Joint Accounts & Expenditure

[Sceptre]

My daughter has been married for nearly two years and they had been together for 7 years before that. They have their own house and love each other very much.

The problem is, money.

They have always had their own money after paying equal amounts of their wages into a joint account to pay all the bills. My daughter has recently changed her job and is earning quite a bit less than she used to, and so her husband puts a bit more of his earnings into the joint, than she does. However, there are some months when she is down to £3 to last her until she is paid again.

His mother is quite well off and has recently given him £1000 on top of buying him a new laptop. Sadly, I’m not in a position to do the same for my daughter.

Back in the 70s, when you got married, two became one, and joint accounts meant just that.........what was earned was pooled and spent on both partners needs, what ever they might be. Today, it seems that “what’s yours is mine and what’s mine’s my own,” for the poorer partner in the relationship, at least in this case it seems to be.

Don’t get me wrong, if she asked him for some extra money to tide her over it would be forthcoming, but she would have to justify it, and he makes her feel bad by stating how low his bank balance is, (not).

Has anyone any ideas how to help her situation? Thanks.

[woofgang]

yep. Seriously. Stay well out of it.

[sapelesam]

I knew people in the 70's who had that arrangement. I've always thought pooling was best. Money is such a divisive thing.

[ummmm]

Tell her to talk to him.

[sapelesam]

I never understand how a relationship survives this arrangement.

[ummmm]

Nor me. What happens when children come along?

[sapelesam]

Exactly what I was thinking Ummmm. I know a wife who has to beg her husband for things for the children. He tells her he would give her more money if she gave him a son instead of the three daughters they have. Happy days.

[bednobs]

we rubbed along in that sort of arrangement for years and it suited us very well. When we movd into a bigger house in the last couple of years we went fully joint. the first arrangement worked very well because if i wanted to spend money on stuff he wouldnt approve of it was fine (and vice-versa) the fully joint works ok too

I cant believe they didnt work it out before she took a job with a paycut
is it household stuff that she needs to buy or stuff just for her? If just for her, she'll either need to talk to him or budget her own money better

[bednobs]

when children come along, you jsut put more in the joint account to cover their costs

[Bazile]

lol
//He tells her he would give her more money if she gave him a son instead of the three daughters they have.//

So he hasn't got anything to do with the gender ?

[New Judge]

Having your "own" money when in a marriage is bound to lead to division and rancour.

It is obvious that unless they do identical jobs, one partner is highly likely to earn more than the other. Although upon marriage the partners do not cease to be individuals, there needs to be a considerable commitment on both their parts which means their individuality must be forfeited to a degree. Marriage is (or should be!) a long term project. Throughout that term there will be ups and downs for both parties. What should happen, say, if your son-in-law found himself unemployed? What if your daughter became pregnant? Clearly a radical re-think of their financial arrangements would have to ensue. Your daughter has chosen to run a house which, had she been alone, she may not have been able to afford. She chose to do so because she entered into a partnership. My view (and it's only my view - not gospel) is that I believe it is the height of folly to exist as two separate parties financially when they have so many joint commitments. Single people usually do that (which is where the problem probably stems from as they spent a long time together before getting hitched). But they are no longer single and there is no need for them to behave as if they were.

What can you do about it? Nothing. It's for them to decide. You can only express your views, but I think you're on a dodgy wicket even to do that.

[sapelesam]

No, it was all her fault.

[EcclesCake]

We've never had a joint account. We have independent money from various sources and agreed on method of splitting household bills between us.

I think the pair of them need to sit down and have a proper talk about their finances.

[bednobs]

plus the forst arrangement give each one some independence - i built up some savings in my running away fund!

[sapelesam]

So you are an optimist Bednobs.

[Bazile]

bednobs - Are you still going to fleece him , on the divorce
settlement ?

[ummmm]

It's advice often given. Everyone, if possible, should have a running away fund. You never know what the future holds..

[Barmaid]

I think they need to have a chat. For whatever reason your daughter is now in the position where every last penny goes on her living expenses. She should talk to him on the basis that she is absolutely prepared to pay her share, however, at the current rate she is unable to continue because her entire income goes on her basics with nothing to spare, therefore they must downsize. He will then have MORE disposible income and they will both be happier.

[ubasses]

There is no right or wrong way, it has to be what suits each individual couple. However, how about adding their salaries together and seeing what percentage of the total each earns. Then agree that they pay the same percentage of the amount required to fund the joint account.

[Sceptre]

I totally agree with you, NJ. “Back in our day” living together before marriage was a no no. When I got married, I paid the mortgage because I was earning a regular wage while my husband was setting up his own business. That soon changed.

I am not going to get involved but wanted any ideas others might have to how she should broach it.

[Sceptre]

I take your point, Barmaid but they can’t downsize. They can afford to live but my daughter is living to afford, it doesn’t seem fair to me.