Mortgages - Prophecy came true!
Posted by danm
Boys and Girls,
I am part way through buying my first house, and have tripped up in several clashes with my girlfriend regarding, of all glorious things, money.
I wanted to ask whoever reads this a simple question - if you shared a house with your partner, how would/how do you split your financial outgoings?
I proposed we do it 50/50, and treat the mortgage and bills etc as a business. We put in an equal amount from our wages to a joint account for house and shared expenses, and bank the rest in our own accounts as we please. That way, if we ever didn't stay together, and split, we just draw a line down the middle as we invested equally. And we still have our own private money. Which we EACH earned on our own, independently. Easy.
She is annoyed because doing equal amounts would mean my higher wage allows me more of my own money to be saved, and she banks much less.
My argument is that I worked hard, its my money, I can do what I like. Remember we are not married, so there is no 'true commitment', just trust. If married, what's mine is hers etc. But for now...
Dan's Income : 1500 month
Her Income : 1100 month
Outgoings : 1300 month (shared 650 each) put into a joint account to pay for the living expenses.
My system is an equal split, treat it like a business.
Dan left with : 1500 - 650 = 850
Lauren left with : 1100 - 650 = 450
+ The PROS of my system? It's equal. If we lived on our own, my argument is that we are paying the exact half share of the exact half things we are using. ie, we half each use the toilet/kitchen etc. If you rented with a friend, heck, university, you pay equal amounts. If we split, we invested right down the middle. All goes wrong? 50/50 split. Easy.
- The CONS of my system? She saves a lot less in private money compared to me, which she argues if we did split up, would make her in a worse off position because she hasn't saved as much as me.
OR
Her proposal is a proportionate system based on what we earn. (18k versus 25k) Again, using 1300 as outgoings split 750/550 approx)...
Dan left with : 1500 - 750 = 750
She's left with : 1100 - 550 = 550
+ The PROS of her system? She gets to bank more, so if we did split she has money in addition to what we'd divide from the actual house assets.
- The CONS of her system? If we split, it's a bit more messy to sort out who has invested what proportion of the mortgage. I end up paying more for exactly the same share. Plus, I bank less in private money, so feel a bit cheated on and penalised for earning more. The other aspect is if we were living on our own separately, she is technically paying a lower rate at the expense of me paying a bigger share, just because I earn more. I know its in proportion, but technically I am subsidising her living lower rate at the gain of her saving more. Am I right or wrong? Also, we equally use the house, kitchen, toilet etc. So why would I be proportionately be paying more of a share, just because I happen to earn more? That's not fair.
If we were married, whats mine is hers. But right now, we are not, and a temporary solution until then is needed. I think this is a bit harsh on me, if we separated in 6 months, because she'd leave better off and I would be worse off.
Obviously, each has its own good and bad points.
I really, really REALLY would appreciate a neutral verdict and opinions/ideas on this from anyone on here.
We are sitting down with her parents tomorrow evening to openly discuss it more, but my parents are fully in favour of the 50/50 equal contributions - since we aren't married.
Thank you so much in advance if you can offer anything
I was hoping someone I respect for their diplomatic nature like Morbid/Mal/Nickv/Muks would offer a ray of light! :P
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2013 11:32AM by danm.
I am part way through buying my first house, and have tripped up in several clashes with my girlfriend regarding, of all glorious things, money.
I wanted to ask whoever reads this a simple question - if you shared a house with your partner, how would/how do you split your financial outgoings?
I proposed we do it 50/50, and treat the mortgage and bills etc as a business. We put in an equal amount from our wages to a joint account for house and shared expenses, and bank the rest in our own accounts as we please. That way, if we ever didn't stay together, and split, we just draw a line down the middle as we invested equally. And we still have our own private money. Which we EACH earned on our own, independently. Easy.
She is annoyed because doing equal amounts would mean my higher wage allows me more of my own money to be saved, and she banks much less.
My argument is that I worked hard, its my money, I can do what I like. Remember we are not married, so there is no 'true commitment', just trust. If married, what's mine is hers etc. But for now...
Dan's Income : 1500 month
Her Income : 1100 month
Outgoings : 1300 month (shared 650 each) put into a joint account to pay for the living expenses.
My system is an equal split, treat it like a business.
Dan left with : 1500 - 650 = 850
Lauren left with : 1100 - 650 = 450
+ The PROS of my system? It's equal. If we lived on our own, my argument is that we are paying the exact half share of the exact half things we are using. ie, we half each use the toilet/kitchen etc. If you rented with a friend, heck, university, you pay equal amounts. If we split, we invested right down the middle. All goes wrong? 50/50 split. Easy.
- The CONS of my system? She saves a lot less in private money compared to me, which she argues if we did split up, would make her in a worse off position because she hasn't saved as much as me.
OR
Her proposal is a proportionate system based on what we earn. (18k versus 25k) Again, using 1300 as outgoings split 750/550 approx)...
Dan left with : 1500 - 750 = 750
She's left with : 1100 - 550 = 550
+ The PROS of her system? She gets to bank more, so if we did split she has money in addition to what we'd divide from the actual house assets.
- The CONS of her system? If we split, it's a bit more messy to sort out who has invested what proportion of the mortgage. I end up paying more for exactly the same share. Plus, I bank less in private money, so feel a bit cheated on and penalised for earning more. The other aspect is if we were living on our own separately, she is technically paying a lower rate at the expense of me paying a bigger share, just because I earn more. I know its in proportion, but technically I am subsidising her living lower rate at the gain of her saving more. Am I right or wrong? Also, we equally use the house, kitchen, toilet etc. So why would I be proportionately be paying more of a share, just because I happen to earn more? That's not fair.
If we were married, whats mine is hers. But right now, we are not, and a temporary solution until then is needed. I think this is a bit harsh on me, if we separated in 6 months, because she'd leave better off and I would be worse off.
Obviously, each has its own good and bad points.
I really, really REALLY would appreciate a neutral verdict and opinions/ideas on this from anyone on here.
We are sitting down with her parents tomorrow evening to openly discuss it more, but my parents are fully in favour of the 50/50 equal contributions - since we aren't married.
Thank you so much in advance if you can offer anything
I was hoping someone I respect for their diplomatic nature like Morbid/Mal/Nickv/Muks would offer a ray of light! :PEdited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2013 11:32AM by danm.
Dan, it is a 50/50 equal contribution, that is fair, just and equitable. The fact that Lauren earns less than you is not part of any equation, what is part of it is the outgoings, which must be shared equally.
I have done a lot of sharing, and living in sin in my time. In one instance, I was earning $A120k pa, whilst my partner was earning under $A50k pa. We also bought a house, and when we split, all the assets were divided 50/50, according to the equal contributions we had made. We each paid for our own cars, as in petrol and servicing etc. and mobile phones. Groceries and utilities were split 50/50.
This girl is mercenary, and is putting her own interests first, instead of the interests as a couple. If she refuses to back down, calculate the percentage more that you will pay, then when you split, you have the right to that percentage over and above the half share of everything, and get it in writing, preferably on a stone tablet!
It is not reasonable by any means to expect to have only a half share when in reality you would be paying over and above your share.
It is your money, you earned it, it is your right to do with it as you see fit.
If Lauren wanted to save more money, perhaps she should think about moving back home....not trying to screw her boyfriend into financing her own personal savings. Sounds harsh, but the reality is not about you paying more, it is all about her, and her inability to save as much as you can.
Lauren should be grateful that at the very least, she is investing on an equal footing in an asset that can only grow and improve over time. Over the long term, that will earn more than a bank account.
Stand firm, that is my advice.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to. [www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Central
I have done a lot of sharing, and living in sin in my time. In one instance, I was earning $A120k pa, whilst my partner was earning under $A50k pa. We also bought a house, and when we split, all the assets were divided 50/50, according to the equal contributions we had made. We each paid for our own cars, as in petrol and servicing etc. and mobile phones. Groceries and utilities were split 50/50.
This girl is mercenary, and is putting her own interests first, instead of the interests as a couple. If she refuses to back down, calculate the percentage more that you will pay, then when you split, you have the right to that percentage over and above the half share of everything, and get it in writing, preferably on a stone tablet!
It is not reasonable by any means to expect to have only a half share when in reality you would be paying over and above your share.
It is your money, you earned it, it is your right to do with it as you see fit.
If Lauren wanted to save more money, perhaps she should think about moving back home....not trying to screw her boyfriend into financing her own personal savings. Sounds harsh, but the reality is not about you paying more, it is all about her, and her inability to save as much as you can.
Lauren should be grateful that at the very least, she is investing on an equal footing in an asset that can only grow and improve over time. Over the long term, that will earn more than a bank account.
Stand firm, that is my advice.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 CentralThanks Mal, I really do appreciate that reply.
You've nailed it to a point exactly what I need to convey - its not about the paying more. She doesn't earn as much, therefore won't save as much, less living costs. Be it with me or on her own. If anything, she should be thankful its allowing her to save more by living with me than herself. My salary alone could get me a place, but hers couldn't. I am beginning to see this could be a whiff of jealousy.
But you are right, just as my parents said! Stand my ground. We both went to uni, had the exact same chances, chose our own paths. I shouldn't back down for earning a different wage, especially 'living in sin' roflmfao!
I guess it would only complicate matters to mention the deposit, lol. That was pushed by her at 35k her part, 25k my part (I tried to get it at 25k apiece, as I knew at some point the whole 'well I invested more than you' blasted out. I said I wanted to 'owe' her the 10k more she paid, so we were equal. But more deposit = lesser repayments, so we went with that). Still, her parents gave her all of her deposit, mine came from parents, grandad and my own savings. I couldn't match 35k, only 25k. I thought it would create a power thing, and it is showing, after only a week LOL.
Still, its just one of them things like you say, get written on a stone tablet with the solicitors. Follow your head, not your heart. Things can get ugly, so be prepared, just incase.
I think she just wants to accept and live as if married, but I am just far too cautious in this day and age. I've seen peoples lives utterly destroyed by unequal splitting of assets.
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2011 04:17AM by danm.
You've nailed it to a point exactly what I need to convey - its not about the paying more. She doesn't earn as much, therefore won't save as much, less living costs. Be it with me or on her own. If anything, she should be thankful its allowing her to save more by living with me than herself. My salary alone could get me a place, but hers couldn't. I am beginning to see this could be a whiff of jealousy.
But you are right, just as my parents said! Stand my ground. We both went to uni, had the exact same chances, chose our own paths. I shouldn't back down for earning a different wage, especially 'living in sin' roflmfao!
I guess it would only complicate matters to mention the deposit, lol. That was pushed by her at 35k her part, 25k my part (I tried to get it at 25k apiece, as I knew at some point the whole 'well I invested more than you' blasted out. I said I wanted to 'owe' her the 10k more she paid, so we were equal. But more deposit = lesser repayments, so we went with that). Still, her parents gave her all of her deposit, mine came from parents, grandad and my own savings. I couldn't match 35k, only 25k. I thought it would create a power thing, and it is showing, after only a week LOL.
Still, its just one of them things like you say, get written on a stone tablet with the solicitors. Follow your head, not your heart. Things can get ugly, so be prepared, just incase.
I think she just wants to accept and live as if married, but I am just far too cautious in this day and age. I've seen peoples lives utterly destroyed by unequal splitting of assets.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2011 04:17AM by danm.
Quote
I've seen peoples lives utterly destroyed by unequal splitting of assets.
As have I Dan. I have been taken to the cleaners by one mercenary woman. After paying a solicitor 9k I still came out with the shitty end of the stick.
That is why I refuse to let a woman move in with me now. I have a girlfriend, and she has her place, and I have mine, and that's just how I like it. When we go out, she insists on paying her way. When she comes over to stay for the weekend, she puts food in the fridge, and brings a bottle or two of wine. Bless her!
I think in your situation you need to have something written down, particularly with regard to the deposit and the equal division of assets in case a separation occurs. I'm no expert really, but I do think that the majority of arguments are caused by money, either the lack of it, or as to how it is spent.
I was disinclined to use the word 'jealousy', but I see from your words, that you can see that for yourself. It is a tricky situation, and even mediation by your parents, or hers, may not work as either party, yourself or Lauren can say that their opinions are biased. It will be difficult to resolve. Perhaps in your area, there are Citizens Advice Bureaus that can offer un-biased advice to you on financial matters.
An alternative is to go with Laurens system, on the proviso that your 'donation' of 100 reduces the 10k differential on the deposit. The debt would be paid in 4.8 years. Of course we both know that this represents an indirect profit on Laurens behalf, as her half of the deposit was entirely financed by her parents, whereas the bulk of your share was provided by your own hard graft. This method gives Lauren the savings she wants to have, but with an advantage to yourself. Get that, and you have a win situation from my point of view. Reducing the deposit debt over time is better than taking a 25k hit in the event of a separation should the assets have to be liquidated.
You must get everything in writing, and signed with a witness co-signing to create a legal document that will stand up in court, should it ever have to go that far. My own failure to do so has cost me thousands. One learns the hard way, where it hurts the most, usually the hip pocket. I'm no expert in these matters either, I'm just looking at your situation from an outsiders point of view, unlike your or Laurens parents, who perhaps have a vested interest in one way or another.
Good luck mate, and no trouble to write a few words for you, I'm just kicking back in the lounge waiting for the race to start.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 CentralI just noticed the deposit difference is 10k, not 25k, therefore the deposit ratio could be equalized to 50/50 in just under two years with your 100 a week donation. If Lauren were to save all of it, it is a 10k nett profit in two years from the relationship. Worth pointing out. But only if the deposit is equalized, otherwise it's not on.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to. [www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Central
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 CentralI do the joint account thing too for household expenses and rent, with us each banking our own wages into our own accounts and then paying into the joint account. It works well.
We pay based on a proportion, like your gf suggested. That way, the person earning more gets to keep more in absolute terms, but it means the person earning less still has some money left over. It works fine, and it means you aren't capped in your outgoings by the person earning the lower wages. In our case, that is important, because currently one of us earns a lot less than the other (that will swap round eventually, mind) - so if we split it, we would have to spend less on rent and food than we currently do.
Also, anything which isn't expsnes (new TV, furniture, holidays etc) are paid for 50:50.
Even if we were married we would do that. Just because you're married, doesn't mean everything belongs to each of you
We pay based on a proportion, like your gf suggested. That way, the person earning more gets to keep more in absolute terms, but it means the person earning less still has some money left over. It works fine, and it means you aren't capped in your outgoings by the person earning the lower wages. In our case, that is important, because currently one of us earns a lot less than the other (that will swap round eventually, mind) - so if we split it, we would have to spend less on rent and food than we currently do.
Also, anything which isn't expsnes (new TV, furniture, holidays etc) are paid for 50:50.
Even if we were married we would do that. Just because you're married, doesn't mean everything belongs to each of you
Good point Mal on the paying back the deposit bit by bit, so as to balance the original deposits. I really like that idea a lot.
That would surely allow the equal 50/50 expenses split, plus my additional donation gives her extra cash she wants whilst levelling the playing field. Again, taken in writing, this could be the dealbreaker
I spoke to her just now on her work break, the conversation turned sour, and I was given a hang up call and told to 'think about it' as per her proportional system. She despises that I see the house buying as a business action, we are a couple, we will enjoy the house, but financially, its a business thing. I asked her if it was friends buying, they basically get out what they put in.
The two go together, but I really feel they shouldn't override the other, and finances can spoil that, by way of me particularly feeling unfairly putting more into it for an equal share out.
I dare not mention her original idea of saying we put all our earnings together, and keep say 300 each in our own accounts monthly. Then she thinks our cars, fuel, bills all comes out of one account. Hell no. Why should I subsidise her car and costs, and her money cover mine? Theres only one benefit I see here, and she gains only.
If we split and have joint savings, how do we work out how much is whose? You know? Ludicrous. I need to keep my own money to buy, say, a new car. My money = my car. If we split, I know its mine.
If we bought it under joint savings, we'd have to sell it or buy the other out. Mental. Who owns what proportion?
Shes very upset that I am setting up for the what ifs, but you have to. Yes, its depressing, but its the real world, and a written agreement now saves $$$ and nastiness later. Its a real shame, because I can see us falling out over this. Other than it acting out like we are in a full on marriage in her eyes, I cannot see a single benefit of doing it proportionately. Not a single one.
And because I don't, and I've said why can't I save more, shes making it out like I am treating it a game, about winning. And how its not about that, who saves more, its a relationship and its equal.
I think the bamboozle answer is that a couple is a half of the other. And punchline it with the clue is in the maths. The other HALF.
My deposit was also part funded by parents and grandparents, she just happened to get bigger amounts than me.
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
That would surely allow the equal 50/50 expenses split, plus my additional donation gives her extra cash she wants whilst levelling the playing field. Again, taken in writing, this could be the dealbreaker
I spoke to her just now on her work break, the conversation turned sour, and I was given a hang up call and told to 'think about it' as per her proportional system. She despises that I see the house buying as a business action, we are a couple, we will enjoy the house, but financially, its a business thing. I asked her if it was friends buying, they basically get out what they put in.
The two go together, but I really feel they shouldn't override the other, and finances can spoil that, by way of me particularly feeling unfairly putting more into it for an equal share out.
I dare not mention her original idea of saying we put all our earnings together, and keep say 300 each in our own accounts monthly. Then she thinks our cars, fuel, bills all comes out of one account. Hell no. Why should I subsidise her car and costs, and her money cover mine? Theres only one benefit I see here, and she gains only.
If we split and have joint savings, how do we work out how much is whose? You know? Ludicrous. I need to keep my own money to buy, say, a new car. My money = my car. If we split, I know its mine.
If we bought it under joint savings, we'd have to sell it or buy the other out. Mental. Who owns what proportion?
Shes very upset that I am setting up for the what ifs, but you have to. Yes, its depressing, but its the real world, and a written agreement now saves $$$ and nastiness later. Its a real shame, because I can see us falling out over this. Other than it acting out like we are in a full on marriage in her eyes, I cannot see a single benefit of doing it proportionately. Not a single one.
And because I don't, and I've said why can't I save more, shes making it out like I am treating it a game, about winning. And how its not about that, who saves more, its a relationship and its equal.
I think the bamboozle answer is that a couple is a half of the other. And punchline it with the clue is in the maths. The other HALF.
My deposit was also part funded by parents and grandparents, she just happened to get bigger amounts than me.
Go Alesi, thats also a good point ,and thankyou for highlighting the other side to this.
Am I right to say you and your partner have a written agreement whereby you contribute more, and thus if you did split, it is documented you invested more? So you then take the bigger proportion?
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
Am I right to say you and your partner have a written agreement whereby you contribute more, and thus if you did split, it is documented you invested more? So you then take the bigger proportion?
Thanks mcdo.
Definitely whats best for the future, I agree, but nothing is ever guaranteed.
I need to ensure for my own financial security and hers, and I know that sounds selfish, but in light of a bust up, things get ugly. I need to be sure that we both come out fairly as per what we have both sacrificed.
The only worry is this is making me look greedy if we separate, but rightfully, I earn more, would invest more, and thus should walk with the larger sum.
God, its depressing to think something neither of us wants to happen.
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
Definitely whats best for the future, I agree, but nothing is ever guaranteed.
I need to ensure for my own financial security and hers, and I know that sounds selfish, but in light of a bust up, things get ugly. I need to be sure that we both come out fairly as per what we have both sacrificed.
The only worry is this is making me look greedy if we separate, but rightfully, I earn more, would invest more, and thus should walk with the larger sum.
God, its depressing to think something neither of us wants to happen.
You're quite right, it is depressing, but a break-up and division of assets is an eventuality that anyone in their right mind should consider. I don't see an easy solution unless the two of you are prepared to talk it over with someone that is qualified to advise you, either a solicitor or a financial planner of sorts. If your other half wont do this, it's apparent that she wants it all her own way. Decisions on money have to be mutual, and beneficial, and yes, buying a house is a business, it is an investment in your future, treat it as such. How much have bricks and mortar appreciated in the last ten years? It is the two of you buying a house, not one, not one and a half, or one and a bit, it is the two of you, which means you share the costs, unless by some miracle of science Dan you manage to get a sticky bun in the oven and have to give up your job.
These questions need to be asked; "Why does one have to contribute more in the long term for an equal share? It's OUR house, we share it EQUALLY don't we?" Laurens plan is for you to pay more, but have only a half share in the investment, that's not what I'd call a good business deal. Ask her to take off the rose coloured glasses and look at it as an investment for the future, and not as some simple soft cuddly teddy bear thing.
Yes it's tough, it's clinical, and somewhat mercenary too, but we are talking about money. Get professional advice, and if she refuses to go along with it, you know what cards are on the table. She's likely holding a heart and a diamond, you have the club, and a spade in reserve!
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to. [www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Central
These questions need to be asked; "Why does one have to contribute more in the long term for an equal share? It's OUR house, we share it EQUALLY don't we?" Laurens plan is for you to pay more, but have only a half share in the investment, that's not what I'd call a good business deal. Ask her to take off the rose coloured glasses and look at it as an investment for the future, and not as some simple soft cuddly teddy bear thing.
Yes it's tough, it's clinical, and somewhat mercenary too, but we are talking about money. Get professional advice, and if she refuses to go along with it, you know what cards are on the table. She's likely holding a heart and a diamond, you have the club, and a spade in reserve!
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Centralmortal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She's likely holding a heart and a diamond,
> you have the club, and a spade in reserve!
LOL! That is a line of sheer brilliance :D
The current aim is to enter this as Common Tenants, and outline the 35k/25k initial deposit.
If we get engaged by the years end, which seems likely, then say we are married by next year. I'd like to think we would change to Joint Tenants.
This whole situation is the filler between co-habiting partners to actual married partners.
It's trying to get her to understand and accept we AREN'T married yet, and as such, bluntly, I need to protect my ar$e if we split, because frankly, I have more to lose.
Getting the Common Tenants agreement and outlining the variation in initial deposit, and then the whole proportional paying off of bills and mortgage will add to solicitor fees. Just going dutch stops all that.
We will see, I had a more pleasant phone call just now. Things are looking up!
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
-------------------------------------------------------
> She's likely holding a heart and a diamond,
> you have the club, and a spade in reserve!
LOL! That is a line of sheer brilliance :D
The current aim is to enter this as Common Tenants, and outline the 35k/25k initial deposit.
If we get engaged by the years end, which seems likely, then say we are married by next year. I'd like to think we would change to Joint Tenants.
This whole situation is the filler between co-habiting partners to actual married partners.
It's trying to get her to understand and accept we AREN'T married yet, and as such, bluntly, I need to protect my ar$e if we split, because frankly, I have more to lose.
Getting the Common Tenants agreement and outlining the variation in initial deposit, and then the whole proportional paying off of bills and mortgage will add to solicitor fees. Just going dutch stops all that.
We will see, I had a more pleasant phone call just now. Things are looking up!
Good for you old bean. The light at the end of the tunnel may not be a train after all.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to. [www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Central
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Centralwhy not split the mortgage 50:50, but living expenses proportionally based on earnings?
RedSam
Winner: Not the Nickv Comment of the Year 2009
Due to the voting system in Germany, Governments are always made up of coalitions of different parties. At the last election, an almost unprecidented result saw the CDU/CSU (rough equivilant of the Conservatives) go into Government with the SPD (rough equivilant of Labour)
Winner: Not the Nickv Comment of the Year 2009
Due to the voting system in Germany, Governments are always made up of coalitions of different parties. At the last election, an almost unprecidented result saw the CDU/CSU (rough equivilant of the Conservatives) go into Government with the SPD (rough equivilant of Labour)
Women are peculiar creatures.
We agreed, or rather Lauren finally agreed that the 50/50 share was the fairest state of play for the time being.
Unfortunately, she was under the belief if we split up, and had to sell the house, we'd both lose the 25k/35k deposits each regardless. Of course we wouldn't, only if the house was sold for less than we paid, plus taking into the account the expenses of arranging the purchase. The fact we bought it at rock bottom price bodes well *touch wood* that it should creep in value enough to at least cover the costs of buying.
So thanks guys, I used both sides of your input to balance things, then stood my ground, as Mal said
How entertaining though, she used the line 'but I have more to lose if we split up' referring to her initial 35k deposit versus mine. That was her side of it.
Yet my higher proportion of paying for things versus her lower proportion based on income as she proposed apparantly wasn't as clearly visible that I actually lose out more by making my cost of living higher, and hers lesser.
But hey, we got there in the end, albeit in a peculiar fashion.
She turned the whole thing into agreeing with me on the 50/50 split, if I just verbally agreed that the act of house buying and going halves on it all is merely a financial investment. She wanted me to admit and say that it served no form of increased commitment to our relationship, but purely a financial thing.
In the sense, she says, that I could do this with a friend, 50/50, what is the difference with us? Well, my argument was that in the whole context of the situation, it is a commitment because we intend to live and use this house buying as the foundations of our future, you know, having kids in this house, the place we stay after getting married. So I tried to fight that it was a commitment, in the context.
So I just agreed, the 50/50 split and house buying as it is on paper is no different to if we did it with a friend.
And just by saying those words, she said OK. Agreed to the 50/50 split. But it doesn't show increased commitment... apparantly.
LOL!
Women. What oddballs.
So basically, as soon as my bank account is open to share everything, it shows I am all about giving up everything for this, because she has fully put everything she has into it. The difference being I have more to give, thus more to lose. I kinda see her side of it more, but its a different ball game when I am the one who actually has more to share and give up in a quantity sense.
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
We agreed, or rather Lauren finally agreed that the 50/50 share was the fairest state of play for the time being.
Unfortunately, she was under the belief if we split up, and had to sell the house, we'd both lose the 25k/35k deposits each regardless. Of course we wouldn't, only if the house was sold for less than we paid, plus taking into the account the expenses of arranging the purchase. The fact we bought it at rock bottom price bodes well *touch wood* that it should creep in value enough to at least cover the costs of buying.
So thanks guys, I used both sides of your input to balance things, then stood my ground, as Mal said
How entertaining though, she used the line 'but I have more to lose if we split up' referring to her initial 35k deposit versus mine. That was her side of it.
Yet my higher proportion of paying for things versus her lower proportion based on income as she proposed apparantly wasn't as clearly visible that I actually lose out more by making my cost of living higher, and hers lesser.
But hey, we got there in the end, albeit in a peculiar fashion.
She turned the whole thing into agreeing with me on the 50/50 split, if I just verbally agreed that the act of house buying and going halves on it all is merely a financial investment. She wanted me to admit and say that it served no form of increased commitment to our relationship, but purely a financial thing.
In the sense, she says, that I could do this with a friend, 50/50, what is the difference with us? Well, my argument was that in the whole context of the situation, it is a commitment because we intend to live and use this house buying as the foundations of our future, you know, having kids in this house, the place we stay after getting married. So I tried to fight that it was a commitment, in the context.
So I just agreed, the 50/50 split and house buying as it is on paper is no different to if we did it with a friend.
And just by saying those words, she said OK. Agreed to the 50/50 split. But it doesn't show increased commitment... apparantly.
LOL!
Women. What oddballs.
So basically, as soon as my bank account is open to share everything, it shows I am all about giving up everything for this, because she has fully put everything she has into it. The difference being I have more to give, thus more to lose. I kinda see her side of it more, but its a different ball game when I am the one who actually has more to share and give up in a quantity sense.
its never too late for some words from you, Gui...!
RedSam
Winner: Not the Nickv Comment of the Year 2009
Due to the voting system in Germany, Governments are always made up of coalitions of different parties. At the last election, an almost unprecidented result saw the CDU/CSU (rough equivilant of the Conservatives) go into Government with the SPD (rough equivilant of Labour)
Winner: Not the Nickv Comment of the Year 2009
Due to the voting system in Germany, Governments are always made up of coalitions of different parties. At the last election, an almost unprecidented result saw the CDU/CSU (rough equivilant of the Conservatives) go into Government with the SPD (rough equivilant of Labour)
Hang on Gui, remember last time you gave me advice on that girl at the swimming pool :P LOL!
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.