Cohabitation Agreement

Females responding would say it is definitely fair in fact they would also say that she should get more. Males responding would say that if it goes down 20% then she should owe you money.I am not a divorce lawyer but since you are in NY and you are a male you will be screwed either way-- no pun intended.

This is why they should get married first before they buy an apartment together.

Men are slobs so just living with a male should be worth more than than she puts into the down payment. I believe she should get at least half the profit if not more.

Sure its fair if he goes for it. He'd be a schmuck to, but I would add that any losses are shared 50/50 as well.

#1 That's a joke...right? Then what would be the point of the agreement if the profit is going to be split 50/50 after each of you gets what they put in initially. The purpose of the agreement is to protect one's interest...the deal proposed only benefits the person putting 20% down....that's clear. The risk that sucker would be taking far outways that of his so-called loving partner who's only risking 20%....why is she only risking 20% anyway? Also, keep in mind that 1% of $100 = $1 but 1% of $1million = $10,000....so the more the property actually costs the more screwed that sucker will be! And so I wish you both love and happiness <3

I think it is fair that you split the profits/losses 50-50- only because you are splitting the carrying costs and you are each getting back what you put in. Why would this not be fair from a $$ perspective?

Answer seems obvoius to me... since they are splitting the mortgage 50/50, then they should evenly split profits on that portion of the apt and closing costs underwritten by the mortgage. For the portion of the apt and closing costs paid for in cash (where the contributions are uneven), the profit split should be 80% / 20%.

Of course, he should ensure that both names are on the mortgage, as well as on the title.
Really, this couple needs a good lawyer to draw up something watertight.

#9's solution is (in my mind) absolutely the right and fair one.

#7 If it's an agreement between two business partners then of course it's about protecting one's interest in the investment. But if it's between two people in a relationship working towards the same common goal of creating a relationship maybe eventually a marriage/family together, then why does protecting the interest matter in the first place if you are getting what you put down back? If you are splitting all monthly expenses 50/50 then why not split the profit 50/50. If you want to make a profit in a business transaction then do it with someone else other than the person you are involved romantically with! Unless of course, it is mutually agreed between the parties and written in stone.

why not provide for some sort of return to the initial capital each puts up? E.g., calculate the total percentage return on the apartment, give that percentage return on the money each put up, and then split the rest of the profit 50/50.

Also, agreed with the party who said that if profit is split 50/50, loss should be too. Basically, it seems fair that profit should be based on the risk each is taking.

oops - #13 here. didn't realize #9 had suggested the same thing. good idea, #9.

#7 what's this whole thing about risk anyway? A couple likes an apartment. They move forward with it...they put down a deposit and maybe she can only do 20%. A lot of times the man puts a larger downpayment because he can. If he has a problem with it then she is not the partner for him and he should not have "risked" anything at all.

#14, what's wrog with him trying to protect his money, if things don't work out. The idea that you should just ignore the potential financial consequences of relationship decisions is the sort of outmoded thinking that gets lots of people into trouble when things eventually go south. It's a lot easier to come to decisions about these things when you're in love than when you're fighting.

Let's talk extremes: You have a couple, both work but only one of them is going to cover all of the downpayment and closing costs assuming all the risk, they will however cover the monthly mortgage 50/50.....upon sale of the property should the one who contributed nothing initially and assumed no risk, benefit fully from the profit? Who would be dumb enough to agree to something like that?...get with it people this is the 21st century and prenups and the like are tools used by smart people to protect themselves. Long gone are the days when woman were stay at home moms giving up their own lives for the "family"...in those cases I say yes to 50/50 but with the rise of woman's lib and equality for all, woman now earn there own living which has given rise to these legal agreements. But play nice people! Don't be like the Donald...he's vicious with his prenups.

#17 I think that you are missing the point that the initial amount put down will be returned and then the rest is split evenly because they are paying monthly expenses evenly.#9 had a great suggestion. It's one thing if she is proposing that they split everything 50/50 without considering the downpayment.

#18 If you can read you would see that I even mentioned that they would be paying for the monthly mortgage 50/50...so it was taken into consideration....get some glasses and/or a brain! All successful people are rewarded for taking risks and a risk of 80/20 is uneven...resulting in uneven returns....I mean it doesn't take a rocket scientist.

I have a partnership agreement...it was decided on when my husband (then boyfriend) bought our coop. It's smart to do, while cool heads prevail (if forbid, you get to the point someday when they aren't). The most important thing for me was that we agreed to a third party setting the price and we would agree to it.

Case in point: I know for a fact, our apartment which was bought from a bank foreclosure because...the husband and wife were in a bitter divorce, everytime they got an offer, the husband accepted, the wife refused to...finally the husband couldn't take it anymore and walked away. Stopped paying everyting, the bank took it.

Of course things still can happen and everything can still be fought over, but I think having something set up early on helps.

You can tell who the male respondents are because they keep bringing the whole business point of view. If decisions in a relationship were made strictly on business terms then what's the point of being in a relationship. With matters of the heart....its almost always an uneven return. And women are the biggest risk takers!

#21, no one is suggesting that decisions should be made strictly on business terms. For instance, one can only hope that the very decision to live together was made because the two loved each other, see themselves having a future together, etc.

I think the only suggestion is that the specific decision about how to distribute gains and losses from the apartment (which is an intrinsically financial decision), in the event the couple breaks up, should be made with an eye toward the financial risk each is taking.

In addition, I take exception to your claim that women are the biggest risk-takers in matters of the heart. I have to think men risk being hurt just as much.

Good discussion points here but OP you should really consult with an attorney on this rather than rely on message boards. If you can't agree then each of you should get your own attorney, approach this as you would a prenup.

It would proabaly be easier if you were both married, but good that you're asking the question because too many times people go into something like this and end up getting screwed.

Definitely each one should consult with a separate attorney, but they still need to work out a basic plan first.

I'm not all mathy and stuff, but I think the amortization schedule (assuming a standard fixed-rate mortgage) should dictate what percentage of the paid-in equity (principal) is owned by each in any given month. So if the apartment is sold three months later, and there's a $10,000 net profit, it would be divided nearly 20/80. If 30 years later, it would come much closer to 50/50, but still not quite.

As a completely separate matter, they can determine what percentage of love, affection, and romance is owned by each in the relationship. No (amor)tization schedule for that. [I'm punny, not mathy, sorry]. Emotional giving and taking are never 50/50, and you shouldn't assume male-female roles determine which way the balance tips.

If it's not about the money then why is the lady trying to squeeeeeze as much as she can out of the deal? #22 Had it right...your talking about what is intrinsically a financial decision but yet want to use the "relationship"/"love" to claim 50% of the potential profit....as soon as the lady putting up 20% brings up the 50/50 split all of that "relationship"/"love" talk goes out the window....then it's about the harsh financial realties of life. It seems to me that the OP is trying to make out like a bandit! Beware guys...you know they're out there...just ask Donald Trump.

#27, they're not buying stock on margin and that's that until they sell. The downpayment is part of the buy, and so are the monthly mortgage payments. She's right to not accept a 20/80 split; he's right not to accept a 50/50 split. There's an equitable middle. This would be the same if two business partners bought an investment property with partial financing.

#27 If she is paying 50/50 of monthly expenses, how is she trying to sqeeze as much as she can out of the deal? These monthly expenses can add up immensely in NYC. It would be equal if he pays 80% of the monthly expenses and she pays 20%. This way they can definitely split everything 80/20!

Is the guy, who is putting up the 80%, also putting up 50% toward the monthly mortgage? If yes, that guy is getting into a bad deal....because he's risking so much more initially to close on the property then he will also be paying 50% of the monthly mortage payments during the time they reside in said residence.

#30 Maybe you're right. And she is getting into a bad deal because the guy she is committed to and is buying a place with is only interested in making this a business deal!!!!

Folks, this IS a business deal. It would be the same thing if they were married, and marriage in the traditional sense is a economic institution. We can sit here and go on idealistically about how love conquors all but this isn't about that.

Although we're told that both parties will split the costs, our legal system recognizes the value associated with housework, which is why alimony is paid to women who were stay-at-home moms and housewives. How this may figure into the deal, we don't know.

To OP - I think you are getting a pretty good deal with this woman. Four months into my relationship with my husband, he asked me to move into his 2 bedroom apt. in the East 60's. He was a successsful investment banker and I was not. He never asked me for one penny and I never offered. We were married 2 years later. Just another perspective.

I'm with you #33 - this guy wants a business partner who also fulfills the role of live-in girlfriend. She is getting a raw deal all the way around. What a cheapskate!!Too many guys in NY to put up with this sort of petty dribble.

these women expect it all these days and most of them cant even cook. Give me a foreign woman any day of the week. Sure, they're greedy too, but they do honor traditional roles.

I'm not sure I understand, #33 and #34 - are you saying that men should pay women to be their live-in girlfriends? There's another name for that sort of arrangement and, in every state but Nevada, it's illegal.

Successful, ambitious women with their own careers often prefer to pay for a share of these things anyway.

Not saying that at all #36 and I am a successful attorney - but this guy is focused purely on the business arrangement and obviously is in a better financial position than his girlfriend. Helping each other out is an important part of a relationship not taking advantage of someone who may at this point in time be making less $. She's crazy to move in with this guy and even crazier to purchase an apt. with him. I predict this relationship will not survive the negotiation of the co-habitation agreement. He should do what it takes to make the realtionship work - she obviously cannot afford more than the 20% downpayment and some women wouldn't even consider this arrangement.

I agree whole heartedly with above poster - this guy is a weasel who wants it all. He is supposed to be in love with this woman - so marry her and forget all this co-habitation garbage. If he is willing to buy a home with her he should be willing to marry her. She needs to read this guy the riot act.

I agree with the above 2 posters 100%. #33/37 was in a different situation where the guy ALREADY owned his place and she just moved in.

Though we don't know about the relationship between these two, in my view if you're willing to spend that much $$ on buying a new place together - and effort towards figuring out how to allocate profits - you might as well get married...would be easier from an emotional and legal standpoint. Otherwise either live apart or have one person buy; then split the mortgage when you're ready to settle down.

The guy in this relationship seems like a real penny pinching jerk. She should get a guy who is not so cheap.

#40 I think the chick in this story is a money hungry gold digger! She's not exposed to much risk but wants 50/50 of the profit...how greedy and stupid is that! Yeah, and to the one's who say 50/50 is fine....enjoy your bitter divorce when your respective wives or husbands drag you into court to take everything you've got and you have to duke it out as mortal enemies! Remember people approximately 50% of marriages (although the OP doesn't seem to be married yet) end in divorce and many of them wind up being nasty separations despite the fact that they were once love birds. At this point in the game I think that they are making the right decision in setting up an agreement....but it has to be fair (non of that 50/50 bull especially in light of the circumstances) ....and they definitely should not allow this to strain their relationship. Good luck!

I just want to say thank you to all who respondend to my posting. I just want to clarify that I am not money hungry as I make good money on my own and do not need him for money. I just wanted to see if someone can explain to me how paying the monthly expenses 50/50 and splitting the profit 50/50 only AFTER he gets back what he put in to begin with was unfair. The whole risk thing is insignificant to me. If I was looking at it like that from the beginning I would have never gone through with the deal because 80/20 is not a fair split. Quite frankly, I would have waited longer to be able to put down a bigger deposit. Thanks to all again.

#42/OP, try to ignore the embittered and antagonistic posters here. I think the best explanation for why the 50/50 split after returning the initial investment is unfair to your boyfriend is that it doesn't allow for a pro-rata return on that initial investment as well. I think if you tweak things in the way post #9 suggests, you'll have a fair deal that you should both be able to live with.

#43, Thank you. Unfortunately, I understand this now. And it's not that I didn't understand it before, but if you are with someone for almost 10 years and you are buying your first home then the prorata return should have been something he should have brought up from the beginning. He knew the situation and still went with it. I would have preferred a less costly place to allow for the initial investment to be more equal. I feel like I've been dicked over. But it's too late for that now. It's all a lesson learned. I appreciate your posting.

If you've been with someone for 10 years and feel they are dicking you over that says worlds about your relationship.

#43 here again. I'm sorry to hear that you're feeling like you got screwed. I know from my own relationship that sometimes money matters can be hard to bring up; obviously, I don't know what your conversations were like, but I have to wonder if you and he just developed different expectations because no one was ever explicit about how it would work. I hope you're both able to work this out and enjoy the new apartment. Best of luck.

... and this just goes to show why #1 reason for divorce is money/finance.

The OP doesn't seem to understand why a 50/50 split on the profit wouldn't make sense....probably a blonde bimbo! (#43 seemed rational)

#41, that oft-quoted stat that "50% of all marriages end in divorce" is wrong. The year in which that number was calculated there were twice as many marriages as divorces, that doesn't mean that the same people getting married were getting divorced. As a matter of fact, a recent study was conducted by a noted think tank that shows that the divorce rate in the US has actually DECLINED...

I know this has little to do with RE or this post but thought I'd mention it.

Sorry,call me a traditional woman but I think this guy has a lot of nerve. He has been with this woman for over 10 years and he is actually doing this to her. I can't stand men like this - if I were her I would cut the best deal I could with him and move out. Sounds like she will be just fine and can CERTAINLY do better than this "skin flint". He will probably ask for his share of her frequent flier miles!

The two people should split up because if there isn't trust in your relationship than why are you together. Ten years together and you are still concerned about what will happen when you split...

I think this relationship is definitely problematic. 10 years together and instead of getting married, they are buying an apartment and it doesn't sound like they are even talking about marriage.

uhh. . .lady I think he is not only a pennypincher with you (his 10 year lover), but not sure how much he really loves you!

Did he need your additional 20% downpayment and could he have qualified for financing without your 50% contribution to the monthly carrying costs. If not, then you enabled him to make this investment in the first place and that is worth something, actually a lot. You sound like a reasonable person who doesn't undertand why someone you are in a long term relationship with is "nickeling and diming" you like this. I don't understand it either - this should be a happy time for a couple - purchasing their first home together. He has turned it into a nightmare and upset you. I know it is easier said than done but I would start planning my exit from this relationship.

Oh boy, OP ignore the noise. I think it sounds like you got your answer, don't let people put FUD (Fear Uncertainty Doubt) in your head.