Gf saying no to buying a house together after 4 years.

[preraph]

He hasn't said he's putting her on the title at all. We need more information. There's no way I would start paying into a house that I wasn't on the title of.

[Gaeta]

If OP's girlfriend had an interest in marriage I think he would have mentioned it. Buying a house is always a good investment even not married. You need both names on the deed and mortgage and you both pay it. If you're not married you only need a Notarized will saying that in case of death your part goes to your BF or your common children, what ever you decide together at the notary. 

Young people are less interested in marriage than us old chickens. The times are changing. There are laws to protect both parties they simply need to be smart about it. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Gaeta

[PegNosePete]

21 hours ago, CAPSLOCK BANDIT said:

You have a child with her, you are already married to her... Getting a piece of paper saying you two are married isnt going to offer her any protection

Wrong. I'm assuming the OP is in England or Wales since his mention of "estate agent" rather than realtor.

In the UK, if you're unmarried living in someone else's property and split up, then legally you have no right to remain in the property, ie. the home owner can change the locks with no notice and you're out. Whereas if you're married then you can apply for B94-1 home rights and legally remain in the property, no matter whose name it is in. Even if the locks are changed you can call the police to re-gain entry. If you're married, you can't be made homeless. I'd say that is a huge amount of protection.

4 hours ago, fromheart said:

Consider that if you buy the house together, she gets the house if you break up. The courts usually decide against the man.

That is completely incorrect since they aren't married. If an unmarried couple buy a house together and split up then they get 50% each if it was bought as joint tenants, or whatever percentage was decided when it was bought if it was bought as tenants in common. When you're not married, the law is very straightforward and gender neutral.

If you're married then the ownership of the house is not so important. Divorce laws take into account all sorts of factors such as length of marriage, assets, respective incomes, number and ages of kids, savings, debts, etc. It is true that in an "old fashioned" family unit where the wife is a stay at home mother and the husband is the breadwinner, the wife is likely to get the majority of the house value. But it's certainly not a hard rule - it all depends on the figures. Divorce generally favours the financially weaker party (whether male or female).

18 hours ago, Kitty Tantrum said:

If she puts her name on a mortgage with you, and you leave her - she's saddled with that. That's not something I would ever be willing to do without the legal recognition and protections of marriage.

The solution to that is a deed of trust. Although the mortgage is necessarily joint for a jointly owned property, the deed of trust legally lays the responsibility for paying it on one mortgagee.

Of course the main problem is that most people don't know all this stuff until it's too late...

 

[CAPSLOCK BANDIT]

10 hours ago, PegNosePete said:

Wrong. I'm assuming the OP is in England or Wales since his mention of "estate agent" rather than realtor.

In the UK, if you're unmarried living in someone else's property and split up, then legally you have no right to remain in the property, ie. the home owner can change the locks with no notice and you're out. Whereas if you're married then you can apply for B94-1 home rights and legally remain in the property, no matter whose name it is in. Even if the locks are changed you can call the police to re-gain entry. If you're married, you can't be made homeless. I'd say that is a huge amount of protection.

Yes but if the relationship isn't going to work then you have the liability of somebody being in your house indefinitely... Sure, for the woman, just rushing to the altar is the best case scenario, but OP isn't the woman, OP is the man and the fact of the matter is that if he is going to be paying her child support, he needs to be in a position to do so. It is in OP's best interests to simply go to marriage counselling before getting married to get a better idea if the situation is sustainable, financially and emotionally, for both parties before marriage happens.

[fromheart]

On 1/21/2020 at 4:35 PM, PegNosePete said:

That is completely incorrect since they aren't married. If an unmarried couple buy a house together and split up then they get 50% each if it was bought as joint tenants, or whatever percentage was decided when it was bought if it was bought as tenants in common. When you're not married, the law is very straightforward and gender neutral.

If you're married then the ownership of the house is not so important. Divorce laws take into account all sorts of factors such as length of marriage, assets, respective incomes, number and ages of kids, savings, debts, etc. It is true that in an "old fashioned" family unit where the wife is a stay at home mother and the husband is the breadwinner, the wife is likely to get the majority of the house value. But it's certainly not a hard rule - it all depends on the figures. Divorce generally favours the financially weaker party (whether male or female).

 

 

Complete nonsense.

If kids are involved, it usually goes to the woman. 

[basil67]

@fromheart and @PegNosePete you're both giving wrong advice for where I live.   Different rules for different states and different countries.  

Best to ask a lawyer.  

 

[fromheart]

Just now, basil67 said:

@fromheart and @PegNosePete you're both giving wrong advice for where I live.   Different rules for different states and different countries.  

Best to ask a lawyer.  

 

If the OP is in a western country, the courts will lean towards the woman if there are children involved.  Even with no children, a man takes an incredible risk with joint ownership or even letting a woman live in his home. 

Many men have ignored this with disastrous results.

[preraph]

That's nonsense. I live in the u.s. and property is divided if both people were on the title. 

[elaine567]

The assumption is that he lives in the UK.
In the UK she would have no claim to HIS property unless she was on the title deeds, which would make it jointly or fully HER property, or there was a cohabitation agreement in place, which gave her some rights if they split.

[PegNosePete]

3 hours ago, fromheart said:

If the OP is in a western country, the courts will lean towards the woman if there are children involved.

"The courts" will not even get involved since they are not married. They don't have courts for almost married or living together. In the UK there is no such thing as "common law marriage".

 

[Ruby Slippers]

We need more info. Who's paying for the new property? Do you have any plans to marry? What protection does she have in case you do something bad like abuse her, cheat on her and she wants out / etc.?

For most young mothers, playing house with a man who's not her husband feels very insecure and scary. By law, you're her roommate, which means she's out on a limb emotionally, financially, spiritually - not a nice place for a young mother to be.

Edited January 23, 2020 by Ruby Slippers

[fromheart]

10 hours ago, PegNosePete said:

"The courts" will not even get involved since they are not married. They don't have courts for almost married or living together. In the UK there is no such thing as "common law marriage".

 

Then by all means Pete, move her into your house.