GF wants me to sign a lease agreement before I move in

[Scaramouche]

Hi Cornbread,
And I thought Starry eyed romance died with Charles Boyer?...You have destroyed my illusions about the deep South,"Gone with the Wind",Rhepp Butler,Scarlet O'Hara and all that....But unless you are hard up,can't cook or have some other pragmatic rationale why restrict your options?....Tactfully rightsize this relationship and become a Don Juan.

 

[Bible_Belt]

By asking someone to sign a contract, you are telling them that you are going to sue them if things go poorly.

 

[Divorced w 3]

By asking someone to sign a contract, you are telling them that you are going to sue them if things go poorly.

I think she’s operating from a place of legal ignorance and would still potentially be a common law year together but I can absolutely be wrong, just a gut feel. I think her intent is in the right spot but when it comes to matrimonial and estate law a lot of people make easy mistakes.

 

[BeExcellent]

By asking someone to sign a contract, you are telling them that you are going to sue them if things go poorly.

Not necessarily. I think she is thinking about this from a financial self preservation mindset, which I can understand. What she may not realize is that it does get muddy if say they get married. No state that I am aware of allows one spouse to evict the other, and living together without getting married is also a sticky wicket that way because it is not strictly and landlord/tenant interaction (so I'm not sure it would hold up in court.)

But that really is HER problem, not OP's. It's a trust question from her standpoint. Does she trust him enough that he won't screw her over financially?

What my friends who are getting married this weekend did, was she kept her house (in her sole name, not community property as it is wholly owned prior to marriage), she moved into HIS house, she signed a prenup about other assets and what happens if things don't work out, and she rented out her house to a tenant. He has a much greater net worth than her, and they both have grown children they wish to leave things to, and this makes sense.

My advice in this case would be not to move into her place, but I do understand that this creates undue costs that are avoided if y'all cohabitate (and I understand OP may not own his own place), but if you go half on rent/bills then the cost is what it is. A roof over your head is going to cost something anywhere you live. Sounds to me like she may have had a moocher somewhere in her past and she is now trying to protect herself.

My father always said that the time to draw up a partnership agreement or contract is when everyone is getting along, because everyone at that time expects things to go smoothly. The agreement outlines what happens if things sour, which no one expects going in, but the agreement needs to reflect what happens in the event that it does.

OP would you willingly sign a prenup at some point (assuming you two marry) stating that the house is her sole property independent of you no matter what (including divorce)? If so tell her that.

If you are unwilling to sign such a document, then she is correct to try and protect herself here.

 

[BadBoy89]

Please no incel or comments that are completely irrational & unreasonable.

Are SIMP comments ok?

 

[Scaramouche]

Not necessarily. I think she is thinking about this from a financial self preservation mindset, which I can understand. What she may not realize is that it does get muddy if say they get married. No state that I am aware of allows one spouse to evict the other, and living together without getting married is also a sticky wicket that way because it is not strictly and landlord/tenant interaction (so I'm not sure it would hold up in court.)

But that really is HER problem, not OP's. It's a trust question from her standpoint. Does she trust him enough that he won't screw her over financially?

What my friends who are getting married this weekend did, was she kept her house (in her sole name, not community property as it is wholly owned prior to marriage), she moved into HIS house, she signed a prenup about other assets and what happens if things don't work out, and she rented out her house to a tenant. He has a much greater net worth than her, and they both have grown children they wish to leave things to, and this makes sense.

My advice in this case would be not to move into her place, but I do understand that this creates undue costs that are avoided if y'all cohabitate (and I understand OP may not own his own place), but if you go half on rent/bills then the cost is what it is. A roof over your head is going to cost something anywhere you live. Sounds to me like she may have had a moocher somewhere in her past and she is now trying to protect herself.

My father always said that the time to draw up a partnership agreement or contract is when everyone is getting along, because everyone at that time expects things to go smoothly. The agreement outlines what happens if things sour, which no one expects going in, but the agreement needs to reflect what happens in the event that it does.

OP would you willingly sign a prenup at some point (assuming you two marry) stating that the house is her sole property independent of you no matter what (including divorce)? If so tell her that.

If you are unwilling to sign such a document, then she is correct to try and protect herself here.

Hi Be Excellent,
Whilst I defer to your legal qualifications and am sure all the above is good advice,whatever legal documents are signed Cornbread has no rights to stay where he is not welcome,the reality being that should she claim apprehended violence the Gendarmes will have him out of there quicker than a Ferret chased Rabbit out of his hole.

 

[Bokanovsky]

And it's very odd that she wants you to sign a lease agreement. Did some guy in her past screw her over?

I don't think it's particularly odd. She has probably figured that signing a lease agreement would give her plausible deniability (i.e. denying that she was in a common law relationship in case the OP tries to make a legal claim against her in the future). It may also be a mechanism to compel him to make contributions to house payments if she's concerned that he will be a deadbeat and just live there for free.

 

[BeExcellent]

Hi Be Excellent,
Whilst I defer to your legal qualifications and am sure all the above is good advice,whatever legal documents are signed Cornbread has no rights to stay where he is not welcome,the reality being that should she claim apprehended violence the Gendarmes will have him out of there quicker than a Ferret chased Rabbit out of his hole.

That is often NOT the case in many US jurisdictions unless an order of protection is filed, an even then police may be reticent or refuse to uphold it.

The legal issue is one of "domecile." If a man is domeciled at an address it is very tough to eject him from his home. You can't just leave a guy homeless. I know this well as a landlord. I cannot selectively evict a single tenant. If a couple is fighting I have no choice but to terminate the lease for all parties.

The same is true of married couples and domestic partners. The police and courts are wise to how much somebody cries wolf and it is not tolerated or appreciated at the enforcement level as a practical matter.

 

[Money & Muscle]

I like it when everyone supports the idea of a woman trying to protect herself financially from a man.

I like it even more when people are against the idea of a man trying to protect himself financially from a woman.

This place has a lot of closet feminists.

 

[BeExcellent]

I like it when everyone supports the idea of a woman trying to protect herself financially from a man.

I like it even more when people are against the idea of a man trying to protect himself financially from a woman.

This place has a lot of closet feminists.

It's not about gender. It's about asset protection. You would encourage a man to protect himself if he had accumulated assets prior to becoming involved with a woman who might assault his assets in the future.

I ALSO SUPPORT A MAN TO PROTECT HIMSELF in such a case. I support any person who has worked hard to create wealth independently to take steps to protect those assets from someone new who might try to waltz in and take away what that person worked so hard to accumulate before the partner arrived.

100%.

Marriage where the assets accumulate during the marriage are quite a different animal.

Here someone owns a house prior to getting involved with a relationship partner. The homeowmer is wise to protect themselves against any potential opportunist who comes along.

Nothing to do with gender. In OP's case the homeowner happens to be female, but could just as easily be male. I'd support anyone protect themselves from potential opportunists. Male or female.

 

[The Duke]

I think the most important thing at stake is the power dynamic of how a man leads and a woman follows/supports.

These 3 things will erode that dyanamic:

-Moving into her place.
-She has more money.
-She wants her guy to sign a legal agreement.

It's like stacking the deck against yourself.

 

[pipeman84]

What does your friend from this thread think? He sounds like a smart guy. #sarcasm

Seriously now, IMO you're wasting each others time. You've been dating for 2yrs and she's been pressing you since January with 'where is this going?' And after all this time you wonder if you'll survive living with her for 6 months?

I told her that I would move in after my lease ends and see if we survive 6 months.

If OP isn't the description of 2 people with no other options, forcing themselves to settle down, then I don't know what is.

 

[Divorced w 3]

It's not about gender. It's about asset protection. You would encourage a man to protect himself if he had accumulated assets prior to becoming involved with a woman who might assault his assets in the future.

I ALSO SUPPORT A MAN TO PROTECT HIMSELF in such a case. I support any person who has worked hard to create wealth independently to take steps to protect those assets from someone new who might try to waltz in and take away what that person worked so hard to accumulate before the partner arrived.

100%.

Marriage where the assets accumulate during the marriage are quite a different animal.

Here someone owns a house prior to getting involved with a relationship partner. The homeowmer is wise to protect themselves against any potential opportunist who comes along.

Nothing to do with gender. In OP's case the homeowner happens to be female, but could just as easily be male. I'd support anyone protect themselves from potential opportunists. Male or female.

Exactly. Let’s walk through this for a moment. Woman protects herself. Has something that for whatever reason belongs to her. Man created fire right why does he want his woman’s crap Isn’t that the mentality here in a nutshell? Men provide

 

[The Duke]

What does your friend from this thread think? He sounds like a smart guy. #sarcasm

Seriously now, IMO you're wasting each others time. You've been dating for 2yrs and she's been pressing you since January with 'where is this going?' And after all this time you wonder if you'll survive living with her for 6 months?

He has a valid point, living together changes things. How many women have you lived with? How did that go?

 

[pipeman84]

He has a valid point, living together changes things. How many women have you lived with? How did that go?

None. I also never dated a woman for 2 years. Unless we're talking kids under 18yrs old, I find the scenario in OP ridiculous. A grown ass man should be able to decide if he wants a future with a woman after 2-3 months of seeing her. Dating for 2 years and still having trepidation about moving in together sounds very weird to me.

 

[CornbreadFed]

I think the most important thing at stake is the power dynamic of how a man leads and a woman follows/supports.

These 3 things will erode that dyanamic:

-Moving into her place.
-She has more money.
-She wants her guy to sign a legal agreement.

It's like stacking the deck against yourself.

Then I just leave and find me a new girl if so be it. Women rule the dating world, you are accepting a losing game by interacting with a female regardless of how safe you play it.

 

[CornbreadFed]

None. I also never dated a woman for 2 years. Unless we're talking kids under 18yrs old, I find the scenario in OP ridiculous. A grown ass man should be able to decide if he wants a future with a woman after 2-3 months of seeing her. Dating for 2 years and still having trepidation about moving in together sounds very weird to me.

This is silly. I have had 6 girlfriends and that 2-3 month thing is completely wrong. Out of all 6, this is the only gf that I’ve considered moving in with. I grew up with a controlling bvtchy step mom that caused me to move out as soon as I turned 18. One of my biggest fears is feeling like I am imprisoned in my own house again. This girl passed all of my shvt tests and qualifications that I put on her, so this is nothing spontaneous or anything.

 

[The Duke]

Then I just leave and find me a new girl if so be it. Women rule the dating world, you are accepting a losing game by interacting with a female regardless of how safe you play it.

That's the right mindset. If it works you will know. If not, you aren't out much and free to leave.

 

[Murk]

Never been in this position, however I charged my Australian tenant £500 per month back in 2018/19. My recent ex GF I charged £300.

Mainly just to keep them accountable. I'd be very wary of paying off this girls mortgage for her. If it's cheaper than your current place go for it, but keep those savings in a high interest account. **** will go south, use this as a chance to save for your future. D*ck her down good for the foreseeable.

 

[FlirtLife]

I like it even more when people are against the idea of a man trying to protect himself financially from a woman.

What, specifically, are you talking about?