fat shamed and billed for the dress 👗 1 800 Drama Podcast | Reddit Stories AITA
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- Check out Saily's affordable eSim plans for your next travel holiday and use my code 'SHAABA' for an extra exclusive 15% off! saily.com/Shaaba ✈️📱
Welcome to Episode 30 of 1 800 Drama! In this week's Reddit Stories r/AITA deep dive, we explore the question: should I be paying for that? What about paying for your friend's kids holidays? What about bridezilla sisters? What's the definition of a 'joke'? How do we help a grieving peach? Grab a cuppa and let’s go fishing 🎣🍑✨
please pre-save Weird! distrokid.com/...
(thank you thank you thank you!)
support my music! 'shaaba' on spotify, apple, & where all music lives!
podcast '1 800 Drama' on spotify, apple, & where all pods live!
Insta @sherbetlemon007
TikTok @sherbetlemon007
Twitch @shaabaandjamie
gaming channel: @shaabaandjamie
Jamie's channel: @jammidodger
Our site: shaabaandjamie . c o m
Share your own drama and advise others here! / 1800drama
wanna be a member? grab a backstage pass! www.youtube.co...
Be kind and have a great day (:
Check out Saily's affordable eSim plans for your next travel holiday and use my code 'SHAABA' for an extra exclusive 15% off! saily.com/Shaaba ✈📱
@24:22 Yes, she doesn't "own" her apartment, but it is hers. Her ability to continue living there and enjoying the home that she pays for, does not depend on her relationship status. Giving up her apartment, moving in with her boyfriend, and paying half of HIS mortgage does not afford her this same reassurance. It's HIS house. Her being able to live there depends on HIM (and if she's keeping him happy). And if something happens to their relationship (they break up, he gets killed in an accident, etc.) she will suddenly be HOMELESS. It's an unbalanced power dynamic and while I don't agree with OPs idea of him paying her money back, I don't agree with her going into it without any protections either. Especially since he's expecting her to just pay half his bills off the record. Refusing to put her on the title is a red flag that he doesn't trust her any more than she trusts him. They are BOTH unsure of their future, so why would OP throw caution to the wind and just hope he doesn't break up with her and land her on the streets? That's logical.
You can’t say you’re “just being honest” and then say later that it’s “just a joke” :p
Glad this comment is so near the top, that comment immediately made me want to yell at the rude lady, "WHICH IS IT? WERE YOU BEING HONEST OR WERE YOU JOKING? YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!"
Not that I'd be able to call her out in the moment, I'd be too busy being dumbfounded by the audacity 😅
That's what I was coming to say. Its "being honest" until you have a consequence, then its "just a joke" and you are overreacting. Absolute b.s. my favourite thing is asking, if it's a joke, explain the joke. Tell me why you think its so funny to insult my body?
@@the.toycromancer I’ve heard the phrase “schrodinger's douchebag” to describe people who decide whether or not they are joking based on how you react. I think it fits well here.
@@the.toycromancer Schrodinger's ah
fr
With all the love Shaaba, renting an apartment and paying someone’s mortgage when your not on the title are not the same thing. When you’re renting, you have a signed contract between the two parties that each must respect. Now I’m not saying that there aren’t bad landlords, but that renting contract will help you should you go to court over one thing or another. If the OP starts paying part of her boyfriend’s mortgage without any sort of agreement there really is nothing she could do if he decided to kick her out.
He already has a leg up in the relationship, he can sell his house in the future should he need to, but there’s no guarantee that he would grant her a portion of what she payed for.
Where I’m from, you can have unequal ownership of a house. Say two people buy a house together: one can pay 60% of the down payment and monthly mortgage and the other only 40%. They could decide that person one owns 60% of the house and would therefore get 60% of the potential sale of the house.
All this to say, Y’ALL NEED SOME FORM OF CONTRACT. For both of your sakes.
It appears I’ve jumped the gun and the forum seems to say the same thing I was 😂
Yes, that’s was my solution: unequal ownership of the house.
When I bought my apartment with an ex partner, I owned initially 75% of it and him, 25%. This was because I was working and he was still a grad student. Plus, my parents gave me the down payment.
Eventually, he bought me back so I owned 66% and him 34%. When we split, I bought his shares in the house, including the appreciation of the apartment.
OP in this story could use the amount she pays each month as building her equity in the house. At first, it would be very little, but if they stay together long enough, it could represent a big sum of money. I think this approach is fair for both of them.
Unequal ownership of the house is definitely a good and fair way to do things, but it would probably take OP a while to build up any reasonable portion of home ownership, so it is not a solution for the beginning. Some kind of contract or written agreement is definitely a good idea to protect OP at the start. I don’t think it makes sense that in the case of a breakup OP gets back ALL the ‘rent’ money she paid though - also depends how long they live together in that house. I agree that renting an apartment with a lease etc and contributing to a partner’ a mortgage is not the same, but it also makes sense that OP does pay something to the house costs and doesn’t live there for free. Sharing bills is something else, as it is stuff both parties actively consume.
Yeah I think the main difference is that landlords aren’t living in your old home afterwards. I feel like that’s what makes it feel unfair…not just the financial aspect but the fact boyfriend can still live there if they break up and she can’t. I feel like what would be the most fair is if she just pays for everything that she consumes- like food, her part or half of the water and heat/ electricity. Not to mention whatever cleaning needs she contributes to. He already is paying for his mortgage. The only change is recurring consumable cost increases which she would pay for. If he gets to live in the house and have his mortgage paid for when she leaves, whereas a landlord would need a new tenant and would be living elsewhere. It’s less of a personal space when it’s a rental and there’s no emotional/ romantic relationship mixed in with everything. It’s definitely different. I don’t think OP should get all her money back in the event of a breakup though because she benefited from living there. Another reason why paying for her recurring expenses makes the most sense to me. Maybe there’s a more ideal solution. I’m sure there is. But neither OP or her BF seem to have the right idea.
This is what I came to the comments to say 😅 it doesn't seem like she trying to get anything out of it like a prenup or something, just some sort of contract to protect her. When you rent the contract protects you, and people can change on a dime. After several times living with friends where I didn't get anything in writing, and it ended badly, get that shit in writing!!
For the first story, if OP is paying for part of the kids food and food with gluten that they can’t eat, I feel like the rest of the group should just help pay for her gluten free stuff. It would make things simple and I imagine it’d probably even out.
Exactly!
Yeah, I'm gluten free and it would probably even out price wise since gluten free items are often upcharged.
If the situation was reversed and one of their precious angels needed gluten-free and she didn't, you can bet they would demand her to pay her share.
On the mortgage, I think they would benefit from a "cohabitation contract" (Samboerkontrakt in Norwegian). Don't know what would be the equivalent other places, but it's an agreement for (unmarried) couples living together.
That way OP could get more of the security that they need, with a contract that specifies what happens if they decide to go separate ways. Like in a lease, "partner has X amount of time to find a new place", "this is what will be paid by who" and so on.
I'm Danish, and my partner and I made our own contract that we agreed was fair for the both of us when I moved into his rented apartment and could not be written on the lease officially. We agreed that in case we split I wouldn't leave him hanging to pay the rent alone. On the other hand, he wouldn't be able to kick me out without a warning (three months). In Denmark, I believe you get a right to the apartment after two years, so the homemade agreement would last until the two year period was over.
To Dalamà: Of course you would not be the drama. It is natural you think of the wellbeing of the children, but you would not help them if you forced yourself into a situation that was hurting yourself. You could help the parent looking into other options instead. Provide support without jeopardizing your own life.
You can't say "I'm just being honest" and then also "it was just a joke." I mean both of those phrases are usually used to excuse something sucky anyway, but you DEFINITELY can't have both!
For the first story, I have celiac disease which is basically a more dangerous version of gluten intolerance and I will say that there is hidden gluten in a lot of things which makes it very difficult to shop for especially for a trip like this (outings can be quite the ordeal bc a lot of planning is involved). Sharing food is not really an option either due to the risks of cross contamination especially when picky eater kids are involved. Gluten free stuff is typically more costly and I wouldn’t ask for my friends to pay for my special needs related food but if they expected me to pay for their kids food which I cannot partake in, I’d find that incredibly irrational. OP needs to stand their ground as their health and wallet is wholly more important. From what I understand, gluten intolerance isn’t like lactose intolerance where you can “risk it” once in a while, It’s typically best to avoid gluten as a whole bc the body really causes a lot of pain toward itself when ingested. Just some added info to support their side of things.
Especially if you're travelling outside your country. We went overseas in 2023 and, no matter how much research you do into gluten free dining, it might mean there is only one GF option
You can "risk it" with gluten intolerance and it's greatly tied to your mental health and how you're doing in general. I can eat a small amount of gluten (and honestly it depends on how gluteny it is, some pizzas I can't go near while others I can eat) with just bloating if I'm doing well mentally, but if I know I'm off gluten will cause me pain even if it's something like a beer
I've got family with celiacs and it's so rough. You know how mad I got when I found out basic stuff tends to use wheat as an emulsifier. TOMATO SOUP. Like what?
@@NekoShogun I know! you have to read the ingredients list so carefully.
With the mortgage payments one: I think I do understand where OP is coming from. My partner and I had the opposite dynamic where I owned the house and they moved in. I said they shouldn't pay rent because 1. I had already factored in that my salary would cover it. 2. If we did break up, I still have a house and they have to find somewhere to live. And 3. We wanted to buy somewhere together - so after years of renting (and therefore not saving much), it gave them a chance to save that money instead. Three years down the line were now buying somewhere together that we can contribute to equally.
The caveat being; we spoke about all this in length before we did anything and it was my idea for me to keep covering the mortgage cost.
All this to say, I can see both sides. Paying off something that would never be yours is hard to wrap your head around when it comes to partner dynamics. I'd never expect a partner to pay of a car loan for me even if I gave them lifts in said car? But I also see that especially if take home pay is similar, and your plan is long-term, then it doesn't make any difference if you would be renting instead? Hard one!!
The mortgage story- I feel like paying rent to a landlord is completely different! With a landlord you're expecting to only be making those payments short-term, but with a partner you're expecting to live together for the foreseeable future. How long are we saying a couple has to live together until it's considered ok to put both of them on the mortgage?
Having no stake in the place she lives is a slippery slope for financial abuse and I worry that should they split up later on she's in a tricky situation where she has to prove she contributed to the household in other ways. I also wonder how her credit might be affected by years of no formalised rent payments, which again hurts her should she decide to leave.
I do also think her partner needs to do more to meet in the middle here! Her concerns are so valid even if shes not going about them in the right way :(
She’s not suggesting that she buys into the house in a real way, she’s suggesting that she pays rent and if they break up he has to give her a huge payout. That’s making it very easy for her to financially abuse him.
There are a lot of possible solutions to this and all of them involve them speaking like adults and discussing their options with a lawyer. They’re both being immature and naive tbh, there’s no reason for it to be this complicated.
They’ve never even lived together, they’re still just dating, so it makes sense why she’s worried about having security. What doesn’t make sense is why she thinks she gets to worry about that, but he doesn’t because ‘she’d never leave him’.
I’ll never understand why people won’t just put a contract in place that benefits them both. The contract can change as time goes on to reflect their current relationship - obviously the terms would be different when they’re living together for the first time vs 20yrs on if they have kids for example.
I agree, her concerns are valid. However, her bf also has a point, she could breakup at any point in order to "claim" the mortgage money she paid. I feel like neither of them is trying to f*ck the other over, they just want to cover their asses, which is understandable. They could benefit from talking to a legal mediator, someone who knows the laws in their area and can help them draw up a "contract" that is fair.
Have posted in more detail separately but I agree. When I moved in with my then boyfriend, later fiancée, now husband, we faced a similar dilemma i.e. he had a mortgage on a flat and I did not own property (although had been saving to build a deposit).
Me moving in was already a net financial benefit to him as the bills and utilities he’d been solely responsible for were now split. However, we actively chose not to split the mortgage.
To protect both of us, we drafted a co-habitation agreement. It was as much to protect him from me having any claims on his flat if we split up, as to protect me from being kicked out and unable to access my belongings etc. It was useful to get us talking about finances and fears and values etc.
At that stage we were just trying to see whether we would work living together. If it didn’t work out and we split up then we wanted to be able to walk away cleanly with what we had each brought to the table.
We approached drafting the co-habitation agreement with the the mindset of loving each other and wanting to protect each other from potentially upset/angry/vengeful future selves if a split was not mutual and amicable. As we’d talked about marriage being something we’d both want if the relationship lasted, plus wanting to buy a larger flat / house together etc., that was the outcome we were hoping for. And it’s easier to think about what is fair and right when you’re in a good place and broken hearts are not involved.
By not contributing to the mortgage, we believed it would protect him from me having any potential claim on his equity in the flat. This then allowed me to put money that would have gone on rent/contributing to his mortgage into a savings account in my name instead.
As it all worked out (now married), the savings I was able to continue to build while living with him enabled me to put equity into the house we bought together - so we both benefited.
@@leggyegg2890 I think we're arguing the same point! As I said, how she is feeling is so valid, but how she's going about it isn't ok.
The way OP explained everything makes it feel like their partner isn't doing much to find a middle ground, just shooting down her ideas whilst she has very all or nothing, destructive ideas.
The whole situation really just does need better communication and compramise from both of them!
@@gracehagon4231 yeah you’re 100% right, I took your comment the wrong way, my bad! Sounds like neither of them have lived with a partner before, there’s a good chance they both had unrealistic expectations so it’s good they’re figuring all this out before she actually moves in.
Now I think about it I was also super stubborn and annoying the first time I moved in with a partner lmao so I’m sure they’ll figure it out, it’s just a learning curve
To Delamà: My heart goes out to you, peach. Hope I'm not overstepping, but I can't help but feel like you're one of the women expected to do all the care work in a family. I've come across it so many times, especially among the women who work for me as a paid carer (Personal Assistant / PA). Very often, they are looking after kids, sometimes disabled kids, as well as ageing parents and / or disabled parents. And they are doing paid work to care for themselves and their families. There is an expectation on women that they will take on emotional labour as well as care work, and often unpaid. I can understand that your family member must be devastated, and reaching out to get support. But I can't imagine that you simply stepping into a role that his late partner might have filled will help anyone in this situation. As Mama Shabaa says, there needs to be some clear problem-solving and conversation to get your family member the right kinds of supports, and bringing in more friends, neighbours, and family members may be the way to do it. You are already keeping a load of people alive and cared for, but you're just one human! I really hope you can both find the right support networks for the whole family. Sending queer auntie hugs from Ireland! xox
This was my first thought as well, you already have a full plate. I understand that the grieving partner may not feel equal to the task of being a single parent right away, but asking one person to essentially just step right into that other role doesn't actually help anyone.
Give only the help that you can give without sacrificing your other commitments and should the moment occur when this person complains that you aren't giving them enough.. walk away.
25:50 I was about to show my landlord side (I'm a good one, I swear! and only one because we rent two rooms of our home to my brother and his family), but is the gist of this story the BF wants OP to pay enough to cover half his mortgage and half the utilities/household supplies? So, first of all, this is a totally different situation than paying rent for an apartment. With an apartment, you need to pay the mortgage because the whole thing is a business, and business relies on making money, and if you're not paying enough to cover the mortgage, it's not making the landlord money.
In this situation, it's not a business (I hope not anyway), so she should only be paying for the additional expenses she is adding to the home: utilities, household supplies, food, and general wear and tear (or direct damage she accidentally causes).
Thank you, was looking for someone saying this.
If she's paying part of the mortgage, she is contributing to *his* equity.
It's different from paying a share of *rent*, in which case he would gain nothing except a reduction in his expenses.
But with a mortgage, he gets less expenses *AND* HER EQUITY.
And this is a Toxic Financial Power Dynamic and relationship poison.
Mortgage one - I have a different approach. I think both of them should benefit equally from moving in together. So let’s say she was paying 600 in rent, he is paying 1000 in mortgage payments. Let’s exclude bills for simplicity, if she payed him nothing towards the mortgage, she would be saving 600 from the new arrangement, he would save 0. if she pays half his mortgage he would be saving 500, while she only saves 100. So in this case she should give him 300, which he can put towards the mortgage or into savings, she also saves 300 which she can then put into stocks etc towards her savings. Obviously, they still would need to make rules/ contract, that she can’t get evicted without notice and that he has to do all the repairs a regular landlord would do.
Oooh.. I LIKE this solution!
yes yes yes
I think I remember commenting on that post and saying that I can understand both sides of the conversation. I wouldn’t contribute rent without a document stating that this is where I live. I moved in with my boyfriend, and I requested to have my name on something - if not the lease, at least a document that is legally accepted as proof of living (e.g. electricity bill). I understand the boyfriend not feeling trusted, but life is all about planning for unexpected circumstances. That would be like saying that taking a life insurance equals wanting someone to die. There must be a middle ground solution somewhere where they both benefit and contribute, and yours seem perfectly valid.
@@adeliecn1763 Oh yeah definitely! I realise I just assumed that a proof of living would be provided since where I grew up you need it to register with the council (which is compulsory) and they then add the address on your ID card. I’ve lived abroad but still forget that things work differently everywhere haha
This is a good compromise imo, my alternative would be that I (op in this case) would take responsibility for specific bills totaling whatever amount they agreed on regarding rent, that way he’s paying his mortgage and she’s paying for things she’s actually using that are like utilities. Some kind of tenant contract is needed regarding evictions/repairs at the very least.
The big part of this is that even if they got married later, regardless of if she was paying for the house, she would still not necessarily have a stake in it since he is the one who bought it into the marriage. In many jurisdictions, property that precedes the marriage is awarded to the person who owned it prior in the event of a divorce.
OP basically wants a pre-prenup, or what I guess I’d call a co-habitation agreement and I don’t think that’s unreasonable in general.
Lovely Shaaba, I'm loving these longer episodes. BUT I'd love for you to include timestamps for the start of each story. Sometimes ADHD brain zones out and I need to go back to restart. Sometimes a story doesn't interest me and I'd rather jump to the next one. Sometimes I just need to know how much attention span I need to manage for this one story. I think adding time stamps would be super helpful!
Celiac here. This may be different across the pond, but there are soooooooo many American foods that have gluten, and many more that have a cross contamination warning. Wheat is a cheap filler, and because very few companies own a majority of food stuffs there are few processing plants that are dedicated allergen free. Yay.
I think a partner being your landlord is asking for trouble. That is a situation ripe for financial abuse, and I see why she’s scared of having no security
I don’t think her proposal gives either of them more security. It gives her the opportunity to financially abuse him, because a break up would now cost him a lot of money. She also isn’t more secure because (I could be wrong) I don’t think this protects her from eviction.
A rental tenancy agreement would protect her and makes sense since they’ve never lived together - like Shaaba said, being on a mortgage together when you’ve never even lived together is a terrible idea. They’re still just dating.
My mum and her partner have an agreement where he pays rent, and it goes towards her mortgage. He’s buying in to the house, so if they break up he has a % of ownership relative to how much he’s paid. Obviously they have a contract in place, it’s not just a verbal agreement. This would also be a good option.
It seems like neither of these people have much experience living with a partner/sharing finances and aren’t negotiating well. OP’s current suggestion wouldn’t be fair to her partner but she absolutely deserves legal protection. They just need to communicate better and speak to a lawyer tbh
10:58 As a person who’s gluten free I would tell my friends I would not be paying for anyone’s food but my own and just buy my own food that’s gluten free.
As a gluten free person i do this when i go on trips myself.
Delama is 100% NTD. Women are so often encouraged to go above and beyond for their families at the expense of themselves. The request from this family member is clearly asking too much. How would Delama fulfill the responsibilities she already has to her own child and parents if she took this on as well? Maybe she could offer to do one day if it fits into her schedule. As unfortunate and challenging as it is for the bereaved dad, his childcare is now his sole responsibility.
On the group vacation story, I recently went on a girls’ trip with 2 good friends. The first couple of nights were at Niagara Falls, and my friends’ husbands were really interested in joining us for the first 2 nights because they had never seen the falls. We got a 3-bedroom rental and split it 5 ways (for the 5 people staying), rather than splitting it 3 ways (by the bedroom). I love my friends SO MUCH.
That’s what my friends and I would do too. If there are 5 people, divide by 5. A couple are still two separate people, so why should they count as one?!
That was actually my thought in the first story too. If the kids are old enough to eat ‘normal’ food (ie not babies or tiny children who eat almost nothing) then they should be counted in the bill division. Maybe as a half, depending on the age, but still count them.
A friend of mine was in a similar situation as the “paying the mortgage” OP and they drew up an agreement where she would deposit the same amount as his mortgage payments into a savings account. If they broke up, the savings account would be split, effectively paying back her 50% on the mortgage to him in one go and leaving her with the other half to move out, pay deposits, pay him out of shared furniture etc. If they ended up marrying (which they did), the saved money would be used to buy in her share of the house. Their marriage contract stated that any assets owned before the marriage would not be split in the event of divorce, but this agreement allowed her to buy a bigger stake in the house (plus any contributions she made towards the mortgage after marriage) which would mean that she was also building equity. I wouldn’t say it’s the same as paying a landlord’s mortgage though, because you do have way more protection and fewer risk factors that could jeopardise your living situation (like your landlord cheating or fighting constantly over how you load the dishwasher).
Not only did being told no about bringing the dog possibly given her the motivation to stand up for herself, but she actually did say that having to pay for a kennel for her dog was the reason she wanted to revisit how they split the bills. Kenneling a dog is very expensive, so it's likely that prior to this, the total cost of her share of the vacation was within her budget, and so sje didn't really mind that she was effectively paying more for food by having to buy some of her own while the parents weren't having to pay for their kid's special foods. However, adding a few hundred or more in kennel costs may have taken the total vacation cost well above her budget.
Mortgage one - I had some concerns about this too because I was potentially going to be buying my own house at the same time as my bf when we decided to move in together. We didn't want the complexity of both being in mortgage in case we broke up. We decided to calculate how much goes to equity vs other expenses (interest, insurance, taxes, etc) and I pay half the non-equity amount. Do the equity is 100% his but I do contribute in an otherwise "equal" way.
That is a good solution. I think there are multiple ways to do this setup but it is definitely important that both parties feel comfortable and equal. And that it also makes sense in terms of building something in common (as staying together long term is the goal). I do think different things will work for different couples.
My partner and I both had apartments and he then moved in with me, but he couldn’t rent out his apartment as he was renovating it (which is fine to live in oneself but not to rent out) so wasn’t benefiting from not living there apart from not having living costs (utilities etc). We figured out how much we each pay on our mortgage and what our common living costs are, and went based on that. We split all common costs but I paid all costs related to the building, housing tax, repairs, and anything that would increase the property value. He ended up contributing a bit to my mortgage but I also helped him continue to renovate his apartment (in time and labour, not money), which to us felt fair in terms of each having gained something when we sold our apartments to buy a house together. I think it is also important to factor in labour and time, not just financial contributing, when looking at who contributed what to property value.
Mortgage story: OP has a point. Going with the mortgage being $1000/month, she would be paying $500/month on his mortgage that goes toward his equity and he would save that $500/month plus keep the equity if she moves out later. So he would benefit twice over.
OP is not wanting to live there for free. She is saying she would split everything else. A house has more bills and even the comparable bills would most likely be higher than her apartment. It's just not as simple as saying her rent and his mortgage are the same so just split that 50/50.
Having owned both an apartment in the past and now a house, I don’t agree that utilities on a house are necessarily that much more expensive. It really depends on the size of the house, insulation, age, etc. They’d use more water and maybe more electricity and heating, but not necessarily that much more - definitely not twice the amount of living alone. Same with cost of cooking, internet, etc. Yes the overall bills in a house will probably be more than what OP paid in her apartment, but sharing higher bills with someone else can still be cheaper than paying bills alone.
The upkeep of a house is more expensive, especially if one owns the house versus renting, but that’s different from the ongoing monthly / quarterly bills.
By which I am not saying that OP needs to or should contribute to the mortgage. They both need to sit down and look at real figures, talk about it, maybe talk about future plans to live together in that house long term or buy another place together, and come to an agreement.
The mortgage issue IS unequal if he is asking her to put her money towards his mortgage for no security in return. He's budgeted his life to pay for that house as a part of his equity on his OWN. If I owned a house, and didn't need someone else's income to pay for my mortgage, I would not expect a partner I got with after the house was already purchased to pay part of my mortgage without us being married/under an equal legal contract. If you're expecting to be with this person for a long time, why would you want them to pay you to live with you? You're not providing a service, you love them. You can ask them to contribute to repairs etc for things they also use, groceries and other bills, but equity that you're already building regardless of whether they're there or not... nope. He can afford for her to not pay for the house, but she can't afford to not have a place to live. IT IS UNEQUAL. And a lot of women have experienced a complete loss in this way. It's not her insecurity. HE is not meeting HER at a place of security or offering options for her to be secure and safe with the equivalent of tenants' rights. She is the only one even offering a solution to her insecurities at all, unless he has offered a midway that covers her needs and she has rejected that contract, too. But I think it's selfish personally to own a home and expect your partner from after the house purchase to pay for the mortgage you've already budgeted for you on your own.
Alternate solution for the last one-if mortgage is 1000, for example, have each person contribute like 700/month. 1000 goes to mortgage, 400 goes to a savings account in her name, which would go to her if they break up, and if they don’t, could go to a shared expense like a wedding or nice vacation. This way she’s contributing really just maintainance costs for her time living there, she has increased financial security, the boyfriend gets a break on the mortgage, and hopefully they’ll end up sharing the house and the savings account.
I think for the second one the OP is fine with renting from a landlord bc thats a necessary thing, but feeling like theyre renting from their partner adds a dynamic to their relationship that she wouldnt have any protections for because theyre in a relationship. And i can totally understand that, but it seems like Shaaba's missing that? Maybe?
There is a huge difference between renting from a landlord and living with your partner. I feel it's very weird to say she's being the AH while he's refusing to put her name on the property. If she pays his mortgage and they break up, she has nothing to show for it. If she's renting, she knows that it's not hers, but she also doesn't have the same costs eg if something breaks, the landlord is responsible.
It also creates a massive inequality in the relationship. It gives him the opportunity to kick her out without any notice, while with renting she is protected by the contract. No matter how they decide to split the costs, it makes a lot of sense to draw up an agreement to assure she is protected as well. If anything, the fact that the boyfriend refuses would be a red flag.
Agreements are best made when you are friendly, not when you're fighting with each other.
On the first story - I’m assuming OP got into the situation gradually. She’s mentioned she’s known the other women since university, so I’m assuming that these holidays have been taking place over multiple years, with the kids coming along gradually (I’m thinking not all of the other five women had kids at the same time). That would mean that at first, there weren’t as many kids and OP would have still gotten a bedroom (or maybe they would taken turns on who gets the sofa-bed each holiday). But then, as more and more of them had kids, the situation got progressively worse until OP felt the need to speak up, and make this post.
Made this comment before we got to OP’s response 😂
I think its also a little bit of privilege on the friends part. I heard a story a while back about a wife asking not to move for her husband and he was mad because she moved many times before. A commenter pointed out that when you are given everything in a relationship it can seem unfair to be asked to treat your spouse/friend with equality. They benefit from the status quo and maliciously or not, they find it unfair to give up their perks. Hope the opposite stood her ground.
For Delama's (sorry, I don't know how to make the accent on the final a) situation, it sounds like the family member essentially needs someone to step in and become a co-parent with them. If that's what's needed, I think it would require joining households and all of them moving in together. If they're super close it's possible it could work, but it's a huge ask and from what she's said it doesn't sound like she feels they're that close
@@kiryanna i would also add that this arrangement could only rly work if the coparenting went both ways. as in not just op helping with the kids, but their dad also helping with her kid and parents.
You didn't ask, but in case this comes in handy in the future, I wanted to share.
If you're on mobile, most devices will bring up the accented letters if you long-press on the corresponding letter. In this case, the "a".
It's more complicated on a computer, but I'd say the easiest way is to Google it and copy+paste.
@@thumbsarehandy. I didn't think to ask, but I always love to learn a new thing. Thanks for sharing :)
For the moving in with boyfriend one, I wonder if it's more about the feeling of being a tenant in her partner's house rather than a shared home. Having said that, I don't think the response is the appropriate. From a purely financial perspective, moving in benefits both of them (except for the risk of being kicked out -which could be resolved by a legally binding tenancy agreement and security deposit situation). Further, whilst it's unreasonable to expect reimbursement for rent, if she contributes anything financially or labour wise to home renovations and repairs, that should definitely be recorded and either reimbursed for compensated with an equity stake.
I would advise OP to get a solicitor/ lawyer before moving in with her boyfriend. By moving into his house as a live in tenant, she runs the risk of becoming homeless. So I'd personally say ESH. X
@SpyderQueen1988 Agreed. Definitely needs to be done formally to cement her rights if the relationship ends. I would also question if it's supposed to be their long term solution. I don't think it's good to have a situation long term where only one person has ownership of the home. It raises a lot of red flags for power dynamics. Maybe they could live there with the goal of buying their own home together, or the option of her buying equity in his home should be addressed after a certain period. Honestly, that is outside my area of expertise so strongly agree on the benefits of working with a solicitor/lawyer who specialises in housing.
@@ktm9292 Well, the long term is automatically covered by common law or something else similar. A contract would supersede that, but if they were going to go contract it would renew for 6 month or a year, generally. They could just decide to do that until common law took over.
Honestly the whole thing sounds like there's way more going on and they really aren't communicating well. Especially when "pay me back everything I paid towards the mortgage if we break up" was what she gave to the internet where she probably thinks that's even slightly reasonable.
I really like some of the solutions others have suggested for the apartment situation because I know on the surface a 50/50 split of cost seems equal, but I don't think it's equitable. I'm thinking about it like this: If they weren't together, OP might (at least hypothetically), buy their own home at some point rather than continuing to pay rent to someone else, and by choosing to stay in this relationship, they won't be able to build wealth in that way.
I don’t think that is necessarily true. If the financial arrangement of living with the boyfriend is cheaper than OP renting alone, the difference can be saved to enable her to buy something later on, either together with her boyfriend or even alone. Aside from the emotional reasons, one of the benefits of living with a partner is to save money, either communal or each person for themselves.
@@s.a.4358 I totally see your point, but if she bought a house on her own or even if they bought one together, ALL of her monthly payment would be going towards a financial asset that she could sell and make back (some of) that money down the line. So you're right that it's a better deal than renting alone, but it would still put her behind if she hypothetically could buy her own property in the near future. (A big hypothetical I know.) BF is getting the better deal in a 50/50 split either way since he is also saving more per month while still paying off his mortgage at the same rate. Though obviously OP paying nothing would not be fair either.
@@ladyknightcreative True. To me they need to sit down and come to an agreement that feels equatable and correct to both, as well as helps OP save money for the future, so she is actually better off than continuing to rent on her own.
They could even think of non-financial ways to contribute, for example OP helping with some DIY, gardening or other time contribution which helps make the house a nice place to live. Just an idea - they need to maybe be a bit more creative than just thinking of mortgage and bills.
As a person who can’t eat gluten, I am not paying for anyone’s gluten food. Especially if they’re making me pay separately for my own food.
Story 1: honestly I feel like her friends are all taking the “she doesn’t have kids and we have more expenses than her, so she can foot some of our costs” approach.
Her not having kids doesn’t mean she has to cover yours, just bc you have the expense!
For the mortgage one, I think OP could reasonably ask for a lease agreement where she gains partial equity in the house as she pays into it. Shared equity doesn't have to be 50/50. Then, if they broke up, he'd have to refinance and pay out her share of the total equity, just like what happens in a divorce if one partner wants to keep the house
That’s also one of my thoughts. My now husband and I actually own unequal shares of our house, as we had different amounts of money to contribute to the purchase. It’s actually quite a common arrangement.
First story: I can *totally* see how this happened. 1 then 2 then all the friends had babies - which makes all those arrangements reasonable. But then the babies become kids and their needs grow and change but the arrangements don’t. Suggestions: OP gets their own room, cost is split based on family size, or kids all share a room (if ages etc make that possible). Food: OP can cost everything out to show the gluten-free cost vs kids’ stuff, or make an order for shared food and one for kids’ food and cost is split accordingly.
For the mortgage, I think it would make sense to look into what portion of the monthly payment is (long-term) just the interest rate? So OP would be paying something like 30% of the mortgage, for living there, while the boyfriend pays 70% for both living and owning (numbers pulled from thin air).
I was thinking of something like this too
That was my thought too. It's fair to ask her to pay half the interest, not fair to ask her to pay half the interest + equity.
I think if the OP ended the friednships in the first story, it wouldn't be over 1 disagreement. Sometimes you don't realize people you thought cared about you don't really care that much when you're constantly helping them or letting them have their way until you ask for some consideration or help. It seems like 1 disagreement, but it's an established pattern of expecting you to people please them, specifically. Them getting mad or dismissing you highlights the fact they don't really care about you, but more so what you do for them. Hopefully the friends come back and apologize and find a way forward, but if they're just expecting OP to shut up and drop it, then OP might want to leave the 'friend' group. They're using OP.
Okay second story there is a huge difference between paying a landlord rent and paying for someone else’s mortgage. Landlords and tenants have a contract that says the landlord can’t just kick them out without warning or reason. But if she helps pay the mortgage there’s nothing to say her bf can’t kick her out for no reason with no help. So that point you made is not illogical.
People who live in large apartment blocks aren't paying toward anyone's mortgage, they rent from a large corporation. Those are owned by very wealthy people. OP 2 has good points.If they split up, she has to find a new place to go and start paying rent again and her ex gets to go on and not lose all that money , AND he still has a home! He's just looking for someone to split the payments with.
Edit for 35:15 - The law is different in the US, Shaaba. People in relationships here will sometimes use a contract before they get married, to protect BOTH of them. Otherwise, the way US stuff works means one partner holds disproportionate power over the other.
Shaaba, you are missing a huge point on the mortgage one.
She wants to become equal partners with her partner.
She doesn't want to become The Tenant with her partner being The Landlord.
That's a horrible power dynamic to be in.
32:49 My dad lived with his ex for a year after breaking up because it was cheap. 😂 They were and are still friends.
I lived with my ex for a few months after our breakup because I just couldn't find a new place. No big drama at any point. I think it all depends on why the relationship ends. In my case the relationship had gradually degraded until we were effectively just friends, so there was no big rush, just the realisation that our lives would continue in different directions.
@durabelle Ya. If you date someone, you are probably good friends. No need to drop friendship along with the relationship.
@@18puppies91 Yep, assuming there's no cheating or abuse or whatever going on of course. But if it's just an amicable breakup with people that have grown apart, then there's no reason to kill the friendship. Having said that, I haven't actually been in contact with my ex for years now, so even the friendship got weaker over time. Still no drama, I could definitely have a friendly chat with him if we met at a party or something. But I now live in a different country and he moved far from my previous home town too, so we're not likely to both be there at the same time even visiting friends/family. (I still occasionally chat with his mum though 😃 But never about him, just other stuff.)
@@18puppies91Not necessarily. Things can get really messy. Out of 4 exes, I would only ever consider living with one after our breakup.
@armie4172 Ya, but I think that is when they do something that would also ruin a platonic relationship.
Loved your video 🫶🏼 advice for the Peach: it's not your responsibility to replace the mother. The father could ask his employer to work day shifts until he is settled or ask the parents of the kid's close friends if they could partly watch the kids. It shouldn't only be your 'sacrifice' especially when you already do so much. It's great you want to help but you need to care for yourself, your children and parents. Lots of love for you 🫶🏼
someone needs to make a ‘Shaaba out of Context’ compilation vid at some point.
And although this has nuthin to do with the vid and all, 😭 we need at least one…
To Dalamà: Not the drama in the slightest. You just cannot do what that relative is asking. He is asking for more than a full time job's commitment that would require you to ignore your own kid's needs for no compensation. I understand that he is going through a very hard time, but in no just world would that mean you need to be his servant. If you wanted to fulfill these requirements and he would allow you to move into the house without paying rent, and that was something you were comfortable with that, it's possible that something could be worked out, but you need to put on your own oxygen mask first.
I agree. I feel for the dad, who just lost his partner and doesn’t want his children to stay home alone at night on a consistent basis. He may even have limited other support around and/or limited financial means to give more compensation. I don’t want to call him an AH because it’s a hard situation all around. But that doesn’t mean Dalamà needs to go beyond what she is able to. It doesn’t sounds like she has the capacity time and energy wise, even if we ignore the financial aspect.
Yeah but she’s not dating her landlord or going into moving in with this person as a tenant. I wouldn’t feel secure in a place where a relationship issue is also a landlord-tenant issue.
Some people are so sensitive to gluten that they have to use separate plates, utensils, etc to avoid any cross contamination at all.
Also, gluten is in SO much. It isn't just things like bread and pasta. It is absolutely possible that the OP isn't sharing any food.
With the mortgage story I can't agree with Shaaba. There is a difference between paying rent to a stranger (that's how capitalism works) and paying a mortgage for someone who loves you. He was living there on his own with no money problem so she should pay only the difference in bills. Also without any agreement he can just throw her away any day because he is the owner. She's not protected in any way so she shouldn't take the costs.
For the last story for Delama, I find it weird that the 13 year olds cannot stay at home on their own? Do they really need a babysitter? I was babysitting other children when I was 12 years old, so I would think that 13 would be old enough to stay home by yourself. At 13 they may need someone to help with an evening meal, and the drive to and from school, but the whole "stay overnight with them" seems like a lot.
i understand that they may have had their other parent at home over the nights and it may be rly hard and contribute to the grief of all family members of that household that that parent is not there
well-adjusted, responsible 13 year olds, maybe.
traumatized 13-year-olds who may be dealing with random waves of strong emotions potentially leading to fights and risky behavior while also dealing with puberty? Probably not.
I was babysitting at 11, sure, and there are some 13 year olds I would trust alone or with much younger children -- but with their only-slightly younger sibling? no. And there are some 13 year olds I know who are allowed to stay home alone ONLY with house alarms on and cell phones active for parental checks on a GOOD day.
Yeah, in today's world of connectivity where dad is just a phone call away, this seems like a huge ask, especially if he's not going to pay her more than 30 measly bucks. I could understand him wanting some help with things like driving them to school and meal prep, but it definitely seems like there should be other people willing and able to help with those things. Does the school not have bussing services or a parent carpool AT ALL?? And he really doesn't know a single neighbor who would be willing to come over and make the kids dinner now and then?? And the average 13 year old should be able to use the microwave for freezer meals or leftovers and able to learn how to cook some easy things like grilled cheese and quesadillas with a bit of guidance. I was left home alone for several hours at a time along with my sibling when we were only barely into double digits. Dad's asking soooooo much and not willing to even pay for it. A babysitter would cost more than 30 bucks PER NIGHT, and that's without them cooking or driving the kids to school. Sheesh!
@@animeartist888 tbh this feels like a lot of judgment put onto ppl that r almost certainly deep in grief. i may agree with the premise of some of ur points but the language u used is honestly very harsh given the immediate details of the family unit being discussed
@@nyahtonks3914 Just because someone is grieving, doesn't give them the right to try to take advantage of others.
I have lost many people. I only just lost my father.
I'd NEVER treat another human being in this way. At least pay them minimum wage ffs
The third one and everyone's comments on it were interesting. I'm not super familiar with the laws here, but when my friend was in the OP's situation, they had to divide the costs in a way that it couldn't be interpreted that she was paying for his mortgage. If she was paying for it, then she would be buying a part of his property and they didn't want it. It isn't the same as paying for rent, because the bf isn't her landlord and in here the laws are set so the partners are somewhat responsible of each other financially. Like if you need support from the government, your live-in spouse's income effect the amount.
I think the fairest way to split it, would be that he pays the full amount of the mortgage, which is gaining his wealth. She could then save the amount she would be paying for rent. All running costs should be paid equally. Then if they broke up, he would have the house and she could have gained equal amount of assets. If they later chose to share their finances, she could buy her half of the house. If she pays half of the mortgage, she is just accumulating his wealth without getting anything in return. NTA.
You are literally just as delusional as her, holy crap 🤦🏼♀️ you are literally getting a house to live in…. Thats what your getting out of it! And it’s significantly cheaper than if you were paying rent on your own. Its the same situation as paying rent to a landlord. They own a house and you pay money to live there. Its that simple. If your partner doesnt want/need your money towards the mortgage then thats cool. No issues. But its 100% reasonable/normal/understandable if they asked you to pay part of the mortgage if your moving in to their house.
@@alyciageiss4504 I don't know why you call me delusional, as I was just explaining that where I come from, paying for a partner's mortgage will automatically give you ownership of the property, as mortgage is paying for the ownership of the property.
Being partners with someone isn't quite the same as being someone's tenant. It is kind of a unhealthy power balance, if it is so. The partner is already paying for the house, so he shouldn't be needing the OP's money for it.
If they both pay for the mortgage, it's the same as both saving equal amount to a savings account and only one of them getting to keep the money, if they break up.
@ because i dont understand how your not just looking at it as being equal to a situation where youd pay rent to a landlord. Your thinking makes no sense to me at all. When you pay rent your not getting anything in return regarding the owning property, other than being allowed to live there. Its the same thing. And yes if he already owned the house he shouldnt “need” the money to be able to pay the mortgage but thats not the point. He was already paying all utilities as well before. He shouldnt “need” money for those either but you still expect her to pay her share of those… its the same thing regarding the mortgage. Other than obv wanting to be with your partner a huge reason to move in together is for BOTH people to save on expenses. If the relationship works out and you get married then its your house also anyways and not an issue. If you do breakup you still saved yourself a shit ton of money during that time cus you would of been paying a landlord double the amount that you were contributing towards the mortgage. And if your worried that your partner is the type of person that would just kick you out onto the streets with no where else to go the second you broke up then maybe you should rethink your relationship.
I agree with the first part of your point - and I also live in a country where partners are assumed to give each other financial support, so I completely understand your logic. Where I live the type of relationship really matters though. If people are legally cohabitating (which can be done with someone other than a partner) it’s different from just being a couple living together without legally recognised relationship.
I don’t agree that OP shouldn’t contribute anything besides half the bills. It makes sense that bills are shared, as both OP and her boyfriend will use them, however if OP was not living with her boyfriend she’d also need to pay rent. So if she is only paying half the bills she is effectively living in the house almost for free. That is not fair to the boyfriend either. I mean, some couples might not have an issue with it, and that is fine too of course, but I can under that others may not like that arrangement.
@@alyciageiss4504 Honestly, I can't see how you see it equal to a situation where one would pay rent to a landlord, when a landlord is doing it to make money and one's spouse is supposedly not trying to make money out of the relationship.
Paying a mortgage is practically saving money for a house, but backwards. If there wasn't any mortgages, you'd have to save the money for a house before you bought it. It would make absolutely no sense to say to a partner that they have to save for the house too, but when there's enough money to buy it, it will be only yours, but they can live there as long as you're together.
The other expenses are about using things and some of them are going to grow with a second person, so it makes sense to divide them. House is an investment and why would one require their spouse to pay for investments the spouse doesn't have any claim over.
Even if one is not thinking their partner is going to kick them out immediately, if something happens, it is stupid not to prepare for that option, when making big decisions. Not all people are what they seem like and a break up might change a seemingly nice person.
The one thing I will say is that when you rent, you have a contract. That does provide you with at least some protection. So maybe letter writer and her boyfriend should draw up a rental contract. That would protect her but also keep things fair.
On the first story, i honestly don't understand why they don't leave the kids home with their partners for the girls trip. It gives me vibes of weaponized incompetence on the partner's sides. Can they not function without wifey home for two days?? I don't have kids yet but I'm planning to and i can imagine how nice it would be to be away from the kids a couple days a month and party with my friends. Then we're all without children to rack up the grocery bill and it would actually be fair for the gluten free OP to pay for their own gluten free items (I'm dairy free and i bring my own food regularly to hangouts). I'm just confused about the logistics of this whole thing.
We don't know their partners to say its weaponized incompetence they could have been working that day of the trip or doing something else that couod have hindered them from watching the children we really don't know .
@@yassine8935 This is a regular thing, though. They've had many chances over the years to make plans with the dads, but chose not to.
Maybe they enjoy having the kids know each other, maybe some have partners who work shifts, maybe it’s just something they all are okay with. Assuming it is weaponised incompetence, or in fact that they are all heterosexual or have a partner, is just an assumption. It’s also not the point of the story, as OP doesn’t have any issues with the kids being there.
I'm buying a house with inheritance money and my partner wants to make sure he's included. And because I dont want to take advantage of him and love him, I'm going to make sure his money is also going into an investment for him. So we're planning on having a contract that all the money he contributes will be his "share" in the house, vs whatever my presumably much larger percentage is. Then, if the house is ever sold, he'll get his percentage back. So he'll share in a loss or a gain.
I would feel scummy to take his money and give him no security in return, thats gross. The OP should also get a written rental agreement so she will at least have tenant's rights.
But in the mortgage one.. I was agreeing with you until the end but then I thought, if he had his mortgage paid off, then would he except her to pay rent or something?? If they stay together until he pays off his mortgage, then what happens? I mean I get both parts and I agree with most points made also from commenters but a part in me feels like he just wants financial aid in paying off his mortgage 😬
I get not wanting to pay on a morgage you don't have your name on. There's no security there if you were to get kicked out. If you're both on a lease then you can't just be kicked to the kerb legally speaking the way you can if everything is only in his name. My solution would be to devide bills a different way. He pays his morgage she pays their utilities like electric, water, trash ect. You can make things fiar without spltiiting things down the middle.
I mean if that makes her feel better, sure. But in the end the money the boyfriend is saving on utilities, he will put into the morgage. So it would be her paying "her" share of the morgage just with a couple extra steps.
I can't help but think she would argue that she's only using half of everything else so she shouldn't have to pay more there and it's just "lip service" whereas in reality money going towards those things in a different sort of split is still going towards the mortgage. Which is still bonkers because literally anything she pays is going to go towards the mortgage in some way because he was paying everything for the last seven years.
There's also nothing stopping them from drawing up a rental agreement. She already wants a pay-back contract. Why not just make one where you get to "the end of the month + 30 days" or something so you have a buffer? If she's paying half her current rent she can save up enough to easily have enough to get a new place if they break up fairly quickly.
If she owned her apartment or had her own house that she was giving up I could understand her more. But her attitude about not owning the house and not being secure makes no sense with her currently being a renter and not having any of that presently.
But how is it different from paying rent, if you're roommates? If you move into someone else's house, are you entitled to live there for free, because it's not yours?
If you want to be protected legally, then some kind of rental agreement seems valid, but not the "I get my money back if you break up with me" that OP suggested.
Like, sharing expenses when you're living with someone is definitely something that needs to be worked out. OP's mindset seems strange to me.
@ I agree but sometimes those extra steps make things feel different
@ Personally I would never be a roommate if my name wasn't on the lease or some other legal document. Nor would I ever ask someone else to be. It just isn't something I'm comfortable with. I agree there's things in her mind set that don't make sense to me. My point was just there's more options to splitting expenses than doing everything evenly down the middle because that's the 'most fair' as I feel like this kind of flattens the conversationa bit
Somebody fat-shamed ME on Threads this morning after I responded to somebody else about they false claim about trans people. I'm not that fat. Im almost two meters tall and weigh 86 kilograms (six feet, 190 pounds)
I manifest that they step on lego. grr. hope you have a good week x
They can't attack your facts, so they have to attack your looks 🙄 I'm so sorry ❤
I guess I’m blessed with good friends because the ones with kiddos always take care of those expenses and don’t treat the childless ones as those who need to pick up the slack. I do think OP needs to be more assertive in not being shoved to sleeping on a couch and paying for food for the kids when the friends won’t give back for gluten-free options. However, it sounds like the aholes are the entitled parents who think that they are owed special privileges because they have kids on the trip.
To Delamà: NTD. i live in CA and currently travel about 30-45 minutes to do pet drop ins and walks 3 times a week and spend about $60 in gas each week. I get paid more than enough to cover this but that's just commuting 3 days and it's double what's being offered to you and they're wanting you to commute 5 days a week, stay the night until sometime in the afternoon, go home, and then commute back for $30. That is not a fair request let alone all the other things going on in your life. Even if you were paid enough for gas, your time is also worth being paid for. For context, if i do an overnight for a pet (the owner is out of town and I'm the only one taking care of the pet) it's $100 per night and my prices are on the cheaper side.
On the mortgage one, this was something I felt strongly about as well when I moved in with my partner. I didn't want to pay equity in his home. I think part of it is that he bought the house alone so he can afford it alone. It's not the same as getting a more expensive apartment or house together, because you know you'll be sharing the cost. He has to pay that mortgage whether I live with him or not.
However, my partner earns 4x my salary on his own, so I only make 20% of the household income. His mortgage is 80% of my take home pay and I do work full time. We decided I'd pay 20% of our expenses (essentially all the groceries since I do all the cooking and a few small utilities). He still saves several hundred dollars every month because I moved in. For me it's only $200 cheaper than when I lived alone. Even if I started earning more I don't think I'd be comfortable paying for the mortgage, but I'd be willing to cover literally everything else. Maybe it's a symbolic difference but I get it.
The mortgage thing: either don't move in together (from a commitment phobe so several grains of salt), or sell the house and buy a condo together with the proceeds
Buying something together could be a good solution if OP has money to put towards a property purchase or if they are okay with unequal ownership, as the boyfriend would bring in (more) starting capital even if they equally share the mortgage. However it’s not always the best idea as the boyfriend selling his house and then buying something else together also costs money. Also depends how advantageous the boyfriend’s current mortgage is and what kind of mortgage they’d be able to get (interest rate, etc).
I think having a conversation about their long term plans is a good idea though. Was it the idea to buy together at some moment? Can they see themselves making the current house their (family) home in the mid-term future? Depending on their future plans it could make sense for OP to put money aside to buy together or even that they change the deed of the house at some given moment to make OP part owner. If they get married in the future that will also change things legally.
The rent system is already abusive to people with less money and no other choice and beneficial to the rich. Let's not make people's relationships like that. The woman in this situation would should not pay for the mortgage, if the man wanted her to live with him, he wouldn't ask for this because he would be paying the mortgage whether or not she lived there. If the man truly wanted to be with this woman he would be happy to take burdens off her back. Same if the genders were swapped, nobody should pay for other's mortgages.
If OP really wanted to live with her boyfriend, she shouldn’t want her partner to pay the largest portion of living costs (half the bills, the mortgage, all maintenance costs of a house) while she effectively lives there for free except for half the bills. Taking a burden of the other’s back should go both ways. Which definitely doesn’t have to be (only) financial, it can also include help with household tasks or house maintenance, DIY or renovation, support with things like administration, and so on. I understand that OP doesn’t want to contribute to the mortgage, and I also understand the boyfriend’s point of view. They need to maybe be more creative in finding a solution they both are comfortable with. What works for one couple will also necessarily work for another.
9:58 This was a communication break down from poor communication. Because OP connected the dog to the cost, the other side has shut down and is only gonna be in defense mode because to them, it does seem like OP is being petty. She's never brought it up until now, and even said, "well because of that (the dog not getting to come) we should reexamine the cost splitting." I get what OP did: she saw this as the perfect opportunity to finally stand up for herself, but because of the lack of communication in the past, they were blindsighted, and the only thing they can grasp onto is the dog.
Yep. The friends now see the dog as the single thing causing these demands, when in reality it was just the last straw. I totally get it from the OPs perspective, it's probably a lot easier to say something when it's a different kind of change rather than yet another child added to the group. I mean, I'd be afraid of insulting someone personally if I brought it up after little Lilyanna was born, if I'd already been "happily" paying for Olivia, Noah, Luca and Ava in the past 😂
(Personally I'd not go at all though if my dog wasn't welcome, but that's just me, I prefer dogs to most people.. Luckily none of my friends would have an issue with a dog, most of them have dogs of their own anyway.)
Paying Rent isn’t paying your landlord’s mortgage. It’s completely different.
Leave the kids and bring the dog
vibe 🐶
This is an on going thing with the first one, not "the first time they disagreed," Shaaba! OP is being taken advantage of. Those women should NOT expect their friend to pay for THEIR kids. They're pissed at her now so yeah, new friends,
Why shouldn't OP be able to become a legal tenant? When my bf moved into my rented flat he officially became my subtenant
happy monday shaaba !
happy monday, peach! x
The mortgage one could be less about it being paying for his mortgage and more the fact that this is his house- a separate feeling than your shared home. Like if there is something going on with the house it’s his final say, which also means you have less say which emotionally I understand. The argument about not paying is absolutely insane, but I think I get where your feelings are come from. I don’t think it’s a money thing at all tbh.
this is very random, but thank you for your videos :) i’ve been feeling a little rubbish as of late and your videos (especially the longer ones) have been such a comfort and a place to partially shut my brain off for a while
For the peach submission : what the family member is looking for is a full time Nanny, it’s not an okay thing to ask as a favour from anyone. That is a career, and I appreciate he is in a horrible position, but you don’t just ask someone to take up a full time job and compensate them £30 a week for it when that wouldn’t even cover the expenses.
Hi Shaaba and peaches. For mortgage story, I see your perspective but I have a different take. She is expressing it weird and could benefit from therapy for financial traumas she may have, but I think it's very normal to not want to live in a house with your partner and not feel like it's both of your spaces. That's the heart of the issue I'm hearing, not greed. If I were boyfriend and the heart to heart conversation went well, I'd offer a contract, like a cohabitation agreement, whereby as long as op is in the relationship she is effectively on the title, but if she leaves/cheats that title goes away. If boyfriend leaves her for his own reasons/not op's fault, then she loses the title but boyfriend must begin the process to repay op's contribution to the mortgage, not the utilities/daily living costs, and divide possessions fairly. This way Op is protected as well as Boyfriend. And especially in my fucked country(US), it's very dangerous not to have something in writing anyway, despite logic which sadly my government doesn't use.
i think OP with the moving in with her boyfriend story is perfectly in the right to say that she doesn't want to pay rent, rent is for tenants, your partner is not your tenant, rent is "you get to live here if you pay me", it has nothing directly to do with the morgages, once they are paid off you can still continue to rent them and earn money from them, it also ties in a lot that they might not be fully ready to move in together because she worries about possible eviction if there's ever an issue between them, although that has more to do with her support network than him specifically, he should understand that if he owns the place they are living in then that gives him power and she doesn't like that, it might help them to discuss at what point her name will be on the title too but i think the boyfriend's demands are worse, he gets a girlfriend in his house who pays her own expenses but it's not enough for him? why not just let her get used to living together first and then you can talk about helping with the morgage because when it comes down to it, she'll probably help pay it if something ever goes wrong, they both already get things out of living together but they are arguing about him wanting more out of it, it actually reminds me a lot about a fictional example i wrote involving two criminals getting mad at each other because one promised a lot of money to the other for their help but then he found out the profits were way bigger so he felt like he lost out on a lot of money but it was really about his feelings, if she had told him from the start he would've probably accepted the terms anyway. why does OP's boyfriend feel like it's so important she pays too? because sharing living expenses is different from paying each other rent, it can just be that he counts rent as living expenses and she sees it more like charging someone to live somewhere, personally as someone who is very far left i think the real discussion should be that accourding to very far left ideology it's wrong to charge someone for the place they call home or profit from other essential needs of other people, having a landlord is still perfectly fine because you need to live somewhere but the ultimate goal is to make housing a human right so no one will have to be in any nasty situations, and that might only come about if renting homes out is banned someday, which will only impact the rich negatively so no harm done, so if OP thinks like that without meaning to, then she would feel weird with the idea that her boyfriends wants to profit from her in such a way
I think that couple lives in the US. because clearly you, as a person in the UK, don’t understand what she means or why it’s a big deal.
Renting an apartment is paying a monthly amount to live there.
Paying half of someone your boyfriend’s mortgage on HIS house is something completely different.
That’s like… paying for the boyfriend’s expensive stuff that he chose to pay off gradually and that isn’t hers at all.
Remember how unfair it was in the previous situation mentioned where a friend was expected to help pay for what kids needed when they weren’t her kids?
This is sort of like that, but even with the person being her boyfriend… it still isn’t her responsibility to pay off what he chose take on the responsibility of.
Also he would have already signed a legal document/contract saying HE would pay off such amount in such amount of time in such monthly amount.
That would have specified that it was only his responsibility as the sole new owner of the house.
Also it’s like he’s charging her money to be allowed to continue being in a relationship with him!
Shared rent is fair especially if she’s on the lease, but it’s NOT ok to charge her half of HIS mortgage!
That’s also like him trying to be both a landlord and a boyfriend and that dynamic is so wrong.
You don’t even pay roommates rent in an apartment.
You pay someone who doesn’t live in the apartment, because it’s supposed to be your home and not the landlord’s home while you’re renting!
She should be paying for what she owns or rent a place as her home or just buy her own supplies each month.
Since she’s moving in with her boyfriend who owns a house, she should only have to pay for her own supplies each month and stuff like a hair catch for the shower (to prevent having to pay for a plumber for anything that might later need fixed because of her also living there).
She CAN offer to pay for something if she wants, but that’s different and should still go both ways to some extent.
(Like she can offer to pay for both their dinners out, but that doesn’t mean she should be expected pay for both every time)
This is your regular reminder that you're all awesome, beautiful and valid little peaches, just the way you are ❤🧡💛💚💙💜 Love you all ❤🧡💛💚💙💜 Stay safe everyone and remember that there are people out here that love you 💜💜💜💜💜💜
I think mortgage one is an ESH. I understand OP's point, and agree moving into someone else's house is way different than renting, but I think they've gone a bit too far in suggesting they're entitled to all of their money back if they break up. With how much utilities, food, etc. can cost, I think OP would be able to cover 50% of the total costs by paying those things instead of having to contribute to someone else's mortgage if that's such a hard line for them. If boyfriend is still mad at that, I think that suggests they should either keep living separately until they can work out a different situation or reconsider the relationship. But honestly if unequal contribution is the concern then I think utilities, food, and maybe insurance, gas, or pet expenses could easily even out with the mortgage.
Wow, story 1 is wow 😮
This sounds like the friends expect everyone to accommodate their kids.
I don’t think OP is petty here.
Sounds like the dog thing was the straw that broke the camels back. I can see why the friends think it’s retaliatory when actually it’s because OP has an additional cost to factor into plans now.
Agree OP should have raised this earlier.
This series has benefitted me SO MUCH in my real life as I am now so aware of precedents! Game changer!
The thing about the renting/moving in with boyfriend situation: I might of missed something but why is everyone saying OP has no problem renting from a landlord, therefore they clearly approve of paying off someone else’s mortgage? I don’t know about you but I certainly can’t afford to buy any kind of property. And not everyone is in a position to move in with parents or something. What else is OP supposed to do? They need somewhere to live.
I think its more that they wouldnt be changing their situation that much - contributing to someone else's mortgage either way - so it seems odd that that would a reason not to move in with the boyfriend.
@ yeah but to me that kind of argument is only valid if it’s a choice. I know technically you can choose not to pay rent and to deal with the consequences but for most people that’s not a fair or legitimate choice.
@@tmaxim2651 I think it is a choice to move in with the boyfriend or find somewhere else to live - definitely a difficult choice and I think she deserves sympathy for the situation, but a choice nonetheless. If that was her only conundrum id be much more sympathetic, but I think OP's also quite harsh on the boyfriend while putting herself above reproach for some reason...
@@aliflanagan7669 True. I just don't think that saying 'you're already paying a landlord so therefore you should have no issue with paying your boyfriend's mortgage' is the right logic, personally. I think she should pay (maybe not half the mortgage straight away but maybe a third or something) because I'm assuming the boyfriend isn't filthy rich and he's sharing a resource with her and they supposedly care for and respect each other.
"Child minder" instead of "babysitter" is sending me🤣
It's weird isn't it??? Child-minder: somebody who takes a few babies & toddlers into their home so parents can work
Babysitter: somebody who comes to the home of the (usually older) children for a night so the parents can party
It's the "shipment goes by car, while cargo goes on a ship" thing
Just to say as someone who has been diagnosed with coeliac disease for 15 years and has been gluten free all that time I would stick to buying my own food in a situation like the first story. It's not just about the food itself being 100% gluten free both in ingredients and manufacturing process but it's about cross contamination too. Sharing food around several gluten eating adults and children would not be safe for me to do and I would need to separate all my food even the non gluten containing items and keep it all prepared away from everybody until I'm sat down to eat it. This person should only be paying for their own gluten free food because even non gluten containing food may need to be bought in duplicates to ensure there is a non cross contaminated one available
For delama, I was a latch key kid by the time I was 12. The only thing I couldn’t do for myself was cook dinner (never been my strong suit). I think this type of ask needs to include a bigger community than just you. If there are no friends (either his or the kid’s) that can help, sometime social support is available through programs. They are not always thought of as an option and they aren’t always advertised but it would be worth looking into. With kids that age, maybe even a baby monitor/camera chat situation could be useful. Like when they get home from school they video call you and it’s just on as a bit of extra support so they don’t feel as alone. But definitely not the asshole as that is a huge ask and seems not quite possible.
“OP should say she was ‘just joking’ about buying the dress” this is the kind of wit I live for
No. 1: I have a son who is 20 and has autism. When we go away I take a whole lot of 2 minute noodles with us and his favourite chocolate bars for snacks because, wherever we go, it 's more expensive because the New Zealand dollar is so weak against most currencies. When we go out for dinner there is mostly something he likes to eat. My daughter-in-law has coeliac disease and there is a lot of stuff that she can't eat. She and my daughter are 26 and 27 so they pay for themselves but, when they were living at home, I would buy stuff that was gluten free as long as it didn't make any difference to what I was cooking (like pasta.)
For the last one, I think that since the kids are already 13 (depending where they live and the crime rate) transportation to school is such a big deal then they should either walk to school or go by bus. Or other forms of public transport. 13 is not that young unless these kids don’t really know how to do chores yet and are still very dependent. I think these guys can be alone at home for like four hours or there chores without issue. I know it sucks and these kids and the man do you need emotional support in this time, but it seems like this is one of those situations where the kid just has to become a little bit more of responsible and a little less dependent. (I say all these as a 17 year old who has been doing chores since i was 10.)
These videos make Mondays so much better :)
As someone who thankfully has a mortgage (finally managed to buy a house last year!) I’ve definitely considered on more than one occasion how I would go about having a room mate nowadays. I’m ace af, so in my case I’m thinking more in terms of literal room mate rather than like an SO, and probably in more short term bases. I finally kind of settled on the idea of them paying for their half of the utilities, plus whatever I would be paying in my escrow towards taxes and insurance. I would set that money aside for doing house repairs and emergencies (while personally still paying the typical amount for my mortgage and escrow on my own), so it would still be used to benefitting the space for the both of us, and it would be low enough that said person can save and work towards finding their own place.
But for me at least, I’m operating in the logic that I don’t want to put myself in a position where I’m dependent on another person’s income and then suddenly don’t have that anymore when they find another place or whatever. Likewise, the scenarios I’ve prepared this possibility for are never long term - it usually comes up when a friend is in a gap where they’re trying to find a new apartment or save towards a better housing situation, and said friend would usually not let me settle for them just paying their half of the utilities. So for me, asking for them to pay the amount of the escrow (like $200) so I can put it back for repairs is a good middle ground - but regardless of how I feel, this is something I would run past the other party first so we can reach an agreement.
Longer term arrangements, especially with long term partners, should likely be split evenly with the anticipation of the long term, while acknowledging nuances like large income differences, etc. I think the third OP should definitely have this conversation in more depth with their SO, and have a contract written out for what they agree on. Particularly it may help if they use a third party if possible.
I just wanna let you know that when you used the cat emoji with the meowing sound, my cat immediately responded with two meows of his own 😹
Thank you for giving us our weekly drama fix. Love your videos
Your little dance of the inconsiderate friends as the boat propeller splashes into OOP's face has made my week 😂
for the mortgage one - why cant they split the bills up so shes paying the water , gas ,etc and the boyfriend pays the mortgage, they would both be paying less in monthly expenses and she wouldn't be paying the mortgage
OP should tell the others that "as I am Gluten free I am opting out of the food you all eat and I will provide my own food". I would also be tempted to offer to organise the Air B&B so I could pick the property that suits all of you better. I am unable to eat gluten and it is very frustrating how expensive the food is, so you definately should not be having to buy food for their kids. You are massively subsidising the cost of these trips. That is unfair and frankly rude. Especially when you match it up with their attitude towards your dog plans.
Gluten is a protein in wheats and grains it’s in allot of things you wouldn’t think of
Thanks Shaaba, I live in Aotearoa and I look forward to getting home on a Monday so I can watch your AITA video. My day at work had me wound up and buzzing with tense energy and I was sure it would still be fizzing tomorrow but this gave me a great redirection for all that energy.
Sister in story 2 is now the focus of my pent up tension.
For the moving in, I think maybe Shaaba is a bit out of touch in regard to apartments. I've never known someone who actually owns their apartment (I'm in the US, so maybe it's a country thing, like it's less common here or something). Shaaba also says because of this, she doesn't see the difference between paying towards a landlord's mortgage and OPs boyfriend's mortgage. I think that inherently becomes a problem; by putting OPs partner in the same position as her current landlord makes a power imbalance immediately, I wouldn't feel secure with that. I would also feel weird about my partner being in that position.
The best compromise I could think of is maybe OP taking a greater share of the utilities/grocery costs. But IDK, there's probably a better compromise that I'm just not thinking of.
It also might be a thing where OP is dooming themselves a little bit by going in with the mindset that contributing to the mortgage would make her partner her landlord.
If I was paying part of someone's mortgage and getting nothing for it, I would feel like a tenant and not a partner.
The thought of someone holding that kind of power over me, especially as a woman, sounds awful. I would definitely want something in writing.
Also having it in writing also protects the homeowner from the OP too.
Shaaba is from the UK though, with a vastly different legal and regulatory system. When I moved to the US, I thought things were done weird here. But it makes a lot of sense, a lot of american legal protections *rely on contracts*.
Spicy shaaba immediately on point, first OP was being swindled!
😭🙏🏾 it do be spinny out there you are NOT wrong Shaaba-
Also I love your videos, I adore them 💜🩷💛 you make my day when I get home thank you for…uh, existing
Also to everyone who sees this comment:
You are loved by me, and if ur single I had now claimed u >:] and you Aro/aces shall have all the bread u desire (or any of ur snacks for those who can’t eat bread)
Love you have a good day or night and ur amazing
To Dalamà: what this family member is asking is equivalent to a full-time live-in nanny. It would be unreasonable to ask ANY one person to all of that, much less at expense to yourself! idk how close you are to this person as you didn't specify, and I understand that losing a spouse is difficult, but what he is asking of you is too much- and made downright impossible when you ALREADY have a kid AND disabled elderly parents who need care, not to mention two jobs on top of that! Your plate isn't just full, it's overflowing, dear. You are NTA for literally not being able to go past physical human limits, and from what I know as a disabled person myself, you are going to run yourself ragged at the rate you are going. With prolonged stress and not enough rest, the body wears down and eventually breaks, which is what happened to me. Please, I know it can be hard, but look out for yourself and your own wellbeing. We all think it cannot happen to us until one day it does.
I'm down for having a theme! I feel like a theme often emerges unintentionally anyway lol
House story: hard disagree, OP is NTD. She's right that it only benefits the bf. If she doesn't move in he's still paying the full mortgage, the only difference is slightly higher utilities. She should cover other expenses but not the mortgage.
Here at 2 views, but also need to go to sleep because early day tomorrow, so I will have to watch later. Have fun with this one, everyone!
Hopw you get some sleep! I feel that so much
So relatable omg
REAL
For story one, idk if I'd consider having difficulty speaking up for one's self for a little too long to be assholish behavior. If anything, it's trying extra hard NOT to be an asshole that ended up backfiring.