Fiancé won’t put me on the title of our new house

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

They aren’t married. She has stayed home taking care of their joint child and has zero financial protection in return, since she would get nothing in a divorce or will. That’s a huge problem and yes, he is a jerk for putting her in this position.

agree, but she's also dumb for putting herself in this situation, for 7 flipping years.

If you are going to be a sahm, or only work PT, and you have a child, you had better have some form of financial security. If your DH is not providing that, then you need to get yourself a FT job that pays decently.

-signed a DW

[Anonymous]

Nobody is engaged for 7 years. I was barely engaged for 7 months. You got played OP.

[Anonymous]

Meet with a financial advisor, but also, ideally, a lawyer --- together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

They aren’t married. She has stayed home taking care of their joint child and has zero financial protection in return, since she would get nothing in a divorce or will. That’s a huge problem and yes, he is a jerk for putting her in this position.

agree, but she's also dumb for putting herself in this situation, for 7 flipping years.

If you are going to be a sahm, or only work PT, and you have a child, you had better have some form of financial security. If your DH is not providing that, then you need to get yourself a FT job that pays decently.

-signed a DW

DP, not the one you're responding to, but: This post is so typical of this thread. Judge the OP but don't offer any concrete advice other than "get a job." Everyone these days thinks it's magically easy to walk into a job. A low-paying, by-the-hour service sector job? Sure. A career position paying a wage that could help get the mortgage that could help someone start really saving substantially? At OP's age? Not so easy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

Oh dear God, you really think that caring for their kid, her kids AND HIS KIDS is "barely work"?

You people are clueless.

They would have shelled out a fortune, maybe more than her salary if she were working anything other than a big deal job, if they'd had to pay for all the child care, a sitter to tote kids to activities, etc. etc. for these past seven years. Of course it made sense for her to stay home. JFC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

Oh dear God, you really think that caring for their kid, her kids AND HIS KIDS is "barely work"?

You people are clueless.

They would have shelled out a fortune, maybe more than her salary if she were working anything other than a big deal job, if they'd had to pay for all the child care, a sitter to tote kids to activities, etc. etc. for these past seven years. Of course it made sense for her to stay home. JFC.

His kids have been adults as long as these two have been together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else get the feeling OP’s “fiancé” is still married to someone else? I can’t come up with any other reason they would be engaged this long.

Op here. He’s been divorced for 10 years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

Oh dear God, you really think that caring for their kid, her kids AND HIS KIDS is "barely work"?

You people are clueless.

They would have shelled out a fortune, maybe more than her salary if she were working anything other than a big deal job, if they'd had to pay for all the child care, a sitter to tote kids to activities, etc. etc. for these past seven years. Of course it made sense for her to stay home. JFC.

Op here. Thanks for this. Was expecting that I would get bashed as a primarily stay at home mom but not this bad! Wow, if I worked, most of the money would have gone to child care. I appreciate the people who gave helpful advice! Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

They aren’t married. She has stayed home taking care of their joint child and has zero financial protection in return, since she would get nothing in a divorce or will. That’s a huge problem and yes, he is a jerk for putting her in this position.

All of the above is her choice. OP could have made different (better) choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You say he is likely to leave the house to his kids – means all of his children - his kids before you AND the kid you have together. I think this is how it should be, since you are not currently his wife.

For example, if he had 2 kids from a previous relationship and you and he have 1 kid together, then his estate should be divided into thirds, which is fair. Any other kids you have that are not his are not entitled to his inheritance.

Depends on the state. He has one minor child that he is obligated to support even after death. If he were to kick the bucket tomorrow, with no wil, the minor child inherits the house. Even with a will the minor child can’t be disinherited. How’s his health. You and kid might be in a better poetic he croaks. I’d still get a job though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

Oh dear God, you really think that caring for their kid, her kids AND HIS KIDS is "barely work"?

You people are clueless.

They would have shelled out a fortune, maybe more than her salary if she were working anything other than a big deal job, if they'd had to pay for all the child care, a sitter to tote kids to activities, etc. etc. for these past seven years. Of course it made sense for her to stay home. JFC.

Op here. Thanks for this. Was expecting that I would get bashed as a primarily stay at home mom but not this bad! Wow, if I worked, most of the money would have gone to child care. I appreciate the people who gave helpful advice! Thank you!

You only should have stayed home if you were married getting half of the marital assets.

[Anonymous]

Maybe she meant to say FINANCE instead of Fiancé....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe she meant to say FINANCE instead of Fiancé....

Very cruel!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everybody thinking the guy is a jerk? He seems sane… sounds like OP wants to sit on her butt, barely work, have this man take care of her, their kid, her kids, and be put on the house? Looks like OP has nothing in her name, no retirement and refused to work at the age of 50! Sounds like he put a ring on it and then realized her true colors…

Oh dear God, you really think that caring for their kid, her kids AND HIS KIDS is "barely work"?

You people are clueless.

They would have shelled out a fortune, maybe more than her salary if she were working anything other than a big deal job, if they'd had to pay for all the child care, a sitter to tote kids to activities, etc. etc. for these past seven years. Of course it made sense for her to stay home. JFC.

"Maybe" lol. Even if, and this is hy-po-thetical, but even if her full time salary paid less than daycare, it's a temporary setback to get way ahead financially. Just like going to college is. You have less net income, but work towards a future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You say he is likely to leave the house to his kids – means all of his children - his kids before you AND the kid you have together. I think this is how it should be, since you are not currently his wife.

For example, if he had 2 kids from a previous relationship and you and he have 1 kid together, then his estate should be divided into thirds, which is fair. Any other kids you have that are not his are not entitled to his inheritance.

It depends upon the state in which you live but if he dies in my state without a will his estate (house, monies etc) would go to his parents if alive and his three children (the two older one and your child).

A fiance has no legal standing.