# Fiance has a mortgage



## peaceful (Jun 27, 2016)

Firstly, my apologies if I'm on the wrong forum.

So my fiance and I are planning on getting married. She has a mortgage of about 220K on a 450K home. I plan to move into her home. We have a prenup that states that her home and debt is her's.

We both work (I earn about 60% more than she does) and plan on keeping a common bank account when married. Living expenses will be paid through the common bank account. Her mortgage will also be paid through the common bank account. This means over the years (assuming we both work, and our income levels stays the same), I would have been responsible for at least half of her mortgage (220K/2 = 110K). 

From a pure financial standpoint, my fiance is getting enriched at my expense. I will be contributing to the common account, and she will be using it to pay a mortgage with the home in her name only. Thoughts? Any ideas on how to make this is fair?

Thanks.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

> Any ideas on how to make this is fair?


She rents her place out and you two buy a home together.

Or you buy half the home she currently has.


----------



## peaceful (Jun 27, 2016)

Renting her place:
Renting her place out isn't a financially efficient option. Her mortgage is too large and we do not have enough down payment. That rules out buying a new home together due to the financial risks. This means if she rents her place so it self-sustains; we would have to rent for ourselves. The only person that would benefit here would be a stranger (the landlord). 

Now one can then argue if I were to stay at my fiance's place, that my portion of the mortgage contribution would be considered "rent", with my fiance being the landlord. So one can say, I should pay for her mortgage, because I owe her rent. However, my response to that would be spouses generally don't charge their significant other rent (this seems absurd to me); and in any case even if I agree my market rate "rent" would be insufficient to cover her mortgage.

Selling half her home:
She's reluctant to sell half her home. It would be viewed from her and my family as bullying. I also don't like assuming ownership of an asset that I'm forced to buy.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Why didn't you just draw up the prenup so that the 230K equity she has in the house is separate from community property and then when you move in you get added to the deed and assume half the mortgage payments? Then, worst case, if your marriage ends in a legal separation whatever equity above the 230k to her name is all community property and is equally split, in which case your contributions are fair and equal?

edit: oh and as for you buying out her share seen as bullying, isn't it bullying that she would accept half the mortgage payments from you but not allow you any of the equity that accumulates from this point forward? and if you feel forced to buy into this asset, why are you even moving in then?

edit #2, are you the same commenter that did a whole bunch of renovations in her basement?


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

So what is your answer then?


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

You should also have separate accounts and contribute appropriately to the joint account. The mortgage would be paid from her separate account, for clarity. 

Or, you can consider your extra contribution as rent for living there, but that would be excessive since you gain no equity.


----------



## DDudley14 (Apr 12, 2016)

peaceful said:


> Renting her place:
> Renting her place out isn't a financially efficient option. Her mortgage is too large and we do not have enough down payment. That rules out buying a new home together due to the financial risks. This means if she rents her place so it self-sustains; we would have to rent for ourselves. The only person that would benefit here would be a stranger (the landlord).
> 
> Now one can then argue if I were to stay at my fiance's place, that my portion of the mortgage contribution would be considered "rent", with my fiance being the landlord. So one can say, I should pay for her mortgage, because I owe her rent. However, my response to that would be spouses generally don't charge their significant other rent (this seems absurd to me); and in any case even if I agree my market rate "rent" would be insufficient to cover her mortgage.
> ...


She can't have it both ways. You guys need to sit down and hash this out one way or the other. You have 3 options:

1) She gives you equity in the home since you are contributing to the mortgage payment monthly.

2) She pays the mortgage out of her own salary since she is keeping all the equity. 

Or 3) Sell the home, and then she can take a portion of the profits to put with your funds and you both purchase a new home together. 

I, personally would do #3. It is fair to both parties. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

> We both work (I earn about 60% more than she does) and plan on keeping a common bank account when married. Living expenses will be paid through the common bank account. Her mortgage will also be paid through the common bank account. This means over the years (assuming we both work, and our income levels stays the same), I would have been responsible for at least half of her mortgage (220K/2 = 110K).


That's not how mortgages work. You're only looking at the principal, not the total cost of the loan. She may still owe $220k, but by the time she pays it off, she'll have paid much, much more than that in interest over 30 years. So your $110k is a drop in the bucket. 

Look at the mortgage amortization schedule and you'll see how much she really will have paid over the life of the mortgage.

As for "fair," you'll be living in that house the whole time instead of paying rent or paying for your own mortgage (plus 30 years of interest).


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

In most states, once you marry your fiancé, you have a right to 50% of the equity that accrues during the time of your marriage.

The 250K or so of premarital equity is hers alone. But from the time of the marriage on out, it does not matter whose name is on the deed, you still have a 50% right to equity.

It's also ridiculous that you think you should not be paying "rent" for a place where you live. Being afraid that you will enrich her is, sell the sign of a very selfish attitude. She could likewise say that you are unfairly enriched by not paying any rent. After all you can sock all the money away in savings while she is basically supporting you financially in regard to the place where you live.

If you did not marry her and rented a place, you would be enriching your land lord. Would you hold that against the land lord? Of course not. He owns the property. But you hold a lot of animosity about the idea of your wife being your land lord... there is an issue there. If I were she, and you voiced that to me, I would nto marry you. There is something very wrong in your outlook. It's especially wrong since you will be legally entitled to 50% of the equity from the time you are married.

In addition, as someone pointed out above, a large part of the mortgage payment is interest. It's not like it all goes to the principle. 

Since it seems that you (and probably she) have little idea of who marriage works financially, it would be a good idea for the two of you to get a financial advisor and a lawyer to draw up a pre-nup. That way you two can draw up a document that reflects who things work legally (her 230K equity is her sole property, you get 50% of all post marriage equity, and you pay your fair share of the monthly mortage.)


----------



## Unicus (Jun 2, 2016)

peaceful said:


> From a pure financial standpoint, my fiance is getting enriched at my expense. I will be contributing to the common account, and she will be using it to pay a mortgage with the home in her name only. Thoughts?.


Thoughts? yeah..don't get married. And I'm not at all being sarcastic.

Anyone who goes into a marriage feeling their partnership "Enriches" the other primarily in financial terms is headed for trouble.

Save yourself the agita of divorce and either work thru your problems truly joining with another soul or remain single where the only emotional commitment you have is to yourself.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> In most states, once you marry your fiancé, you have a right to 50% of the equity that accrues during the time of your marriage.


Bingo. At any rate, get your name on the deed. The mortgage is a separate entity. My W is on the deed but not the mortgage.


----------



## Grogmiester (Nov 23, 2015)

Not to be doom and gloom here since you are about to get married but what happens if you guys don't work out?

Say several years down the road and you two have a huge argument. She says I want you to leave. You say no way ,,,, but ,,,, only her name is on the mortgage and real estate taxes. If the authorities were to be involved I would think they would side with her since her name is on the mortgage.

No one ever gets married thinking they will get divorced some day but I'd look into this scenario. Being more informed never hurt anyone. 

Since this mortgage is rather large (at least for me it is) how will you guys be deducting the interest? You make more and that might benefit you more than her but it's her on the mortgage. The financial institution is reporting interest to the government under her name but not yours. Have you figured out how you guys will deal with this?


----------



## Herschel (Mar 27, 2016)

Man I hate prenups. Why get married if you feel there is a chance you are going to end? I get it, we are all here, but it is just initial added stress that is more of a negative than anything.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Yeswecan said:


> Bingo. At any rate, get your name on the deed. The mortgage is a separate entity. My W is on the deed but not the mortgage.


Were I his wife, I would not put his name on the deed. This is a VERY bad idea. There are several ramifications.

One is that it looks like she gifted him half of her 230K equity which is her sole property.

Secondly, if he's on the deed and not the mortgage, then if they divorce he gets 50% of the home equity and she gets the entire mortgage.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Grogmiester said:


> Not to be doom and gloom here since you are about to get married but what happens if you guys don't work out?
> 
> Say several years down the road and you two have a huge argument. She says I want you to leave. You say no way ,,,, but ,,,, only her name is on the mortgage and real estate taxes. If the authorities were to be involved I would think they would side with her since her name is on the mortgage.


That's easy, he forces the sale or re-finance of the house because she is going to have to pay him 50% of the equity that accrued during their marriage.



Grogmiester said:


> No one ever gets married thinking they will get divorced some day but I'd look into this scenario. Being more informed never hurt anyone.
> 
> Since this mortgage is rather large (at least for me it is) how will you guys be deducting the interest? You make more and that might benefit you more than her but it's her on the mortgage. The financial institution is reporting interest to the government under her name but not yours. Have you figured out how you guys will deal with this?


Did you know that the IRS has this thing called filing married. Yep, they take the mortgage interest and property taxes as a deduction on their joint income.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> Were I his wife, I would not put his name on the deed. This is a VERY bad idea. There are several ramifications.
> 
> One is that it looks like she gifted him half of her 230K equity which is her sole property.
> 
> Secondly, if he's on the deed and not the mortgage, then if they divorce he gets 50% of the home equity and she gets the entire mortgage.



For me that is an issue. If you are getting married, the property should have both names(deed). Momma dies the state could be looking to take the property. If I die my W is no the deed. House is hers. The mortgage will be paid off from my savings. She is free and clear. If they divorce, whoever wants the property will have to buy the other out. Most of that is ironed out at the attorneys.

Also, if H is on the deed H is now gifting his contributions.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Yeswecan said:


> For me that is an issue. If you are getting married, the property should have both names(deed). Momma dies the state could be looking to take the property. If I die my W is no the deed. House is hers. The mortgage will be paid off from my savings. She is free and clear.


You are right that if a spouse passes away, having the other spouse on the deed make it all go much easier



Yeswecan said:


> If they divorce, whoever wants the property will have to buy the other out. Most of that is ironed out at the attorneys.


Yes, if there is a divorce, attorneys get involved most of the time. 

But the OP's fiancé has a large amount of sole property that she would do well to protect. And there are ways to protect it.



Yeswecan said:


> Also, if H is on the deed H is now gifting his contributions.


I'm not sure how this applies to the OP since he has no equity in the home going into the marriage. His wife will have 230K equity in sole property.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> You are right that if a spouse passes away, having the other spouse on the deed make it all go much easier
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The H will be providing money to pay for the mortgage and this will be his portion of the equity. From my understanding items obtained before the marriage will not convey 50/50 in a divorce. I guess the individual marrying into a home is taking a chance on losing possibly every penny that his put into the home out of his/her pocket. But, we hope that those getting married are not dwelling on the "what if" divorce happens. If they are perhaps it is a good time to take a step back and regroup.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Yeswecan said:


> The H will be providing money to pay for the mortgage and this will be his portion of the equity. From my understanding items obtained before the marriage will not convey 50/50 in a divorce.


Generally separate property remains separate after divorce. Though in some states, a person can make claim to their spouse's separate property.

There is also the issue of mixing marital income/assets with separate income/assets. When that happens, it can convert separate property to marital property.

For example, if the OP and/or his wife make payments on the home out of marital income, a good lawyer could claim that she mixed martial property/assets with her separate, so she essentially gifted her separate property to the marriage. She has a LOT to lose if she is not careful.

He really had nothing to lose here and a lot to gain. But for some reason he's afraid that he will be ripped off.




Yeswecan said:


> I guess the individual marrying into a home is taking a chance on losing possibly every penny that his put into the home out of his/her pocket.


No, the person marrying into the house has the right to 50% of the equity that accrues from the time of marriage. The two of them would be paying on the mortgage during the marriage. So it's a pretty fair distribution if they end up divorced.



Yeswecan said:


> But, we hope that those getting married are not dwelling on the "what if" divorce happens. If they are perhaps it is a good time to take a step back and regroup.


While it is not good to go into marriage with an adversarial outlook, it's also wise to protect ones self. And if the OP does indeed love his fiancé, it would be reasonable to expect that he would want to not only protect himself but here as well.


----------



## Yeswecan (Jul 25, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> While it is not good to go into marriage with an adversarial outlook, it's also wise to protect ones self. And if the OP does indeed love his fiancé, it would be reasonable to expect that he would want to not only protect himself but here as well.



I owned a home before marriage and did not really think about what I had put into the place monetarily or otherwise. It make no difference. What's mine is yours and what's yours is mine. 22 years later it still is the case. Building a life together.


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

Your best option here is separate accounts. She pays the mortgage since the house is hers. Buy a rental property and put it in your name only. Rental fees should cover your mortgage. Then you'll have a return on your money and a house in case you divorce. She signs a prenup saying the rental is yours.


----------



## BlueandBlond (Jun 20, 2016)

My brother and his wife had a pre-nup as he owned his house (paid in full) and when they divorced she got 50% regardless of the pre-nup. I agree with a few that with what is left owing on the mortgage, find a lawyer and financial advisor and work something out. Then, if divorce comes up in the future, you both should be taken care of.


----------



## kristin2349 (Sep 12, 2013)

TX-SC said:


> Your best option here is separate accounts. She pays the mortgage since the house is hers. Buy a rental property and put it in your name only. Rental fees should cover your mortgage. Then you'll have a return on your money and a house in case you divorce. She signs a prenup saying the rental is yours.



 ^

Am I missing something here, where is the OP going to live?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

kristin2349 said:


> TX-SC said:
> 
> 
> > Your best option here is separate accounts. She pays the mortgage since the house is hers. Buy a rental property and put it in your name only. Rental fees should cover your mortgage. Then you'll have a return on your money and a house in case you divorce. She signs a prenup saying the rental is yours.
> ...


Apparently the OP will live free in this fiancé/wife's house. Plus earn 50% of the equity in his wife's house, and build his own assets via the rental house, plus be able to save what he would otherwise pay in rent/mortgage if he actually paid something for the place he lived.

What a deal for him!!!


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

EleGirl said:


> Apparently the OP will live free in this fiancé/wife's house. Plus earn 50% of the equity in his wife's house, and build his own assets via the rental house, plus be able to save what he would otherwise pay in rent/mortgage if he actually paid something for the place he lived.
> 
> What a deal for him!!!


He would not be gaining any equity in his wife's house. Wasn't that the prenup? In a divorce she gets the house?


----------



## 225985 (Dec 29, 2015)

peaceful;15999897
From a pure financial standpoint said:


> With that attitude, your marriage will not last. Do a pre-nup.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

peaceful said:


> Firstly, my apologies if I'm on the wrong forum.
> 
> So my fiance and I are planning on getting married. She has a mortgage of about 220K on a 450K home. I plan to move into her home. We have a prenup that states that her home and debt is her's.
> 
> ...


Simple way. Do not do it.


----------

