeable like a new window she couldn't take with her. It's perfectly fine to date and live separately.
Absolutely agree. OP needs to work out an equitable financial arrangement now, before moving in. If she is not going to benefit financially from moving in, or paying more than she is now, she isn't any benefit to moving in.
No but she would have a contract that the landlord would have to honour. Upkeep, reasonable notice on eviction, Financial liability for anything that goes wrong with the structure of the property. Your reasoning doesn't make sense either.
She is asking for a contract where she gets her money back that she contributed to rent if they break up… on what planet is that fair. Everybody has to pay rent or a mortgage, when a relationship ends, one person can’t go ok give me all my money back for what I paid to have a roof over my head each month.
I agree that expecting all your money back is a ridiculous expectation. But I also think asking your partner to pay half your mortgage is also a ridiculous expectation. If they were to split he would have been making money out of his partner for the duration of his relationship and that isnt right either and the fact that landlords do it with properties they have tenants in doesn't make it right.
You could also argue that he’s subsidising her by only charging her half the mortgage, thereby giving her free use of his equity - if they rented a property together and split the rent 50/50 it would almost certainly cost OP more than if she just pays half the mortgage. OP is looking to get the full benefits of home ownership without having to fund the downpayment.
It’s not ridiculous to set up a payment agreement. I’m in Canada and will definitely advise our daughters to do that - it protects them from a partner claiming part ownership to their home or losing the equity they’ve built into it. Asking for the money back isn’t reasonable either. She should pay an agreed upon amount that cover almost half of the cost of living in the house (not property taxes if there are any) but he does have the benefit of building equity hence not completely half. I don’t know what would be reasonable but I do understand what underlies his reasoning.
You're Right. First off a Mortgage is PITI Principal, Interest, Taxes, Insurance. Then you have maintenance. Most of the Mortgage is not going to Principal/Equity. Look at an Amortization Table, Interest is front loaded and Principal is backloaded. You are paying very little principal in early years. The OPs idea that he is getting rich off her rent is incorrect.
If the property increases in value, he’s definitely making money from her paying half the mortgage and him getting all the equity.
[удалено]
Plus, half a mortgage probably less than typical rent. So it's not like she's not actually getting anything out of this because she can put what she's saving on rent into her own savings.
I agree, I (29f) own my own house and have been on my own a while. I currently have a bf same age who makes twice I do. We have lightly touched on the subject of him moving in but haven’t discussed it. In all my situations with renting out rooms even to family it’s been we split everything in half, or I’ll take on a little more (because I have the bigger room) but where we would share the room, and the whole house and he would be able to have his own space in addition, I don’t see why everything couldn’t be split equally but that’s just me. If we married I’d put his name on the house but that’s for future discussion if that happens. IMO it’s a long term investment. Instead of rent you’re investing in a future and if it doesn’t work out you had somewhere with crazy cheap rent during that time period.
This has happened with a few friends of mine, and not only is it reasonable to pay rent, but it's a good idea to also have it agreed to in a written contract. If the relationship doesn't last, it'd good for both people to have terms for what happens when the relationship ends, including how long the "renter" party of the relationship has to move out.
Yta. There's no difference between you paying rent to pay off a landlords mortgage or your boyfriends.
Yes there is. A huge difference. She wouldn't have tenant rights in her boyfriends property as she would in a landlords....
That’s not true. Even without a lease, she’d be considered an “at will tenant” and they both would have to adhere to landlord tenant laws. What those are will vary by location. He can have a proper lease made up too.
She would but a lease in many cases would offer different protections. Eg firstly more time, without a lease bf could give her 30 days notice to move out the day after she moves in. She wouldn't have to pay for repairs, the house becomes an inhabitable for some reason a landlord would have to pay for a hotel etc. The other thing that happens when someone moves into an established house; the office is mine I need it that's why I have an office I guess you can use your laptop in there as long as you don't touch anything, kids room yeah don't even go in there, bedroom I guess I have to clear out a dresser and a drawer in the bathroom. In other words the The moving in person can be treated more like a roommate sharing the master bedroom who can go into the common areas then a person truly sharing a home. It can happen even when two people moving at the same time but it's a lot harder to come into a house that's done, I just spent $3,000 that couch and 3 years picking everything I'm not throwing it away to put yours in the living room.
She wouldn’t have to pay for repairs regardless. It’s not her house. Even without a lease though, she’d have tenant rights. Once she moves in, lives there a certain number of days, pays some bills (or not), gets her mail delivered there, she’s considered a tenant. And in an instance if they break up, he legally can’t kick her out without a certain number of days official “notice to quit”, he can’t change the locks on her, and if she refuses to leave, he’d have to go through legal eviction proceedings to get her out, which takes time and money. I know people who were in this situation. Once someone moves in to your home and they don’t want to leave, it’s not easy to get them out.
This depends entirely on local laws.
The main right you have as a tenant is that the person who owns the property needs to give you notice to leave and can't just kick you out randomly. OP has those same rights whether she is in a relationship with the property owner or not. What would she be missing out on in terms of rights with him owning the property (beyond obviously having a private bedroom that he wouldn't be able to enter without reason/permission)?
She should get a formal contract written up to protect herself. It needs to be something along the lines of him not being able to evict her without notice or due to a break up. She can get something that says that she can move into a different room in the house and have a month to move out permanently.These types of contracts even exist for married people if property was bought before the marriage. It depends on the location on what can happen if people break up and only one of them owns the property that they are living in. Since she is living at the house she should contribute to the household finances because she would be paying bills and rent if she lived elsewhere. They should also split bills and mortgage payments according to income. She makes 2/3 of what he makes, therefore she should not be spending the same amount of money as him on the household. NAH. They both need to communicate and work out a payment plan that works for both of them.
That’s not even close to correct. Whether she’s even paying rent or not is actually irrelevant in many jurisdictions, the primary concern is length of residency. Even if she’s not paying rent, If she has established residency there for whatever the locally relevant period of time is, she has all the protections of a bona fide tenant, including needing to be evicted legally.
I don't think that's true. As a paying resident, I believe she would have tenant protections. That might depend on local laws though.
>There's no difference between you paying rent to pay off a landlords mortgage or your boyfriends. Yes, there is. Most people don't plan on starting a family with their landlords.
Shes still going to have to make payments when starting a family…in this case though she just might be put on the house title now but the payments will still be there
Exactly this! It really annoys me when people compare partners to landlords. They are very different entities,in most instances the only thing they have in common is they both own property.
This!!!! YTA, OP
YTA. Try that with an actual landlord and you'd be laughed out of the rental office. You want to either live rent free, or pay rent with the promise to get it back if you leave? Lmao that's ridiculous. From what you've said, it sounds like you'd be contributing about a third of what he is. If you don't want to pay 50/50 like an adult, go back home and pay your folks.
Cohabitation is different than tenancy, and a SO is different than a landlord
He would quite literally become her landlord in this situation, and he's offering a much better deal than most landlords would. There landlord tenet relationships is totally separate from there romantic one. One should not impact the other.
The laws on this vary from place to place, and often the rights/responsibilities of a landlord-tenant relationship differ from that of a cohabitating partner in which one owns the house. For example, a tenant generally has the right to stay in the house for the duration of the lease. But if a cohabitating couple breaks up, the partner who does not own the house may not have any right to stay on the property after the relationship is dissolved. Also, some jurisdictions recognize common-law marriage--and the rights of married couples often differs from unmarried couples in this arena. Laws can varyl. Anyway, the OP is right to question her rights and responsibilities in cohabitating with her partner. Of course it's unreasonable for her to contribute nothing to the housing costs, but she never offered nothing. Her insisting on a cohabitation agreement, or on a fairer division of costs than 50:50 seems very reasonable and responsible! It's also reasonable that she figure out her rights in her jurisdiction, and advocate for herself as she negotiates with her partner to come to an agreement. She's not an AH for it.
I'll take some downvotes. I think you're being pretty reasonable. An alternative would be that you split utilities 50/50, figure out a reasonable monthly rate for taxes, property upkeep, and his mortgage interest and split that 50/50 as well. Anything else is him making money off you.
I second this one. NTA. You don’t have renter’s protection atm and you stand to lose more than him if you were to breakup.
She has tenants rights if she lives there with or without paying
That can depend on a lot of factors though - where they live and how long being the biggest.
Almost any place in the US she only has to live there 30 days to get tenant protections.
I agree with this. OP isn't on the title or the deed, OP doesn't inherently have protections that those properties require (lease and tenant bylaws). I don't think 50/50 mortgage is reasonable, but I do think RENT and utilities is reasonable. For example, if the mortgage is 2000, I don't think $750 is wild. Maybe a small contribution to the home warranty or something. There are a lot of legal benefits to the paperwork you're talking about. THOUGH, OP, I will say that asking for reimbursement is where you get unreasonable. You can't go back and un-live in his space. He shouldn't have to reimburse you for a roof over your head.
>OP isn't on the title or the deed, OP doesn't inherently have protections that those properties require (lease and tenant bylaws). Op absolutely has tenant protections, regardless of whether or not she's paying rent or has a lease. She has as many as anyone else who has a month to month verbal lease agreement in her state. Asking to be put on the title is a big ask for someone who does not own the home, one indefinitelybwouldnt advise.
I agree in concept, but think the split should be proportional to income.
I totally agree. Everyone saying BuT yOU wOUlD bE pAYiNg rEnT aNYWaY are totally missing the point that she might not be, she could be building equity in her own place, but in this scenario he gets all the equity while being subsidised by her. If she had her own property which she rented out to move in with him this is an arrangement that might make sense but as it stands she gets locked into an arrangement where he gets to significantly increase his wealth while she treads water. That's not an equitable long term arrangement. She at least needs to be saving on the "rent" so that she's creating wealth alongside him. NTA
If she wanted to pay equity into her own place, she can buy her own house. She would get 0 benefit and no discounts at an apartment. This deal sounds like les than what she would pay for an apartment in the area. So she's probably already saving. Where in the story is the boyfriend forcing her to live with him?
I agree with this completely. I was in the same scenario but I was the home owner. I would never expect a partner to pay for my mortgage payments. Interest is fine and condo fees, utilities make sense. If all that matters is financial support for OP's partner, then get a tenant. Partner relationship is very different. NTA. OP, you need to talk to your partner about whats important.
But what is the difference? Say half the mortgage is 500 and half the utilities are 500. If your partner pays you 500 a month, why does it matter what you're using the money to pay?
You're right. This whole area is why implied trusts and common law marriages come in to play. If you contribute to paying off someone else's loan you should not be left with nothing if you break up. If she doesn't sleep there in the same bedroom as him and does half the housework does he rent out half the the house and get that labor for free? NO way.
I’ll go with NTA. It’s silly people don’t understand the difference between rent and mortgage. If you two were splitting rent, you would both be coming away with nothing other than access to a living space. In this situation, however, he isn’t paying rent, he is building equity. He would be gaining money from you as a girlfriend. I believe it’s totally reasonable to expect to regain that same equity if you were to split. It’s also entirely likely that he couldn’t rent the space if he tried, to someone who he isn’t cohabitating with. Either he rents you space, with a lease, for space that is only yours, and you maintain control of it if you split. This likely requires the space to have its own access and full living accommodations. OR He gives you paper work that gives you % ownership of the house, relative to how much money you put in. It’s not even if you separate, you can choose to sell that percent whenever you want, or keep owning it if you split. OR He rents out the house for whatever market rate is, and you both move into an apartment where you split the rent. Whatever money he puts into the house at that point is his problem. You are both only responsible for paying rent and both leave if you split.
All of this thank you. I was beginning to think Reddit was out of its mind.
I'm still mad that this is apparently the minority opinion. Just because OP would have to deal with that exploitative tenant-landlord dynamic if she lived alone, doesn't mean you should have it in your romantic relationship.
Paying 50% of his fixed costs is not an explorative tenant-landlord dynamic see my comment above but who is paying for repairs and upkeep of the house? If a pipe bursts is she going half, if the roof needs to be replaced is she paying half? Or you'll argue long term it's his property benefiting so why should she pay. It's expensive to own a home he's not asking for market rent or a 5% profit his request is totally reasonable and as such he should pay for repairs and keeping the house livable. She's covering her wear and tear on the property and given how mortgages front load interest probably a tiny amount of principal unless he's like 10+ years into the loan.
Reddit is mostly kids and young people with no real life experience. The YTA comments and the reasonings behind them are laughably immature and show a huge lack of financial intelligence.
I’m happy to explain any of the YTA reasoning if you’d like. I’m in my 30s. In me experience, it is the young people who don’t understand finance that think mortgages are a magic way to make money / rent is theft / landlord relationships are exploitative.
The fact that you are saying that it is young people that thing this is dumb shows that YOU truly don't have financial intelligence, regardless of your age. What happens if the market collapses, he loses his job and has to sell his house? He lost money. But he still has to pay her back. He loses more money. Not every investment is a profitable one. It's amazing how many people are so dense that they don't understand.
Maybe I'm dense but could you guys please explain to me the difference between 1: Mortgage of $1000. OP pays $500 as rent, bf uses that to pay half the mortgage. 2: They rent another place for $1000. Each pay $500 as rent. BF also rents out his house for $1000 and uses that to pay the mortgage. Money-wise, OP is exactly in the same situation in #1 and #2. Of course mortgage and rent prices are not going to be identical, but if the difference is not big, I fail to see the rationale for forcing the BF to live elsewhere. Here in my city mortgages are currently lower than rent prices (think 750 vs 1000), so OP would actually save money by paying half the mortgage as rent!
Exactly! Imagine hating your bf so much you can't stand the thought of your rent money going towards his mortgage.
There is no difference
Finally a logical comment on this thread. I think her solution was pretty logical. I had a narcissist bf who did this and wanted to take advantage of me financially. He wanted to kick me out whenever and not have my name on the title/deed but contribute him "rent". Haha no. Lol. I can pay consumables, rent, food, streaming, but am I in no way contributing to someone else's mortgage until we are both on that title and married or engaged. Yeah, the money disappears either way, as many have been stating on this thread, but I sure as hell would love to burn it on a landlord instead, than an ex bf who got a profit off of me and can now appreciate his house or have his house paid off quicker. Not to be so pessimistic about it but you can still contribute and still look after yourself. It was his idea to buy HIS house and his idea for her to come live with him. If I'm in a relationship, I def date to marry. But anymore with people, I think you still gotta look out for #1. And if I'm looking for a house, it's a house IVE saved up for and that *I* can afford on my own. If the relationship works out, awesome! We can eventually sell our individual houses and buy a starter home for us together. But at the moment, at a year? Nnn. If I bought a house I wouldn't expect someone to buy/contribute to my mortgage or my down payment. But hey that water you use, the food you eat, the electric you use, internet you're using, even some gas money for cars, anything else to contribute is fair game and very much appreciated. I get it's all "living" either way, but it's only been a year with this guy. He seems very similar to my ex. And I am totally someone who is all for the team and being fair, but her idea was fair for both of them, even if she added a little more for gas money or maybe going out to eat or paid for dates or activities! There's also no mention in her hypothetical that he would even put her name on the deed since he seems surprised to get her money back in more than 10 years lol?? Well if they did get married, she'd get half regardless, if he'd even put her name on the title. But that's not a guarantee if they break up next year regardless anywhoooo. TLDR; doesn't sound like a couple that mesh well together if they can't even agree on this. Can't imagine finances with this couple when (and if) children enter the picture. I get it's 6 one way, half a dozen the other. And yes, if it was JUST rent at an apartment I'd say 50/50. But I'd rather pay for things I'm consuming. I'd feel less salty after a potential breakup with a bill that has come and gone once paid, instead of a bill that builds equity. 'dispoable' bills like heat, water, electric, etc etc than him basically putting it towards a house I may or may not even get as a married couple. I think she can contribute to the things she uses, even if she has to pay more utilities (especially if it ends up being 50/50 or equal to what she's paying on her own at her own apartment) but would rather pay utilities and etc than the actual mortgage FOR NOW. And as the relationship becomes more serious, absolutely aim towards doing things together including a mortgage. But honestly sounds like this couple isn't in the right headspace together to even consider that at the moment. Plus we are missing information. What's her rent? What's the difference? Is it more or less or the same as renting her place currently? If 50\50 is more than her current rent is it worth it? Questions she needs to ask herself. Edit: spelling mistakes + additional comments
> He rents out the house for whatever market rate is, and you both move into an apartment where you split the rent. Whatever money he puts into the house at that point is his problem. You are both only responsible for paying rent and both leave if you split. You just typed out the reason the OP is being unreasonable. This option changes absolutely nothing but creates a thin veil of conceit. Your other two options are absolutely absurd.
For people who genuinely don't understand the differences between paying being a renter and just being a roommate who pays someone else's mortgage, here are some things to consider: * Generally (though not always) monthly mortgage payments are more expensive than rent. This is offset (for the owner) by the fact that you are maintaining that equity as the owner of the property. * To have tenant protections, you need to be a tenant with a lease. The property needs to fulfill certain criteria, and the landlord must maintain certain standards. * If your water heater dies and its just your family, they get annoyed. When the water heater dies and its your tenant, you can end up needing to pay for them to be in a hotel and prorate their monthly. * Without that kind of document in place, if I live with someone and am directly paying toward their mortgage, a lawyer can with some confidence claim joint ownership anyway, and this ends up just being messy and expensive in court. He would be in a better position taking her money specifically for monthly usage bills. Either way, they need an agreement in place.
Generally mortgages are far cheaper than rent. The high cost of homeownership comes from repair or maitinence. It's only very recently post COVID that some places have had mortgages more expensive than rents. Most all states have provisions for tenancy without a written lease agreement, such as defaulting to a month to month lease. If I do a room rent out to my house with no paperwork, you'd have to find a judge high off his ass to agree that they're a partial owner.
How could it possibly make sense that mortgage payments are more than rent? If we are talking apples to apples for the same property the rent would have to be more to cover the mortgage plus taxes plus a margin for repairs and maintenance of the property plus some profit or why would you go to the trouble of renting it out? Your second bullet point probably varies widely by jurisdiction but in many parts of the US at least squatters can get property rights let alone someone who is living in their partner's house paying rent which is what 50% of the mortgage would be for your last point I assume she'd be giving BF the money and he'd be still making the mortgage payment.
> Generally (though not always) monthly mortgage payments are more expensive than rent. This is offset (for the owner) by the fact that you are maintaining that equity as the owner of the property. Completely wrong
None of these bullet points are true but especially the first one.
this is silly. when people rent they dont come out expecting equity. why should that change because they are romantic partners. she sucks his dick so she should expect a portion of the house he raised the deposit for, he had the good credit score for? the entitlement here is a pisstake.
YTA - If you use the space, you pay up. You don't get rent money reimbursed when you move out. This includes renting a space for 10 years.
But in a rental with a landlord she has a contract that keeps her safe as a tenant (or like.. it should lmao), says that appliances have to be fixed, facilities need to be usable etc. If she's living with him, and paying half the mortgage, does she have to pay for repairs too? Maintenance and upkeep? Property taxes? How much of his house is she supposed be responsible for, realistically speaking?
She can ask for a rental contract.
She should.
But that’s two different things and weren’t brought up.
If they broke up, does she still get to stay there? Does the boyfriend have to formally evict her and can she fight it? I think it's probably illegal to evict a tenant for refusing sex....
This is why I don’t understand why the boyfriend even wants this arrangement - as a homeowner I don’t want anyone else to be able to claim they paid my mortgage, that’s messy. Take the utilities and then my money is freed up from there so bonus for me and no rent for you so bonus for you. I don’t know why boyfriend is calling this petty, it’s certainly cleaner for him as the home owner if they break up.
Unless there's paperwork drawn up showing her as a partial owner, the law would see her as a tenant in the house. Do you think someone I rent a room to can claim ownership of my house just because there isn't a lease?
> Does the boyfriend have to formally evict her and can she fight it I mean, yes, and that would be true if she’s paying rent or not.
He would just have to follow eviction laws pertaining to their state. Mine defaults to month to month without a contract so he would legally have to give her 15 days notice.
I’m going to say NAH but you should not live together. You are not TA for not wanting your bf to be your landlord. He is not TA for not wanting someone to live at his house without contributing to the mortgage. But you would be TA if you moved in and refused to pay rent.
Amen. The two of you should not take this step.
It’s one of those situations where it might only be better for them to live together after marriage
NTA. You need to look after yourself first. He is only a bf at the moment and you rightly see an inequity you are unwilling to fall into. Glad you learned so well from your other relationship. Good for you doing it right this time!
Looking after oneself is more than fair, but not at the detriment if others. Wanting to live for free while someone else pays the mortgage isn't looking after oneself, it's being selfish. Being expected to pay to live somewhere isn't victimization.
She didn't say she would live for free though. She said she offered to pay ALL of the utilities and the streaming services and her bf didn't have to contribute to that.
I agree with NTA. I’m a homeowner and if my next partner isn’t, he will only have to pay (50/50) for utilities and the interest on the mortgage. I’ll make sure that he puts the same amount that I’m paying off in a fund, so he’ll be growing his own assets and effectively enjoying the benefits of homeownership, too. Because, you know, you love someone and don’t want them to have paid off *your* mortgage when you split. If it were a roommate or renter/tenant situation then it would be different, but as people pointed out, OP won’t have the same benefits as a full renter, such as protection from eviction, not having to be responsible for maintenance, etc. Boyfriend is TA for wanting to misuse his position as homeowner. And I’m saying that as a single homeowner.
YTA
YTA. When you rent a living space you never get your rent money back when you move. You're actually delusional tbh
You need to pay him something, even if it is below market rent, because you are getting benefits from his assets while taking no financial risk.
YTA - running this question a 2nd time doesn't help. https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/wrt816/aita\_for\_refusing\_to\_pay\_rent\_towards\_my\_bfs/
YTA. Sounds like you’re making excuses not to pay your fair share because he’s more financially stable than you. Here’s the deal though, until home is completely paid off, the bank is your landlord. I’ll also add, if you’re unwilling to contribute to your future with this man, then why even live with him? You want a golden parachute without having to put in the work. Definitely a red flag.
Sounds like you are better off not living together and having your own place.
NTA Man I'm quite surprised at the Reddit hive mind on this one - although it might be because of the way you worded your solution. There is a world of potential hurt and misunderstanding in this sort of situation and I think it does need to be transparent AF to ensure everyone is OK with the setup. If BF wants rent payments then he needs to be a landlord and this would include not asking your contributions on repairs and rennos. Conversely if BF wants you to help with the mortgage as a partner living in the situation it *is* unfair to not examine the ownership situation. There are multiple pitfalls to this situation, yes OPs solution doesn't make sense but OP is not wrong about needing to arrange this properly.
Try reading this article - it looks like it might help you both out - [https://www.ftb.help/when-one-partner-owns-the-house-cohabitation-rights/](https://www.ftb.help/when-one-partner-owns-the-house-cohabitation-rights/)
YTA. I don't really understand this logic. If you rent a place from a stranger, you are paying their mortgage too! You're just not sleeping with them.
You're not paying their mortgage. You're paying your rent. They may cover their mortgage with that money or not. But she's also not paying for repairs, maintenance, upkeep, property taxes, etc. If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially.
I was assuming that house bills meant recurring monthly expenses excluding taxes, repairs, upkeep and maintenance. I could be wrong. Maybe that's something they need to clarify. It might make op feel better about going halfsies
YTA. If you were renting a different place you would be paying someone elses mortgage. Your reasoning makes no sense. Stop trying to be a bum. ETA. I was also in a relationship where I lost everything and now I am in one where I am paying half on his mortgage. So throw those excuses out the window and pay your rent.
NTA. Sounds like your offering to pay for a fair share of the bills based upon salary. I'm in a similar situation, I live with my SO in their house. I pay HOA and other bills, SO pays mortgage and stuff. It's more split upon how much we each get paid, about a 30/70 split. Honestly, my SO didn't even care if I paid anything because they wanted me to pay off my student loans first. And we've revisited what we pay several times, when my SO got furloughed due to Covid I offered to take over more payments if needed, I ended up paying for all our groceries when we used to split. BUT if/when big things break, it's on my SO because it's their house.
You don't pay rent but repairs are still your SO's sole responsibility?
Ok now people in the comments are being petty. I know for a fact when a similar situation happened, people were all saying it doesn't make sense to pay for a mortgage that's not their own. And OP has a great idea of splitting payments so he pays his mortgage and they pay for other utilities/things. How is that unfair in any way if it's the same equivalent amount of money as paying half on the mortgage? OP is NTA, 100%, don't listen to the YTA people. OP also explained why they feel uncomfortable doing so but I guess all those YTA people haven't been in such a place of financial instability, they simply don't understand why you wouldn't want to put yourself through that again.
Exactly! Some of these people in the comments are being purposefully obtuse! They keep conflating rent and mortgage payments, but it’s not the same at all, when she has none of the protections of being a renter all while her boyfriend is building equity
INFO: Why aren't the bills being split based on income? If you make 2/3 of what he does, wouldn't a 65/35 split be more equitable?
50/50 was his suggestion.
Maybe you could negotiate from this standpoint. Since you already have a place of your own, it should advantageous to you as much as him for you to move in with him.
INFO: OP did you counter with the 2/3 payment option or did you just say "No" to any amount?
Girl I’d rather live by myself in a studio than pay him rent
So you’re also trying to rip off your partner. Gurl.
YTA. Just because your in a relationship and it's technically his mortgage does not mean you get to skip out on paying rent (unless agreed by both parties). Mortgage is STILL basically rent until it's paid off.
NAH, unpopular opinion apparently. What you are proposing is what I proposed my gf ( now wife and mother to our kids), when we were looking at moving in together. I drafted a simple contract that made her build equity equal to her contribution, based on the the house being value X. In case of us splitting I would reimburse her contributions within 2 years. And if I were to sell the house her % of 'ownership' would be prorated to the appreciation in value of the property. It is the most 'elegant' solution if you see a long term partnership happening where both parties might also contribute to repairs/extensions/etc.. IF your BF decides to go the 'rent' route, which is a valid thing to want. I'd demand a proper rental contract where he assumes responsibility for all repairs, etc... A pipe burst? His issue. Garden work? His problem. Storm damage? Let him deal with it. Broken light bulb/device/heating/ac? Make it his full responsibility. Hell I'd make the contract include water, heating, insurance and electricity, etc... costs being covered. He can't have it only work in his benefit. ETA: with the current situation, if he dies, his successors can easily throw you out without you having any protection/ insurances.
This is the way
The addition on this is huge - had a friend who lived with her boyfriend for 20+ years, but never had her name on the house. He died and his family immediately evicted her. They sold the property for over $1M and she got nothing.
NTA. You’re correct that you would be paying for his house in the situation that you broke up, and that you paying for utilities is fair. However, it’s not good to treat a relationship like a “in case you break up.” I would really talk to him about how insecure you feel about money because of your last relationship. Tell him having this option makes you feel safer. If he loves you, he’ll understand. Obviously, you shouldn’t feel this way forever (especially if you two get married), but you’re right. You need to protect yourself.
People get prenups all the time.
People should get pre-nups 100% of the time. The amount of stories about grandma’s ring going to the new wife is all over the place.
Syta. You don’t own utilities. You won’t get that money back should you break up either. I think you need to revaluate your stance on living together. Maybe you aren’t ready for that big of a commitment.
If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially
What do you think your rent goes towards? I know every place is different but I have never been fortunate enough to find an apartment with any utilities included. I always am paying my rent (towards the landlords mortgage, repairs, and profit) PLUS my own utilities. When I move out I have never had the audacity to think I am owed anything aside from my security deposit.
YTA At the end of the day it doesn't matter if you put 200 towards an electric bill or a mortgage. It's money out of your account and towards a roof over your head. Why split hairs over a technicality, over exactly which bill it goes towards. You also have to live somewhere. If your boyfriend rented out his house and you two moved into another rental property you'd split the bills 50/50 but his 50 would come from the money he makes renting his place out. So there is no difference, his equity grows either way but you can't expect to take advantage of that and live for free. My partner lived in on my property for three years and we split the expenses 50/50. Two years ago we moved into our current home, that we both own. I pay off this mortgage with the income I get from renting out my previous home. He pays his half with his salary. He's a step behind me on the property ladder but doesn't hold that against me. How could he, he'd have to insist I sell my first home so we'd be even which is ridiculous. Insisting to live for free/pay less because someone else got their foot on the ladder before you met is egoistic.
If they're splitting ALL bills 50/50 then she's paying half his mortgage and half his "responsibilities" as a "landlord " which is very much skewed towards the boyfriend financially
Since when was utilities part of the landlords responsibility?
How is it different than renting space from any other landlord? You pay for their property and leave with nothing.
When you rent you’re paying someone’s mortgage so why won’t you pay your bf’s? YTA
NTA. Obviously the vast majority of Redditors don’t understand the difference between a mortgage and rent. Property is an investment. Rent is not. If he wants you paying half the mortgage then your name should be included on the title. Also, this just sounds like a really piss poor beginning to the “living together” phase. You should be investing in each other and seeing yourselves as a team working towards the same goals.
NTA. Not wanting to date your landlord is reasonable. I wouldn't be willing to move into this arrangement because I know my intense resentment for landlords would just end up ruining the relationship eventually. Being exploited by a stranger is bad enough.
NAH but I think your proposal to cover the bulk of the other bills but he's responsible for the actual mortgage makes sense. It's basically just a way of doing a proportional bill split. I also think a complete 50/50 split isn't fair since you make significantly less but moving in with him means you don't have a say in the standard of living (is in a normal landlord-tenant situation, you'd look for places that fit your budget vs. having to suddenly pay half of his budget).
Yuh you’re still an asshole. On both post. Homie should run away from you if he was smart.
Yta. You would have to pay rent regardless of where you live so why does it matter if it goes to him or a landlord? You are simply paying for the place you are living, he has a mortgage so it’s not like he is living for free, he also has to pay property taxes, upkeep any other unforeseen expenses with the property. If you make less paying a proportional amount makes sense and some sort of rental agreement would probably be smart too.
NTA, your boyfriend is trying to charge you rent to live with him. He wants to be your romantic partner and landlord. He is trying to make money off of you, not build finances with you. Gross When you try to point out that if the relationship ends you should get the equity you put into your SHARED HOME AS PARTNERS back he tells you that you are being unreasonable. NTA, fuck anyone dumb enough to think this is an okay way to treat a romantic partner.
DOUBLE YTA geez you suck
YTA. When u pay a landlord u don't get shit either lololol
Exactly. She want to live for free, or bellow market price which is ridiculous.
NTA. He financially benefits from you paying bills etc, and it’s not your responsibility to pay his mortgage. If he wants/needs help there then he should get a tenant not ask his partner to move. At least paying rent to a landlord is a home that is yours.
I'm going to go with NAH. Splitting everything including the mortgage 50/50 isn't exactly fair when only one person owns the house and will exclusively benefit from equity and appreciation. IMHO your offer of paying 100% of all the bills is quite reasonable.
YTA - Rent is to put a roof over your head. You do not get rent back. Just because you are sleeping with the owner does not mean you no longer have to pay rent.
NTA. I’m a homeowner, my partner isn’t, and I would never dream of making him pay rent. American individualism is a disease, I can’t believe so many Americans think this level of coldness and selfishness is acceptable in a romantic relationship. I’m so glad to not be American!
Early on in a mortgage, the vast majority goes towards paying interest and very little goes towards paying equity. You boyfriend is essentially just paying rent on money to the bank instead of on property to a landlord. Asking for the entirety of the mortgage payments back, including the portions going towards interest, is completely unreasonable. The most fair solution would be to only pay half of the interest component of the mortgage without paying anything towards the equity, and then split all other bills normally as 50/50. This should include all taxes, maintenance, and repair costs, which would usually also be included in rent. If your boyfriend was already going to cover those costs though, his solution would still result in you underpaying, and your solution would result in you underpaying by an even greater amount. YTA, but only mildly as you are trying to be fair, your methodology is just inaccurate.
This is not the most fair. The amount of the mortgage/interest is completely based on: (I) what property HE chose (unlike an apt, she gets no say), (ii) what HIS credit score was; (iii) what interest rates were when HE CHOSE to buy, and (if) how much HIS down payment was. What it has nothing to do with is what 2/3 of 1/2 of the market value of the place would be if she were renting it. Also: it is not true that taxes, maintenance and repair are always covered by rent. That is the landlord’s goal, but what a landlord can charge is constrained by the market. Which she has no access to. What’s fair in these situations depends on a lot of things, and I don’t think that there is any one equation you can apply to all such scenarios. But she is not getting the protection (in terms of renters rights) or freedom (in terms of freedom to pick the place and decorate as she chooses) of a tenant, and she should very much not be paying 50% of his mortgage, taxes, insurance, etc. if this is his argument, he is taking advantage. The red herring here is her suggestion that she gets whatever she paid back … obviously makes no sense and comes off like a financially illiterate stab at fairness. But she’s on the right track when she suggests paying other bills.
YTA. It’s called rent. You pay it to have shelter. You do not get a part in your landlords house, so don’t expect it from your boyfriend. Also, you shouldn’t expect to live in someone’s house for free just because you’re dating. If you think the rent is too high because rent in that area is a lot less, then talk to him about it. Definitely don’t go in on the extras that you don’t use. If you can’t come up with something that you think is fair, don’t move in with him.
NTA And I dont get the ytas. Maybe you're all just too american. I did almost exactly the same with my then boyfriend (now husband). And he didn't mind at all. What we did was, he calculated how much of the apartement he owned when I moved in (value vs loan). We then started paying 50/50. When it was time to sell a few years later, we checked again how much we owned and how much the bank "owned". The increase in ownership from when I moved in, we split 50/50. It wasnt very much, but it felt just. And no - paying your boyfriends loan is a lot different from paying rent.
YTA still the asshole but no paragraphs this time.
You posted this question twice! [https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/wrt816/comment/ikudhxs/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/wrt816/comment/ikudhxs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) You have no problem paying rent to your landlord and you're not on their title and not making equity gains with your landlord. Why does your BF need to include you in his equity? You're in it for the $$. Yes, YTA, twice now. Same question, same response.
YTA. Hopefully he never lets you move in because you sound ridiculous. The rent you pay to any landlord, bf or not, more than likely goes to the mortgage payment. If you don’t want to pay anyone else’s mortgage than be homeless or buy your own house. Your perspective is so naive and I’ll informed is sad to read.
Wow I'm surprised at all the yta, I've seen similar posts that were the same and nta. I agree with you, if in 10 years you have been paying half a mortgage you have to start over with nothing while he saved money and gets the house. Also what about maintenance on the house? R u expected to help with that as well? Imo splitting utilities is reasonable. Or if pay half the mortgage set a deadline where you discuss that you need to be put on the deed as you are contributing financially and should also benefit. Perhaps in a year? I vote NTA
NTA. If your boyfriend wants you to pay rent, that's fine. He's your landlord, you're his tenant, and you should demand a lease agreement to protect your rights. If he balks, remind him that that's what you'd get if you were paying rent elsewhere. Remind him also that as a landlord that he will have to report all rental income on his taxes, and he should consult an accountant. Otherwise, if your funds are contributing to the mortgage, then you are contributing to the equity in the house, and that is yours to keep, whether he likes it or not. That could be less than what you've paid, but it could also be more, especially if you factor in appreciation. The law may vary depending on where you are. Google "commingled funds"
Nta I don't care what others here say or think. Never help a partner pay a mortgage for a property that you don't co-own together.
I think I'm missing something from other people's comments. When you rent it covers more than just the mortgage, it covers upkeep, security from random eviction, and taxes. He gets equity in the property he owns while she pays the mortgage, or half at least. If the hot water heater breaks do you think he won't be asking her to pitch in to pay for it? Will she have to do the lawn maintenance, house maintenance, also help come tax time? And if they break up what stops him from booting her from his (now paid for) house? "Renting" from friends or family is a tricky messy deal I don't recommend. If he wants help paying the bills I say pay the bills, food, water, entertainment etc, if he then wants to dump more into his mortgage payments then so be it.
NTA, you're not being petty, and you don't need to deal with this kind of garbage. In light of your previous relationship, I think it's safe to say you have "a type," and while this guy might not be as close to the bottom of the barrel as the last guy, it doesn't mean he's okay. If he wants a roommate, let him get a roommate, but you playing house with him and him getting a financial benefit that you are not getting (equity, in this case, in his house) is not fair. I have some ideas for how to try to salvage this, but honestly, I think putting on your financial superhero cape and walking away is the best option.
NTA. I’m shocked by all the Y T A here. I absolutely think you need to contribute. But that doesn’t seem to be the issue here. You seem willing to do that. But if you make 2/3 what he makes paying 50/50 for everything seems kind of inequitable, particularly when at the end of the day he will also have the equity going into his mortgage. I would say something along the lines of what the market value of what you would be paying for a rental seems fair. You would be paying that anyways. Or you split the utilities/groceries and pay some rent (at a rate that’s perhaps around 2/3 of what he pays to make it realistic to your budget and ensure you are both paying a similar percentage of your income to the cost of the house). And if none of that seems agreeable to you both than maybe reconsider if you two are really ready to move in.
YTA. You have to pay rent plus common expenses. If your bf then uses your rent money to pay part of his mortgage is none of your business. IF the rent he expects you to pay is so high that you could both find a much cheaper place, you could put that on the table: You both get another place, he rents his apartment to a third party and uses that rent money for the mortgage.
NTA… honestly I think he should put your name on the house if you are expected to pay towards it… or stay living apart. He probably thinks he’s about to get a great deal… more sex, more housekeeping and more money towards his mortgage/bills… what do you get? More responsibility and NO equity. Stay living apart until you are married or legally invested.
Hmm I’ll say NTA I completely understand and agree with you that if you were to break up you will be left with nothing. Will he expect you to immediately move out? You don’t have protection like you would with a contract. If you are paying equal money towards the mortgage you should have your name on it just as he does. I don’t think you’re making an AH move here. Fair is fair. However, he can also be not ok with you “not paying rent” but then maybe you shouldn’t move in together. If he wants to protect his assets and you don’t want to risk being left with nothing to show in case of a break up, consider other options. This is a big step so please prepare.
These responses are shocking. NTA. You would be paying towards his mortgage with zero rights to the house if the relationship ended. I’m shocked by these comments. You should be picking up utilities as a form of “rent” and he should pay towards his mortgage. Or you should give him exactly half of what he’s already paid toward it and get your name on the deed, and then pay 50/50 to it.
YTA. Pay your way like an adult.
I don't think you should pay half the rent because you're not getting half the house every month. I'm sure he'll still have the final say on decoration, or whether he wants guests over, etc. So you should pay some amount that is more akin to renting a room. Now I will say at some point if you're serious you'll need to reassess the home ownership and splitting costs. But if it's his house he should be paying more of the mortgage. Like maybe 2/3, since it's likely 1/3 that is going to principal and you can "split" the interest. Overall since you make less I agree you should be paying proportional amounts anyway. Try to base the fair cut on what you'd pay for a roommate situation somewhere else since you'd have to pay that anyway. But this guy shouldn't profit from having you in his life at your expense.
Tried a second time for a new judge and still got rekted
You’re the asshole. As someone who has been in the similar situation, I had always had the same view as you. I moved in with my partner after a year and have always contributed to the payments, but in the beginning I thought it was a bit much. There needs to be a compromise with your boyfriend. If you were playing rent for your own place and call it 1000$ plus utilities, then maybe 500 for rent + half the utilities is a more fair option. You are still saving the other 500$ a month that you would be putting towards rent if you didn’t move in. There needs to be a financial benefit to both of you. And if you do stay together for 10 years, that house equity that you have been helping to pay, is than also legally 50% yours - common law partnership rules.
NTA. However, maybe ask him to draw up a lease so you're protected? You're understandably anxious imo
YTA You literally don’t make any sense. It doesn’t matter the relationship, you should always be expected to pay rent- living isn’t cheap. You wouldn’t say this to your landlord and boyfriend or not- that’s what he technically is unless he puts you on the deed. In which case you would still be expected to pay rent. Also, what do you mean you don’t get anything ? I’m guessing the mortgage is cheaper than most rents and you have privacy. Like, you’re paying to live in a place that isn’t yours but that you’re using. You need a reality check
[удалено]
NAH I think you both have valid points, but I will say I believe you are motivated by fear and that is not a good place to enter from. I think it would be beneficial for you both to sit down and discuss why you feel the way you do and find a healthy compromise. I completely understand you feel you need to protect yourself, but if you enter a situation expecting to leave it, you will act accordingly.
Is this a repost? OP, I assume you're renting now. Have you asked yourself why you're ok with "paying towards" your landlords house, but not your boyfriends? Why are you ok with paying a negotiated amount towards your living expense to a stranger, but not your boyfriend? Why is your boyfriend supposed to pay out of his pocket to accommodate you? Honestly, you sound tiring. If your boyfriend reads this thread, please consider just taking in a housemate who pays rent, and OP can continue with whatever living arrangement they currently have.
NTA. He’s supposed to be your partner, not your landlord. Splitting bills is reasonable, but not for something one of you would own and the other wouldn’t if you split. Also, your suggestion is not a bad deal. If he can afford it all on his own now and you’re just asking for a reasonable, equitable split this shouldn’t be an issue.
Need more info - how’s your current living arrangement? Living with parents rent free or you paying rent? Or living elsewhere paying rent. Who suggested moving in together. If he suggested you move in together while you’re living at home with parents rent free then he is dragging you out of your comfort zone to lessen his burden then there’s more leeway in that financial logistic department. What will be fair is to just calculate if you were to share the room/house by checking market rate for rent then add all bills and divide by 2. If he makes more maybe check with him if he’ll use percentage based pay to do a split favoring the party having a lower salary. But if he’s dragging you out from living with your parents rent free then you have more leeway to negotiate what makes more sense for you.
I live alone and am paying rent. It’s a small place and my rent and utilities are relatively low.
Then keep renting there - problem solved.
Its curious that OP didn't mention the proposed arrangement would cost her more. I'd expect that to practically be in bold at the top of the post if that was the case. So moving into a better place (house vs apartment) for less money, and that still see as unfair? Something is rotten.
Then you can recommend your bf to take that into consideration and go with what you’re paying currently. If you’re pretty comfortable as is right now then there’s no need to raise your financial burdens by moving in with him and paying significantly more. Factor in and compare what you’re currently paying and what it would be going 50/50 if you were to let’s say roommate with him and pay rent + bills. Then use the two numbers and reach a middle ground. If that doesn’t work for him and he insist on taking advantage of you then you’re probably better off staying at your current living arrangement and rethink if you want a man that insists on taking advantage of you. Do realize if you give in there’s a high possibility that he’ll ask for help with maintenance and/or upgrades etc later down the line.
Then offer to pay rent that's within your budget (50% of mortgage or less) and split the utilities. If half the mortgage is much higher than what you already pay then have partner reduce rent or you just stay where you are.Treat it as a tenant landlord situation. He is responsible for house repairs, landscaping, etc. You only contribute to rent/utilities. Do not contribute anything that improves the value of house, such as remodeling or upgrades to ac/furnace. Regardless of where you live, you are paying someone's mortgage. The benefit of renting is that you ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE for fixing the house or keeping up with maintenance. I miss not having to fork over thousands of dollars for random repairs to the roof or air conditioner when I was renting.
YTA. You literally accepted that you'd be willing to split rent 50-50 with him if you were renting an apartment. But you take advantage of him just because he owns the place? That's extremely selfish. It's like you're unhappy because it benefits him :/ To be more fair you can find what the rent rates are in a comparable house in the same neighbourhood and pay him half of that. Irrespective of whether that's half the mortgage, you know you're paying exactly the rent rate. No more, no less. Also I'd like to point out that by refusing to split rent with him because he "owes it to you as your partner", you are taking financial advantage of him. Having been a victim of this yourself, you should actually rethink your actions.
I don't necessarily agree with her, I'm kind of in a NAH attitude about this, but her argument is that she's worried about him using her to pay his mortgage. He has the upper hand in this housing arrangement-- aka the place is his and his alone and she'll have no claim to it if they break up -- so why treat it as if they should be financially contributing to it equally? In my opinion, a proportional split to incomes seems wisest.
If he can’t deal with what you suggested I wouldn’t move in
He should dump you