I Bought a Apartment by Myself. What Is My Girlfriend Entitled to IF We Break up?

Lbigbunj92 on 30/08/2023 - 16:20
Last edited 31/08/2023 - 13:00

Edit: Thanks all, really value all your input (and horror stories / regrets lol). I'll take all this info on board and consult with my family's lawyer accordingly!

I can’t seem to get a straight answer anywhere else online, so naturally, I’ve come to OzB

I’m in the fortunate position where I’ve been able to buy an apartment as a PPoR. I’m also in a de facto relationship with my girlfriend. We’ve been together for less than two years, and have been living together for 1 year (both on the lease). The intent would be that we both live together in this new PPoR. I bought the apartment using my funds only, and it’s only my name on the offer sheet and the contract.

We don’t have joint bank accounts. Up until this point, we have split the cost or take turns sharing the cost of the things we both reasonably consume together (i.e., lunches, bills, groceries). If we want/need to buy something for just ourselves (i.e., clothes, car insurance, petrol, social sports, etc.), we do that with our own money from our own accounts.

[I realise lots of couples have shared bank accounts and do the whole ‘shared account, plus two person accounts’ thing, but we’re not at that stage in our relationship yet. Or at least I’m not ready for that yet lol. One day I’m sure I will be, and perhaps that will dramatically change the scenario I’m describing and i'll seek advice accordingly.]

My intent for now was to just charge my partner “rent” of sorts to help contribute to the mortgage repayments of the PPoR for us both – I’d be happy to do this formally or informally. Consensus online seems to be that you charge half the marketplace rent for the same type of living situation you could find on the open market, which is basically in-line with what my intent was in the first place. Say, $180 a week to live in a 3bed 2bath apartment with me. I figured this would be a reasonable thing to do and would also help her to continue to build her own nest-egg for her to do whatever she wants with in the future – either with or without me.

The part where I’m worried is based on a work colleagues’ story. He reckons he has a “buddy” who was in the same position as me, and lost half his house when he broke up with his girlfriend even though she didn’t contribute to the cost of buying the house. This has naturally got me a bit freaked out, despite my best efforts to ignore stories about “buddies of mine” lol.

Can someone point me to the answers on this, or provide some advice?

Financial

Comments

    • ekstrabraket on 04/09/2023 - 20:51
      +3

      Women are naturally wired to marry up, unless you're super attractive and charismatic guy which most men are not.

      • [Deactivated] on 04/09/2023 - 20:54

        My husband is so you take that false statement back

      • Sweet3st on 05/09/2023 - 17:06
        +1

        I think it's often a case of men being wired to marry down. A lot of men don't like their partners to have independent wealth or earn the same as they do.

    • jonathan111 on 08/09/2023 - 19:03
      +2

      women never marry down, man must make at least 40% more for satisfaction

      • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2023 - 19:05

        Are you the dowry accountant?

        • jonathan111 on 08/09/2023 - 19:07
          +1

          i have been interested for over a decade and reviewed the research and outcomes done in this field almost daily

  • cuckchump on 03/09/2023 - 11:00

    shouldve had a prenup agreement b4 moving in together

    set up a trust fund and put that property into it and have ur parents names on the trust….

    yeh laws here suck regarding relationships especially defacto….

    • Laundryboy on 03/09/2023 - 11:15
      +2

      It doesn’t work unless u did it way prior to the moving in and the trust is solely in parents name. Changing assets ownership to a trust requires not only a huge stamp
      Duty and yearly trust costs, it also requires the bank to allow lending to a trust who owns by your parents. It’s a very complicated and super costly process.

  • Aerith-Waifu on 03/09/2023 - 15:13

    So the question now is what OP is going to do after reading all these comments?

    • Sweet3st on 03/09/2023 - 22:58
      +4

      Well naturally he's going to break up with his girlfriend and spend the rest of his days playing World of Warcraft and using prostitutes ;)

      • try2bhelpful on 04/09/2023 - 00:46

        Ya do wonder about some of the people on this website.

    • AustriaBargain on 05/09/2023 - 11:07

      Die alone. He’s gonna have his apartment buried with him.

  • bmerigan on 03/09/2023 - 22:40

    If she's officially paying rent to you then she's a tenant and not entitled to any ownership considerations upon breakup. A formal rental agreement is a smart thing to do.

    • liongalahad on 04/09/2023 - 01:25

      Im pretty sure the defacto status supecedes the rantal agreement. I actually think if she pays no rent and doesnt contriute to anythng, will look better for him. She will have all her money available to invest if she wants and build her own assets. Him letting her live there rent free will be seen as a way to help her bulld her own assests. Hopefully she does that, and I dont see a court ruling in against him if she wasttes her money rather than building assets

      • matt-ozb on 04/09/2023 - 01:43

        Lol .. that's ridiculous.. once your a couple then everything is merged and you're running a company together. One person can waste whatever they want and it makes no difference. Add up assets and share based on contributions. Then make sure the slacko can maintain their amazing lifestyle on the future, so give them more assets and spousal maintenance.

        So messed up .. the slacko should be in debt to the income earning partner for the amazing life over the period of the relationship .. but it's the other way!

        • liongalahad on 06/09/2023 - 01:29

          Does that also work with debt? If he gets a big loan before the end of the relationship, with all his asset as security, how does that work? Does the loan get split together with the asset? Surely the bank won't let half the loan security disappear like that? Or if she gets half assets, does she also get half debt? I wouldn't have a clue tbh

          • matt-ozb on 06/09/2023 - 01:54

            @liongalahad: There's a reasonableness principle applied to the assessment.. it's not black and white .. so, yea, if you deliberately waste $200K buying beers for the full nightclub during the settlement negotiations, then it ain't gonna work out great for you.

            Get a loan and you'll get money/assets to go with that.

            It's not exactly half 50:50 either just approximating .. that's the starting point .. consider inputs with a few 5% rough adjustments, consider an extra 5, 10, 15% for future earning potential.. chuck in some spousal maintenance for 3 to 5 years at $4K mth after tax .. enjoy.

  • liongalahad on 04/09/2023 - 01:21

    A court will take into account contributions towards property etc If she does not pay rent, not pay bills, doesnt contribute towards the mortgage, has her own salary available to invest (and hopefully she is investing her money and has assetts) - why would a court give any of his property and assets to her?

    • matt-ozb on 04/09/2023 - 01:39
      +2

      Add up all assets, assess contribution of financial and non-financial, share .. all seems generally fine at that point except

      (a) even if the person is just sitting at home doing nothing, that's not recognised and they're basically considered to looking after the home 100% to support the other person to max out their performance and income

      (b) the slacko has an amazing life for a few years for free, then suddenly is entitled to that amazing lifestyle forever, so then start bringing in spousal maintenance and more assets.

      Then it's really messed up and unfair.

      • Sweet3st on 04/09/2023 - 10:03
        +4

        Agree to a point, but the courts have to generalise and if you support an unequal and unfair relationship, that's down to you. I (female) separated from (male) partner after a considerable period of time where I worked FT and he did nothing (working on career plans that never eventuated). I also put up the lions share of $ towards home, and did most of the domestic work. I was lucky to walk away with almost my initial financial contribution because I could prove that I paid for everything, and there were children involved (he took no part whatsoever in their care and was completely unknown at the local school… of course he wanted custody because that's how women rip men off right?). Tbh I was OK with the result because I recognise my fault in letting him get away with it. What I wasn't prepared for was the incredibly vicious and sustained almost AVO worthy campaign of attack on me personally… I think he joined lots of online mens groups. There's a nasty, controlling, misogynistic corner in a lot of mens psyches that they just don't see, although the current generations are a lot better.
        All OP has to do if he doesn't want to break up is tell GF, I've bought this property and I want it to be mine and not yours, I'd like to continue the relationship but I think we should live separately. Naturally this will be unappealing as then he is stuck with all the domestic chores and she will probably look for a partner who can offer more commitment. As others have said, don't cohabitate until you're ready to commit and share.

        • bigsaver on 04/09/2023 - 10:34
          -1

          "I was lucky to walk away with almost my initial financial contribution because I could prove that I paid for everything"
          Does that really matter? Is the judge going to look into that detail or your outcome was mostly based on being a women and having most of child care?

          In my case, we never combined finances and the balance sheet shows my contributions are 90%+ …
          I already made an offer to settle at 50% minus what I had prior to relationship starting..

          The other party seems keen to go straight to court and didn't even counter offer.. doesn't wanna work even though child is on childcare. .. My understanding is only the lawyers will win and she's not the brightest so easily brainwashed

          • Laundryboy on 04/09/2023 - 14:58

            @bigsaver: How did yours go? Strangely I m offering the same % to my ex and she rejected it. My contributions are also 90%+. Probably going to court soon

            • bigsaver on 04/09/2023 - 22:52

              @Laundryboy: Still going mate.. got a reply just rejecting the offer…not counter offering.. her lawyer said she can get a higher % in court which all defendant lawyers will say even if it's not true… even if that was true I can guarantee that after fees she will be getting less money anyway .. she's not that smart so that's why I'm cutting my losses anyway

            • matt-ozb on 04/09/2023 - 23:58

              @Laundryboy: "My contributions are also 90%+"

              of what? just financial contributions? you're missing the more important factors of (a) non-financial and (b) future earnings potential.
              sorry for your loss.

          • Sweet3st on 04/09/2023 - 15:30

            @bigsaver: Yes of course being the custodial parent and shouldering the responsibility of raising children made a difference. Even so I only got what you're offering, most of my initial contribution and 50/50 after that, despite having worked and paid all the bills.

            • bigsaver on 04/09/2023 - 22:58

              @Sweet3st: Was that a final hearing/judge decision? So your ex didn't contribute and left with 50% … So in my case since I contributed pretty much solo then I can't see how I could get less than that ??? I'm also willing to do share custody too which she's not keen because it's too lazy to work and wants full child support.. the system is absolutely fked when it comes to allowing dads fair time with their children…

              • Sweet3st on 04/09/2023 - 23:29

                @bigsaver: He left with 50% (apart from what I brought to the relationship) having not contributed financially but that also takes into account that I had custody and would raise children. So I think you're being optimistic if you think you'll get the same result I did. Custody will be decided on who has been doing the childcare/school/making meals/organising social activities etc. If you've been a very hands on dad and contributed equally to child raising chores you have a good chance of equal custody.

          • matt-ozb on 04/09/2023 - 23:56
            -1

            @bigsaver: what are you talking about? your spreadsheet with a pile of numbers for financial contributions doesn't help much.

            it doesn't work like that.

            the non-financial contributions outweigh the financial contributions .. and the future earnings potential also outweigh the financial contributions … you are heading for disaster.

            there's a reason why it is called 'Family Law Act 1975' … because it was designed for a different century where, typically, women would stay at home to raise the family with fewer opportunities for education and government support and child care.

            it's unfortunate that the laws do not reflect the equal opportunities in the current century .. where the working person gets screwed and the slacko gets the most.

        • jatbinks on 04/09/2023 - 16:22
          +1

          @Sweet3st: "I was lucky to walk away with almost my initial financial contribution"
          Is because you are a female. If the genders were reversed I can guarantee you your partner would have walked away with 100% esp since children were involved. You get penalised for being a man in this system.

          • Sweet3st on 04/09/2023 - 16:32
            +1

            @jatbinks: Completely untrue. The court gives priority to the welfare of the children, then it assumes equal contributions. As why would you stay in an unequal relationship? I'm female and the only reason I was able to get back what I did was children. No children, no way I would have gotten back anything like my initial contribution.

          • matt-ozb on 05/09/2023 - 00:04
            +2

            @jatbinks: "Is because you are a female"
            No the system isn't biased towards men vs women … it is biased against hard-working people that waste their life in a job everyday vs slackers that chill and relax.

        • matt-ozb on 05/09/2023 - 00:12

          How do you guys like that get a nice babe like you?

          Some women that I have talked to seem to get a sense of satisfaction from looking after a helpless dependent guy .. no idea why .. but maybe that's where I'm going wrong.

  • some123 on 04/09/2023 - 21:35

    Transfer it to your parents. You'll have to pay stamp duty again though. Do you have any siblings? Risk with that is once it is in your parents name your siblings might want a piece of the pie in the future so to speak. But less likely than a defacto partner to do it.

    Then once it is in your parents name have them just let you live in it rent free.

    • Laundryboy on 04/09/2023 - 22:57
      +1

      It doesn’t work that way, unless u transferred the property way before becoming defacto. If not, the property will be considered in the asset pool to be separated. Moreover, your parents will have to have the borrowing capacity to take on your remaining mortgage and of course stamp duty and capital gain tax to be paid as well. Makes more to just go for FBA

        • Laundryboy on 04/09/2023 - 23:35

          If you try to hide assets and was found out, you will be punished legally and probably give more % of the asset pool to her. You still have to pay her in a payment plan the money u owe her even if you have nothing left (due to you given them away).

          I doubt her lawyers will work for payment that is a cut of your assets. I consulted 4 lawyers and all 4 are paid by hours and they all told me no good lawyers will work for % of the assets gained. Going to court can take up to 3-4 years and probably tons of hours of work. Legal aid is free if she is poor but they also strive for mediation instead of court.

          • matt-ozb on 05/09/2023 - 00:09

            @Laundryboy: The "no win no fee" is prohibited for family law so maybe the "fee % of assets" is included in that prohibition? (never read the details of the laws in that space).

          • bigsaver on 05/09/2023 - 00:19

            @Laundryboy: she's definitely not paying her lawyer so he's either taking a % cut from the settlement or just billing by the hours and relying on settlement money to get paid

  • Commander1201 on 05/09/2023 - 07:53
    +1

    Can someone summrise this, 520 replies, good lawd.

    • matt-ozb on 05/09/2023 - 07:58

      Only stay in a relationship if your partner contributes sufficiently for you both financial and non-financial … If their contribution stops, then separate immediately.

      • Commander1201 on 05/09/2023 - 08:08
        +1

        Fair, is he losing his apartment though or not?

        • Sweet3st on 05/09/2023 - 09:22
          +3

          Is he losing his GF or not seems to be more applicable at this point…

    • cupcake on 05/09/2023 - 09:39
      -1

      Guy says he has a deposit and wants to buy a unit on his own and asks if his girlfriend can claim it if they break up.
      If I were her, I would run.

      • Commander1201 on 05/09/2023 - 11:12
        -1

        Equal wage and but you keep the house too right?

      • mandelbrot on 05/09/2023 - 11:22
        -1

        I guess you missed the headline or body of text which says "I Bought a Apartment by Myself"

  • johnmatrix on 05/09/2023 - 09:18
    +6

    When I was 24, I watched my grandpa's defacto partner of 30 years file for separation while he was undergoing chemo at the age of 84 for terminal stomach cancer because her main concern was money when he dies, so she did it while he was alive to ensure she got half of everything.I decided to get a loan to buy the house off him to pay her out so he didn't have to sell his home while he was dying.

    Then at 34, I was undergoing treatment for brain cancer, all the side effects of steroids/radiation and other meds lead to the decline of my relationship, gf found someone else during and broke up with me after 7 years. Luckily I didn't marry her and we lived completely separate lives.

    I can't see myself ever being in a relationship again.

    The lack of support when you get sick is pretty unbelievable.

    • [Deactivated] on 05/09/2023 - 11:13

      "In sickness & in health…"

      You should have married her!

      • matt-ozb on 05/09/2023 - 13:43

        Lol :) .. hopefully!

        But probably not

    • bargain huntress on 06/09/2023 - 17:21

      Jebus you and your poor grandpa have terrible taste in women! That is appauling.

      If you ever get back in the saddle i hope you find someone worthwhile.

  • stickingly on 05/09/2023 - 11:22

    De facto is as good as married.
    Had a case in my family where an elderly parent died, left everything to the kids. Then a person came out of the woodwork with lawyers claiming to be a de facto as they had "lived together" for a few years and claiming part of the estate. Didn't end up in court but cost a not insignificant piece of the inheritance to settle

    • Protractor on 06/09/2023 - 12:47

      Gold diggers.They prey on specific demographs. Many a returned soldier been sucked dry.

  • pformag on 05/09/2023 - 15:30

    Lawyer Up!

  • bargain huntress on 06/09/2023 - 17:18

    Either;
    a) get married,
    b) accept that worst case senario you might lose half your assets,
    c) sign a de facto prenup,
    or d) dont move in together.

    I wouldnt want to live with someone unless i was committed anyway.

    Youre trying to have your cake and eat it too like most people nowadays.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join