Hey guys,
After more than two years of living together, the woman I love broke up with me. Putting the emotional issues aside, there are some thorny practical problems as well. One of them is how to split remaining rental costs. When discussing this with my ex, she got upset at my idea of what was fair. I had already asked for advice on this to people around me, but they may also be partial, so let me ask for your judgment in the fairest of ways, by sketching the situation without giving away which side is which:
We met in 2011 as two international doctoral students in the same place and soon fell in love and started a relationship. We wanted to move in together and, in July 2012, got into an apartment with a rent that would be too high for either of us, but ok to share. The contract stipulated that we had to remain tenants for at least 3 years before being able to leave (with a 3 months' notice) and we had enough faith in our relationship to commit to it.
One of us had to go abroad for two periods of 6 months for mobility requirements of the PhD. We would visit each other every other weekend. The partner abroad would have a smaller room or studio, which was covered by study funds, and the other would stay in the apartment, but rental costs were always shared. There had been discussion about leaving the apartment or looking for another roommate for the time being, but this wasn't followed up.
The relationship went downhill a few months ago and finally it ended, two weeks before the last mobility period would end. Currently, one of us is staying in the apartment and one in a studio. We cannot legally end the contract for the apartment until July 2015, but it's not financially possible to pay the rent until then, so we will need to end the contract, with 3 months notice, and pay a 1 month fine. The rental cost of the studio is 400 euros a month and the apartment is 900 euros a month. We both have the same salary, but the PhD funding of the one of us who stays in the studio is uncertain for November onwards.
Now, let's say there are three scenarios with their own reasonings:
1. The contract has two equal partners who are equally responsible for the rent of the apartment and all remaining costs (3 months + 1 month fine) should be split in half. This is fair legally and as a matter of principle
2. The partner who paid for the apartment when abroad and who has uncertain future funding should be cut some slack and something along the lines of equal monthly costs for the coming three months (400 for the studio + 250 for the apartment, to equal the 900-250-650 for the one in the apartment) and split costs for the fine is more reasonable
3. The fine should be split, but the three remaining months are not the responsibility of the partner in the studio. He/She has paid enough extra costs when abroad, has uncertain funding and does not live in the apartment anymore and should not have to pay for the luxury that the other can still enjoy for 3 more months.
Which one would you say is most reasonable/fair? I'm really curious what you guys think. Sorry to bother you with my personal shit like that, but I would really appreciate some input from people other than the ones close to me, who are likely to be biased. Thanks!
After more than two years of living together, the woman I love broke up with me. Putting the emotional issues aside, there are some thorny practical problems as well. One of them is how to split remaining rental costs. When discussing this with my ex, she got upset at my idea of what was fair. I had already asked for advice on this to people around me, but they may also be partial, so let me ask for your judgment in the fairest of ways, by sketching the situation without giving away which side is which:
We met in 2011 as two international doctoral students in the same place and soon fell in love and started a relationship. We wanted to move in together and, in July 2012, got into an apartment with a rent that would be too high for either of us, but ok to share. The contract stipulated that we had to remain tenants for at least 3 years before being able to leave (with a 3 months' notice) and we had enough faith in our relationship to commit to it.
One of us had to go abroad for two periods of 6 months for mobility requirements of the PhD. We would visit each other every other weekend. The partner abroad would have a smaller room or studio, which was covered by study funds, and the other would stay in the apartment, but rental costs were always shared. There had been discussion about leaving the apartment or looking for another roommate for the time being, but this wasn't followed up.
The relationship went downhill a few months ago and finally it ended, two weeks before the last mobility period would end. Currently, one of us is staying in the apartment and one in a studio. We cannot legally end the contract for the apartment until July 2015, but it's not financially possible to pay the rent until then, so we will need to end the contract, with 3 months notice, and pay a 1 month fine. The rental cost of the studio is 400 euros a month and the apartment is 900 euros a month. We both have the same salary, but the PhD funding of the one of us who stays in the studio is uncertain for November onwards.
Now, let's say there are three scenarios with their own reasonings:
1. The contract has two equal partners who are equally responsible for the rent of the apartment and all remaining costs (3 months + 1 month fine) should be split in half. This is fair legally and as a matter of principle
2. The partner who paid for the apartment when abroad and who has uncertain future funding should be cut some slack and something along the lines of equal monthly costs for the coming three months (400 for the studio + 250 for the apartment, to equal the 900-250-650 for the one in the apartment) and split costs for the fine is more reasonable
3. The fine should be split, but the three remaining months are not the responsibility of the partner in the studio. He/She has paid enough extra costs when abroad, has uncertain funding and does not live in the apartment anymore and should not have to pay for the luxury that the other can still enjoy for 3 more months.
Which one would you say is most reasonable/fair? I'm really curious what you guys think. Sorry to bother you with my personal shit like that, but I would really appreciate some input from people other than the ones close to me, who are likely to be biased. Thanks!
Comment