This stuff always gets weird when you're dating your roommate. Talk about it and decide what would make both of you happy. Marriage seems like it solves all the problems.

Partner B could just pay what rent is considered fair, given that it's not a typical renting scenario. If partner B rented a similar house with a roommate, what would they expect to pay?

Not being on the mortgage shouldn’t matter. They’d be renting from someone else if not from them.

Only time I’d see it be a problem is if the owner is trying to make a profit off the other.

If the end goal is to get married (not sure I’d sign a 30 year commitment without it), then would it really matter if “owner is getting equity and I’m not!”?

You are confused because you didn't decide what your plans and lifestyle will be for the long term.

Decide this and the financial questions will answer themselves.

But you could also find out that you have incompatible visions, finances have this nasty habit of not allowing you to remain in denial about such possible incompatibilities.

On one hand it's whatever works for you.

On the other A owns the home and pays all bills, repairs, taxes, insurance and B pays 50% of market rent on the home.

Utilities are split down the middle.

If A wants to reduce the charge because the home would otherwise not be B's pick or because they want to eliminate the 'profit' portion of rent to be affordable that's fine but justifying any lesser s[;ot charges because of income is silly. I don't pay less for milk because I'm poor. Why would I pay less for rent?

Joint account at separate bank each partner contributes what is needed to pay all the bills (including mortgage) plus $100 - $200 monthly. This should cover utilities, cable, groceries, etc.

Partner A "charges" rent to Partner B at FMV or FMV less a "Partner" discount. This may work out where A is paying 65% or mortgage and B is paying 35% more or less.

If partnership continues and A sells the house then of course, the proceeds could go toward the new house. At this point all money becomes "our" money. How to to spend and how much to save is a joint decision.

If partnership ceases then B leaves and joint account is closed. Remaining funds could be split equally or a portion gifted to B based on the percentage of mortgage covered by former "rent" agreement.

[deleted]

Maybe look at what the place rents for and ask partner B to pay 35% of what the place would rent for?

What we think is irrelevant.

What the two of you decide when you sit down and talk about it is what matters.

IMO partner B pays a rent amount that both feel is fair to cover both any rent and a portion of utilities that are included.

find a similar house that's for rent, and partner B should pay approximately half what the rental cost is as their housing expense. they are a tenant, and should pay what a tenant pays.

other ongoing bills (utilities, cable/internet/TV tax... that's a thing in the UK IIRC?) should be split 50/50, or based on income, whatever they believe is fair for their relationship.

I'd do it like this:

Mortgage and utilities split 65/35. All other bills (food, subscriptions, etc) split 50/50.

Well, a 5050 split is obviously the most fair, but I'm in a similar situation where I make about twice what my partner makes and I our split is about 6633 because thats what she can afford and I want to live in a nicer place. We were doing 5050 when we lived in a cheap one bedroom apartment though.

A key thing for both to remember is mortgage is the minimum amount the owner has to pay. Think new roof / repairs/ decorating / insurance etc. Rent is the maximum that you have to pay.

Also if the house was paid off with no mortgage still paying rent would be fair.

Personally my view is: c25% of FULL market rent. (Likely more than half the mortgage) 50% bills Joint Discretional spend (holidays, meal out etc) split as per post tax income ratios.

With house owner to pay for all household unexpected bills.

With a post marriage split to be more about having financial goals and evenish discretional spend (with highest earner having more to reward the hard work, and potential extra costs of more senior roles)

Personally I've always done the split based on income with my significant other. If you're planning to use the equity on the existing home for the purchase of the new home then both parties are contributing to that building of equity. Yes, there has to be a component of trust in there, but unless you refinance the existing home in the name of both parites, there will not have any concrete certainty.

If Partner A pays the mortgage and Partner B pays the bills that would be fair. Also Partner B should buy the groceries to even things out a bit.

Partner B should pay 25% of gross income (or 33% of net income) to Partner A as rent.

Fairness is subjective. She currently has none of the legal or financial risk. None. Talk it through and just make you're not actually losing money. It's also about perception. If someone pays part of the mortgage and utilities may easily think they're a contributor, but what about property taxes, insurance, the risk attached to it all, etc???

You do whatever works for y'all. If you're not married or very certain you're going to get married, I wouldn't put someone else's name on any titles.

Partner A is going to own the house and pay the mortgage whether or not they are dating and no matter where the date is living. Offering to have their date live with them doesn’t change anything financially except it saves Partner B from paying housing costs. Even if Partner A normally has a renter, I doubt the renter shares the same bed with their landlord.

If Partner B wants their own room in the house, then determine fair market value of that room and sign a lease agreement. That way, if the dating suddenly stops, then Partner B isn’t also suddenly homeless.

The other financial aspects of dating won’t change. Partner B has their own expenses for utilities, cellphone, groceries, and personal care. Most couples do this on a casual basis such as, “I’ll pay the electric bill this month” or “I’m going to the grocery store, do you need anything?” Partner A continues to pay for all house related expenses because they were going to pay for those anyway.

In the meantime, Partner B saves their housing budget. As mentioned above, they are at risk for suddenly finding themselves homeless so they might need that money.

So you guys net 7200 a month, bills are 1600 a month. I would personally do it income based so maybe 600/1000 bc i like even numbers but you guys arent living paycheck to paycheck. Either one of you could comfortably afford the whole thing so just choose whatever you are comfortable with. But seriously if this is causing a hiccup you should be on relationship advice. It would be different if the expenses were taking up somebodys entire paycheck but yall are doing just fine.

Where things get bothersome is home maintenance and improvements. That’s equity responsibility. So I believe one has to determine if B is equal to a roommate paying rent; in which case, the financial burden and yes the fun decisions are A’s to make. Then utilities. A should provide the past years usage and payment. Can the increase be attributed and paid by B? Then food/chores. And as any good attorney would ask A, would you feel differently if B won the lottery?

B’s name is not on the mortgage, the utilities etc so is losing credit proof needed should B move out. Say, A dies? Basically a roommate agreement would work. A needs a written agreement so it’s easier to evict. I’ve thought of this stuff, not as a love interest, but an actual roommate. What’s the fair rate? Roommates.com will show places rates in your area. I hope that’s net income and both are contributing to their retirement funds. Also, B needs a better job, maybe more education or certification.

[removed]

I was in this exact scenario. My now-husband already had a house he purchased when we started dating. When I moved in with him after a year, we split mortgage + utilities by income %. A few years later we bought our own house and got married, so I didn't feel bad about giving him equity on the old house, as we rolled it into our new house together.

Firstly Partner A is already doing very, very well and B is doing very, very, very well. It's an awkward one, because when you're married you can view your finances as combined. There is no objective answer to this, personally I prefer treating each other like equal roommates. It is not enough to say "if fine" "I don't care", you both been to positively sit down and talk this through, talk about your values re: money, housing, expectations and responsibilities. Did either of you grow up with values to do with taking care of your partner, or looking for someone who will take care of you? Is B genuinely happy to subsidise A bearing in mind a 2:1 split in As favour of total housing costs of £1600 is effectively the same as B paying ~£300/month to A.

Was A renting out a room in the house before asking B to move in? If B moving in caused A to lose that income it seems fair to charge some amount of rent (although it should have been decided when B moved in, not 4 years later). BUT If A was paying the mortgage beforehand without planning to rent part of it out, maybe it's a little opportunistic to try to gain monetarily from living together? In that case, I would aim for a contribution that feels like an amazing deal on housing to B and a small perk for A instead of going for "fair" since this isn't the same as just being roommates. Maybe B pays all or most of the utilities? That way if you break up, B won't feel resentful for contributing to equity they won't retain and anything that B did pay is just gravy for A. If you do get married, it might not matter practically anymore, but things like this can cause lingering hurt feelings.

Where is marriage in this scenario? You gave a timeline of 9 years together but no date on when the marriage would take place, which would solve all these issues. Other than that, the most equitable would be % wise, but nitty gritty stuff like that causes friction.

The owner of the house determines what fair rent is. Probably not 50% of the mortgage but if you're actually going to get married eventually then it won't matter anyways.

Splitting anything based on income hardly makes sense.

The rest is relationship advice, in terms of how you agree to split things. The fairest, healthiest way when married is 50/50 split unless 100% certain agreed not to for a variety of possible reasons.

[deleted]