Nah I fully get that. But what I'm saying is that, hypothetically, I have a home that I'm paying a mortgage on. Just because I am intimately involved with someone that I'm not married to, that entitles her equity in my property if I charge her rent? I also mentioned in in another reply, she did not help with repairs, merely paid a reasonable rent. What exactly, in your view, is the defining line between having ownership stake or not? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just curious for your perspective.

[–] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I really don't have a defining line. It's very grey for me. I wouldn't expect someone to take out a HELOC to pay out equity for their girlfriend that moved into a house, that he already owned, for six months. But on the other extreme, a couple that has been living together for five years feels like she should get something. Especially if she helped with the down payment like my GF did.

Where the line between these two extremes is? I don't really have a catch all answer. It'd have to be case by case.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

On helping with the down payment, I would absolutely agree with you, especially if y'all are in agreement that you're buying it together. Now your other comment make more sense.

That's a completely different story than already having your own place and inviting someone to live with you. Maybe it's just me, but I would want my gf to pay a fair share of living expenses, even if I were managing it on my own or with a roommate (I'm married and we're stuck renting for now, so this was all hypothetical anyway).

[–] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I fully agree. I don't think people should be getting free rides, it just starts to feel weird when an investment is seen as an expense that someone is expected to contribute to.

Utilities and shit though? 50/50 for sure. No greyness there. Another guy said they split the interest payment which I also think is fine. It's really only the principle where I start to feel gross.

(Well maybe not 50/50. I need my gigabit internet at any cost)

[–] Esjee@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funny how you keep repeating that like a broken record when you can't come up with a logical and objective answer. It's a relationship and varies on a case by case basis. If my girlfriend is living with me in my house and we're both earning equally then I'd expect her to contribute to the expenses too. Either by taking "rent" from her or just splitting the bills. But to be fair, I do see your side too. If I'm paying mortgage for the house then it would be weird to ask her to pay a part of it.

[–] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

It seems we may just have different morals that no amount of back and forth will rectify. I apologise for sounding like a broken record but I'm responding to several people with similar arguments and memmy ain't as good as keeping track of context as Apollo was.

I actually live this scenario and have an equity agreement that splits the sale proceeds proportional to what each person put in. I find the idea of land lording over a partner to be disgusting.

If you want your girlfriend to live with you then what's the alternative? She move out and buy a second house? If you want her to live with you then she shouldn't have to put her financials on hold to do so.

But I agree that it's case by case. In several other places I've said that I don't expect their recent girlfriend to get a cut of their boyfriend's house just because her lease expired when they started dating. The longer she lives there though, the more I think the conversation should be had.