Don't sell and don't get married.

mrsconn23 · November 2022

Dear Prudence,

I own a one-bedroom condo that has a nook that can be sectioned off somewhat. Also outside the city, I inherited a house that I rented out. I have had the same tenant for many years. My fiancée currently lives with her parents and several younger siblings. She keeps complaining about having no privacy since she telecommutes.

I have offered for her to move in with me and make her a real home office. She keeps balking. My condo is “too small” and she’d rather we have a “fresh start” in the house. I am a 15-minute walk to work now. I don’t want to drive over two hours both ways every day. I don’t want to deal with the hassle of moving, losing my very nice tenant, losing the rent income, and taking over a 40-year-old suburban sprawl. I want my fiancée to focus on getting rid of her school debt and finding the freedom to pursue her passions. (She hates her job.)

I am happy enough to support her in her dreams, but not at the expense of my own. When we speak about the far future, we are on the same page about kids, religion, and finances. It is the immediate reality that keeps tripping us up. My fiancée has suggested I sell both properties and we get a new one together. We fought when I asked why she thought her name should be on the deed when she wasn’t putting any money down. She called me money-hungry and cold. And it was only “fair.” I told her I was trying to be rational here. She could redecorate the condo, get part of an office share downtown, or find some roommates, and I would be happy to cover the cost of a room for her work. She is sticking to her demand for the house. Our old counselor had health issues, and we are on a waiting list to see another one because of insurance. I love my fiancée, but this conflict is taking a toll. Nothing I offer works.

—Moving Woes

banana468 · November 2022

Do not get married.

You're on the same page of big picture things but are absolutely NOT on the same page regarding finances.

And with the cost of living (and fuel - I just received our delivery of oil today and hoo boy) going up, that's quite the demand to place.

She is calling him money hungry and cold when her proposal costs more money, forces a tenant to find a new home, and add an additional 20 hours a week where the LW is out of the house.

LW does strike me as a bit controlling as well with the "she needs to focus on" comments but I think they're a poor match for each other.

MesmrEwe · November 2022

LW - I'm wondering if you're colorblind to the color red because all of those deal breaker size Red Flags are a waiving!!! TOTALLY agree with Banana - DO NOT get married to this person LW!!!!

The first challenge is the non-agreement of where the marriage lives. FI wants LW to move to them, and the (financially and professionally stable) LW with the houses says there. That's a pretty big issue right there and why so many distance relationships ultimately don't work out.

There just seems like there's going to forever be a separation of levels especially when it comes to finances and who controls the checkbook. The FI doesn't have their financial nor professional house in order and the pattern the LW described is going to be pervasive given the "denominational differences" that have nothing to do with religion.

While there is A LOT to be said about starting fresh in a new home that is "neutral territory", the reality is right now is not the time to be buying as it's a seller's market and if the LW needs to sell BOTH properties to purchase a place together plus the cost of the additional expenses that 4 hours in a vehicle each day would bring that have NOTHING to do with the cost of gas (health wise that much commute time each week will add up! From less time for sleep/recovery, less physical activity time each day, less time to attend to other outside of work responsibilities, etc.), PLUS the cost of the mortgage placed squarely on their shoulders, while the FI expects their name on the ownership of the property, this really doesn't end well. It's also something to consider that they aren't married yet, so what the FI is proposing would mean that if the LW did the sale of the two properties and put the FI's name on the new place and the marriage doesn't happen, the FI gets 50% ownership and it's a prudent thing for LW to consider in the "It's not personal, it's a business transaction" aspect.

banana468 · November 2022

I also think it's "cute" that the FI thinks that the condo is too small while the several siblings underfoot in the house are her current living style.

mrsconn23 · November 2022

banana468 said:

I also think it's "cute" that the FI thinks that the condo is too small while the several siblings underfoot in the house are her current living style.

This.

Also, this sounds like an age mismatch. FI lives with parents and 'several' younger siblings? LW sounds a lot older than their FI, down to the parental tone re: "I want her to focus on..." It's all icky, IMO. LW, you need someone closer to your age and maturity.

banana468 · November 2022

mrsconn23 said:

banana468 said:

I also think it's "cute" that the FI thinks that the condo is too small while the several siblings underfoot in the house are her current living style.

This.

Also, this sounds like an age mismatch. FI lives with parents and 'several' younger siblings? LW sounds a lot older than their FI, down to the parental tone re: "I want her to focus on..." It's all icky, IMO. LW, you need someone closer to your age and maturity.

Also totally agree. It makes me think there's at least a 10 yr age gap if not more.

It's making me think a few things:
-LW has deliberately chosen to partner with someone who is much younger than him and by nature of his comments, he's taking on a leadership "alpha" role in the relationship which therefore cannot be a partnership.
-The GF is likely in her first job. She likely does not like it BECAUSE it's one of the first adult jobs she's had.
-If GF is not living on her own then she's really lacking a real world perspective and may need the dose of reality that she's not going to get all the things she wants especially when they're grossly financially mismatched and thinking that she's somehow owed her FI's assets. It makes me wonder how sheltered she may be and how often she has been told no.

Casadena · November 2022

I totally understand wanting to move somewhere new together and I think the LW is being a little too inflexible about considering that. Moving to the house outside the city is dumb. Also, "I'm happy enough to support her dreams, but not at the expense of my own" is grossly dismissive IMO. These ppl should definitely not get married while they are still too selfish (and that's totally fine to be, they don't sound like horrible people) to compromise on something huge like this.

banana468 · November 2022

Casadena said:

I totally understand wanting to move somewhere new together and I think the LW is being a little too inflexible about considering that. Moving to the house outside the city is dumb. Also, "I'm happy enough to support her dreams, but not at the expense of my own" is grossly dismissive IMO. These ppl should definitely not get married while they are still too selfish (and that's totally fine to be, they don't sound like horrible people) to compromise on something huge like this.

Meh - I'm kind of team LW on this while the FI is coming into this without the $ to be a financial partner.

I think he's condescending and subconsciously chose someone who is going to be "beneath" him by going for someone so much younger, but I also think there's a big issue asking someone to sell his condo and rental home, kick out his tenant (income and put someone out on the street) AND put the house in two names when the FI not contributing to this.

Yeah, I get that's how plenty of relationships worked years ago when there were single income families and someone stayed home but in those situations I question if the partner that did not contribute financially felt entitled to so much of the financial decisions including both names on a mortgage when not contributing to the down payment or the payment yet.

Casadena · November 2022

SIB -

I just can't imagine someone not being willing at all to compromise on this though. All of his needs are more important than hers which is super unfair if they are engaged and planning to live together - regardless of who has more money. He has a short commute, he doesn't want to "deal with" moving, etc. but can't begin to entertain her point of view because she doesn't have as much money? He has all the power here and is very ok with wielding it and its' not a dynamic that makes him seem like a great guy. To be clear, I think it's perfectly fine to set the boundary of not selling the rental house or not moving there. In my mind, a very reasonable compromise would be selling (or renting out) the condo and renting or buying a place together, even if she cant contribute as much to a downpayment as him.

Partnered life is full of compromises as we both know first hand. They clearly should not get married if they both can't compromise.

banana468 · November 2022

Casadena said:

SIB -

I just can't imagine someone not being willing at all to compromise on this though. All of his needs are more important than hers which is super unfair if they are engaged and planning to live together - regardless of who has more money. He has a short commute, he doesn't want to "deal with" moving, etc. but can't begin to entertain her point of view because she doesn't have as much money? He has all the power here and is very ok with wielding it and its' not a dynamic that makes him seem like a great guy. To be clear, I think it's perfectly fine to set the boundary of not selling the rental house or not moving there. In my mind, a very reasonable compromise would be selling (or renting out) the condo and renting or buying a place together, even if she cant contribute as much to a downpayment as him.

Partnered life is full of compromises as we both know first hand. They clearly should not get married if they both can't compromise.

Agree that there could be a compromise here but it's not that simple even if it involves the condo and not the rental home.

It's a seller's market so while if he sold it could be high, they'd be looking at a place that's larger and needing more $ for that down payment. If he needs to walk in with more $ for that downpayment then that's more $ he's spending.

If they stayed then he could be needing to refi before renting. We have a condo that we rent and were forced to refi by the mortgage co because it stipulated that the home was owner-occupied. Refinancing now also means that the mortgage payments go up with higher interest.

Unless they legitimately sat down and crunched #s I'm still team LW because any future moving to a bigger place relies on him as the majority finance holder. If the letter said that she presented a financial plan, talked about what she could contribute and highlighted condos that were larger, in the same area and in an affordable budget that would be one thing. Instead the position is that the LW should be making these moves and sales and by not doing it he's a big meanie. In order to compromise, she needs to show up to the table with facts and a proposal of her own.

Do I think this guy is too controlling? Absolutely. Do I think it's likely justified in this case? Yes.

Casadena · November 2022

banana468 said:

Casadena said:

SIB -

I just can't imagine someone not being willing at all to compromise on this though. All of his needs are more important than hers which is super unfair if they are engaged and planning to live together - regardless of who has more money. He has a short commute, he doesn't want to "deal with" moving, etc. but can't begin to entertain her point of view because she doesn't have as much money? He has all the power here and is very ok with wielding it and its' not a dynamic that makes him seem like a great guy. To be clear, I think it's perfectly fine to set the boundary of not selling the rental house or not moving there. In my mind, a very reasonable compromise would be selling (or renting out) the condo and renting or buying a place together, even if she cant contribute as much to a downpayment as him.

Partnered life is full of compromises as we both know first hand. They clearly should not get married if they both can't compromise.

Agree that there could be a compromise here but it's not that simple even if it involves the condo and not the rental home.

It's a seller's market so while if he sold it could be high, they'd be looking at a place that's larger and needing more $ for that down payment. If he needs to walk in with more $ for that downpayment then that's more $ he's spending.

If they stayed then he could be needing to refi before renting. We have a condo that we rent and were forced to refi by the mortgage co because it stipulated that the home was owner-occupied. Refinancing now also means that the mortgage payments go up with higher interest.

Unless they legitimately sat down and crunched #s I'm still team LW because any future moving to a bigger place relies on him as the majority finance holder. If the letter said that she presented a financial plan, talked about what she could contribute and highlighted condos that were larger, in the same area and in an affordable budget that would be one thing. Instead the position is that the LW should be making these moves and sales and by not doing it he's a big meanie. In order to compromise, she needs to show up to the table with facts and a proposal of her own.

Do I think this guy is too controlling? Absolutely. Do I think it's likely justified in this case? Yes.

of course it sounds like that, he wrote it.

charlotte989875 · November 2022

I wonder if the other side of this is “my fiancé owns a one bedroom condo and a larger home in the suburbs; he wants to continue to live in the condo and I don’t have any personal space in here at all. He says we can section off a piece of a room for an office but it still all feels like his space. He’s also telling me to quit my job and pursue my passions and not worry about money, but refuses add me to the deed of the house. I don’t have a space of my own, or my own money, and he’s not interested in compromising to make me feel comfortable in our shared home. What do I do?”

They’re clearly not compatible but it’s not because of their finances. People can get married to someone out of their income bracket but everyone has to 1) agree on how money is earned and spent and 2) not use
money or assets to control or manipulate the other person. I’m not sure they’re actually doing either of these things.

banana468 · November 2022

charlotte989875 said:

I wonder if the other side of this is “my fiancé owns a one bedroom condo and a larger home in the suburbs; he wants to continue to live in the condo and I don’t have any personal space in here at all. He says we can section off a piece of a room for an office but it still all feels like his space. He’s also telling me to quit my job and pursue my passions and not worry about money, but refuses add me to the deed of the house. I don’t have a space of my own, or my own money, and he’s not interested in compromising to make me feel comfortable in our shared home. What do I do?”

They’re clearly not compatible but it’s not because of their finances. People can get married to someone out of their income bracket but everyone has to 1) agree on how money is earned and spent and 2) not use
money or assets to control or manipulate the other person. I’m not sure they’re actually doing either of these things.

Also agreed. Obviously it's going to be from his point of view because he wrote it.

short+sassy · November 2022

I think they both sound selfish and inflexible, though not so bad that there might not be room for compromise.

He says they are on the same page about finances for the "far future". But I think he's deluding himself on that because they aren't on the same page NOW about finances in some pretty fundamental ways. She lives at home and presumably works FT. Maybe she contributes something to her parent's household, but it probably isn't much if it's anything. So where is her money she could contribute to a down payment? That doesn't seem to bother him, other than he thinks she should use this opportunity to pay down her debt. But that's a red flag to me that she doesn't plan for the future and piddles her money away on whatever.

Facing 4 hours of commuting. 4 HOURS!!! On the road, every day. And losing rental income on top of that. Oh, hell no. This is a non-starter and the FI needs to understand this is completely off the table.

I think it would be nice if she at least gave his idea of turning his bonus space into her office, a trial run. But they should already have a plan in place if that doesn't work out. Because she's probably right and a one-bedroom condo is too small for them, especially because she is WFH. But then she also needs to pony up money for living expenses, if she wants them to move into a bigger place.

However, if he is dead set that he will not sell or rent out his condo so they can move somewhere else, then enjoy your bachelor pad, dude. Because you are going to stay a bachelor.

Though, if he does sell both properties, I do agree with him it's bullshit she would expect her name on the title for the new house when all of the money to buy it...down payment and mortgage payments...is only coming from him. Once they get married, that could potentially be another discussion where he adds her to the home. But imho, until maybe there are kids involved (if that's their plan), I don't think he should do that either.

He inherited the one house and bought the condo. Those are his assets, predating their marriage and possibly predating even knowing her. They should remain his assets. After getting married, that's when they can start pooling their resources and it's shared, no matter how much (or little) each person is bringing to the table.

Don't sell and don't get married.

Re: Don't sell and don't get married.

Choose Another Board

Search Boards