SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, littleblackheart said: Except that's not what's happen. She wanted for them to buy a house together. He short-cut their plan, that they agreed on together as a couple, and bought a house 'on his own' (with his parents' deposit) without even giving her the courtesy of a warning because he (just him) was ready to move out. He made a good investment call for him, but forgot to include his gf of 3 years in his plan. Nothing to do with putting her name on the deed; rather, because didn't tell her their plan had changed. It looks like she still wanted the relationship to work despite being sidelined, because she moved in with him, therefore allowing him to afford a mortgage he can't pay on his paycheck alone. They don't plan to marry, so buying a house together would have been the next best thing as far as commitment. That's what they had agreed to do. It's now not happening. He acted like a single guy, not like a partner. It may not have been calculated on his part, but he's not left room for a partnership in the way OP sees it. I don't see bad intent on either side, but I do see incompatibility. This world is FILLED with people who have a lot of "PLANS"... but when you cannot afford your "plans" it is (OBviously, just by looking all around the society nearby) OK not to follow-through on those plans. This was a man and his parents purchasing a house, and the girlfriend had exactly zero to do with any of it. (Then she came here attempting to figure out a way to weasel herself into something, without investing any capital) The equation parallels exactly the idea of her hoping those parents would be dumb enough to cosign a car loan for a mere "girlfriend" of one of their offspring. Nobody in their right mind does such a thing. Edited April 8, 2020 by SincereOnlineGuy 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, SincereOnlineGuy said: Edited April 8, 2020 by SincereOnlineGuy Link to post Share on other sites
littleblackheart Posted April 8, 2020 Share Posted April 8, 2020 4 minutes ago, SincereOnlineGuy said: This world is FILLED with people who have a lot of "PLANS"... but when you cannot afford your "plans" it is (OBviously, just by looking all around the society nearby) OK not to follow-through on those plans. Of course it's ok for plans to change. All you need to do is discuss it with your SO, like any respectful person would do, not go ahead and do whatever without even letting them know, no? Seems like very basic relationship 101 to me🤷♀️. I didn't get any 'weazeling' was made, but I tend to give perfect strangers online the benefit of the doubt. There doesn't have to be any bad guys when a situation arises in a couple; sometimes, things don't work out. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 20 hours ago, littleblackheart said: I didn't get any 'weazeling' was made...sometimes, things don't work out. Of course no weaseling was (allowed to occur)... the would-be victims were too sharp for the perpetrator... (which IS the case in MOST attempts to victimize others... no matter what you think after you turn off the news broadcasts) 1 Link to post Share on other sites
preraph Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 Pretty sure once he knew she didn't actually have any money saved to put down on a house, he assumed she knew the plans had changed. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 2 hours ago, SincereOnlineGuy said: Of course no weaseling was (allowed to occur)... the would-be victims were too sharp for the perpetrator... (which IS the case in MOST attempts to victimize others... no matter what you think after you turn off the news broadcasts) Funny, I read that she was hoping to build a future with him and was disappointed when he did that dream without her. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 4 hours ago, basil67 said: Funny, I read that she was hoping to build a future with him and was disappointed when he did that dream without her. Uh, she was never any part of the equation which commenced a quarter-century ago. There is no other relevant entity. Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 @SincereOnlineGuy so he was never going to be a team player, working towards a goal with a partner. So how is she the bad guy in all of this? Link to post Share on other sites
central Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 On 3/24/2020 at 8:16 AM, alphamale said: make a list of all the sexual acts you perform on him and put a price down for each one. present the list to him and see if he still wants to charge you rent Ha! That's a good way to get booted out and find out what it costs to live on your own! This "relationship" may not have a future, but the rent sounds minimal unless it is as much as or more than she'd pay to live on her own. It sounds to me like she wants a free ride at his expense, and does not want to be responsible for her self. Besides, he needed parental help to afford the place, and has to pay them back on top of any mortgage. She should be glad to have a good place to live without his parents underfoot, but seems selfish. Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 16 hours ago, basil67 said: @SincereOnlineGuy so he was never going to be a team player, working towards a goal with a partner. So how is she the bad guy in all of this? He IS a 'team player'. She simply wasn't ON the relevant 'team' . 1 Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 True that. He's was never going to be a team player with her. Better she know now than later. Link to post Share on other sites
salparadise Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 (edited) On 4/10/2020 at 12:22 AM, central said: ...the rent sounds minimal unless it is as much as or more than she'd pay to live on her own. It sounds to me like she wants a free ride at his expense, and does not want to be responsible for her self. Besides, he needed parental help to afford the place, and has to pay them back on top of any mortgage. It amazes me how women (or anyone) can rationalize that living indoors shouldn't cost them anything... because someone else, who isn't a member of the VOA, should be covering it for them. In this case, she uses the fact that he has a mortgage, and therefore would be benefitting unfairly to obfuscate the simple reality. Well whoopee- how does she think it works when she rents from someone she doesn't know? I don't know what property values are across the pond, but I do know what the exchange rate is, and £300 is as close to free... you couldn't rent a cardboard box under a bridge in the US for that amount. We keep having this same thread, just different names and details, where the theme is, "why does he not understand that I am entitled?" I suggest that we create a new subcategory where they can post for free and relieve some of that pent up frustration! Edited April 11, 2020 by salparadise 1 Link to post Share on other sites
elaine567 Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 14 hours ago, SincereOnlineGuy said: He IS a 'team player'. She simply wasn't ON the relevant 'team Nail on head. This isn't about entitlement this is mainly about disappointment. She thought they were a team, him and her against the world, to find the real team was him and his mother and she was there to make up the numbers or more accurately to help pay off their mortgage... Now she knows the reality of the situation, she needs to do an unemotional cost benefit analysis to find out where her bread is best buttered... Link to post Share on other sites
CAPSLOCK BANDIT Posted April 11, 2020 Share Posted April 11, 2020 5 hours ago, elaine567 said: Nail on head. This isn't about entitlement this is mainly about disappointment. She thought they were a team, him and her against the world, to find the real team was him and his mother and she was there to make up the numbers or more accurately to help pay off their mortgage... Now she knows the reality of the situation, she needs to do an unemotional cost benefit analysis to find out where her bread is best buttered... The problem is that OP cannot afford to be a part of this team; she could not save enough money to pitch in, in the first place... Now, she has the opportunity to save money by paying $300 in rent, surely less rent than she is paying now and has the opportunity to be with her boyfriend and save money to pitch in on the house, but she does not want to. It seems to me like the commitment issues are on her end. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 On 4/9/2020 at 9:20 PM, basil67 said: @SincereOnlineGuy so he was never going to be a team player, working towards a goal with a partner. So how is she the bad guy in all of this? LOL - she isn't IN *all of this*... and she is being too stubborn to understand as much. Three people decided what that guy would/could wear to school on the first day of 7th grade too... and she was NOT a part of that triumvirate. It's the same triumvirate. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 Sure, she may not get it and is disappointed. I still don't understand that why she's being made out as the bad guy just because she hoped to build a future together with the guy she thought she'd marry. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, CAPSLOCK BANDIT said: save money to pitch in on the house, but she does not want to. It seems to me like the commitment issues are on her end. Why would she pitch in on the house if she's not part of the equation? Edited April 12, 2020 by basil67 Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 18 hours ago, basil67 said: Sure, she may not get it and is disappointed. I still don't understand that why she's being made out as the bad guy just because she hoped to build a future together with the guy she thought she'd marry. The OP is trying to fleece her way into part ownership of the investment made by a blood-related family to which she is not related at all at this point, and never will be by blood. The parents are guarding/protecting their child. This would be worlds easier to understand were the perpetrator a male, and the would-be victim a female. (and to some amusement, public opinion would then suddenly see right through the ruse) 2 Link to post Share on other sites
littleblackheart Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 So neither him nor his parents had the bottle to tell her to go? I'm sorry but buying a house is a super extreme solution to a conflict avoidance issue... Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 1 hour ago, SincereOnlineGuy said: The OP is trying to fleece her way into part ownership of the investment made by a blood-related family It's such a long thread...forgive me for not seeing it. Where did she say this? Link to post Share on other sites
littleblackheart Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 17 minutes ago, basil67 said: It's such a long thread...forgive me for not seeing it. Where did she say this? She didn't. Extrapolation of the highest order. Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 5 minutes ago, littleblackheart said: She didn't. Extrapolation of the highest order. I suspected as much. But giving SOG the benefit of doubt. Link to post Share on other sites
littleblackheart Posted April 12, 2020 Share Posted April 12, 2020 14 minutes ago, basil67 said: I suspected as much. But giving SOG the benefit of doubt. I am sure I am missing something. Even if OP was Machiavelli reincarnated, why is the solution to buy a house? Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) On 3/24/2020 at 4:05 AM, Poppy93 said: My boyfriend... his parents My boyfriend... his parents he says he will never get a joint mortage with anybody because it's too risky and his parents have the same arrangement with their property. LOL - there is no 'extrapolation' needed She admits he has parents She admits she has zero to do with the arrangement and her entire thread here is about her trying to weasel her way into something where she does not belong. (the only way the OP can save face in any way here is if it comes out that the parents have a much greater actual stake in the investment than her boyfriend spelled-out for her) (and then only in the way that he was misleading her while at the same time she was trying to hoodwink him and the innocent parents ) (and in this context, his "parents" are such that, whether they are actual blood relatives or not, any assumptions that way by me do not affect the context) Edited April 13, 2020 by SincereOnlineGuy 1 Link to post Share on other sites
basil67 Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 No, her thread was about her expecting to build a future with him and finding out that he had no intention of doing so. I can't see where she tried to 'weasel' or 'hoodwink' him into anything. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts