Who is being unreasonable – home ownership, inheritance and children from previous relationships(111 Posts)
I have namechanged for this as I have some potentially identifying posts on here and want to keep this private.
DP and I have been together for 4 years. He has two DDs from a previous relationship. Him and his ex own a house together which they agreed to keep hold of until the youngest leaves primary school as it was just up the road and now the time has come to sell it.
He wants to buy house with me when he sells his house with his ex. As he lives in an expensive area of London where his DC will remain (his ex is wealthier than him) he can not afford to buy there alone and needs my salary in order to get a large enough mortgage. However, when talking about it he says that he would like to leave his share to his children and will not discuss having a clause that would allow me to remain there in the event of his death. I don’t have a problem with not inheriting from him but this does mean that if anything happened to him I would be out on my ear and I don’t fancy losing him and my home at the same time.
As a single person who has not owned a house before I qualify for a government scheme which would enable to part own a house with the share to buy scheme. Although this would not be as good as an investment opportunity it would mean that my home was secure no matter what happened to him. It would have to be in an area not as close to his DC as I can’t afford to do this there and there are no flats on the scheme available there.
I am not sure if this is relevant or not but I feel it may be. DP has always been financially secure. His parents are comfortably off and own two properties in expensive outright which he will one day inherit (he has one sister to share this with). He has always had very well paid jobs and is a just that bit older than me so was able to buy a house in an expensive area of London before houseprices went crazy. In contrasts my parents house was repossessed when I was 21 . I am now 34 and have saved up a small amount on my own but am not set to inherit anything. My pay is OK now but nowhere near his at my age.
He thinks I am being selfish and that he sure his children wouldn’t kick me out but I am not prepared to invest all I have and all I am ever likely to have in a property that isn’t secure. I am more concerned with security than making a profit.
To be clear I don’t think he is being unreasonable to put his DDs interests first but I think he is unreasonable to expect me to invest in a home that I would be forced to leave if he died when I have the option not to. He thinks that I am being selfish and that my refusal to buy with him on his terms is me stopping him living near his children.
Who is the unreasonable one here?
Well maybe neither of you are being unreasonable BUT I wouldn't buy a home with someone who wasn't prepared to buy it as joint tenants (where it goes to the survivor) or to at the very least leave me a life interest in their share.
Don't put yourself at risk here.
I understand him wanting to protect his kids but I think the normal thing is to have a lifetime interest for you and the kids inherit when you die or decide to move. Well that is what people I know seem to have done.
He is being unreasonable if I am understanding correctly. So you would financially invest in a home that would then belong to his children if he dies? What about your half of the house?
So he wants your money to buy a house near his children but doesn't care if you are forced out when they inherit and yes they can easily force a sale.
YADNBU. I would not buy with anyone with that kind of attitude.
YANBU. You're being incredibly practical and sensible, don't let him convince you otherwise.
I hate to jump to conclusions about someone based on one side of a story about one aspect of your relationship, but this does seem to indicate a not very nice side to your DP? I don't understand his reluctance to explore options with you that mean you could both be happy - his children would still inherit his half and you could have a home for life. Surely this would be best for everyone?
I'm sorry but it sounds like he just wants what he wants and he expects you
and your share of the deposit to facilitate what he wants with no regard to your financial security. Maybe i'm just a bit cynical and perhaps hes being thoughtless rather than selfish, but i wouldn't proceed down this road with him if i were you. Sorry, i'm sure it sucks.
If you are contributing too and named on the mortgage/deeds I doubt his kids will just be able to boot you out on his death anyway? But no yanbu.
You are not stopping him living anywhere - he doesn't earn enough to live where he wants to live. And that's his problem.
You would be seriously ill advised to go along with his scheme.
Stand back and consider what he is telling you about your relationship.
I would get my half of the house but I'd have to sell it in order for them to get theirs. Its likely that I'll be too old to get a mortgage at that age so I'd potentially have to leave my home which isn't ideal and i might not be able to buy elsewhere.
He should give you a life interest- speak to a solicitor.
Sorry - the only caveat to my previous post is if there is a large age difference between the two of you?
For example you mention him being older? If you are nearer to his kids age than to his age, maybe he's worried about dying and his kids effectively never inheriting because you outlive them? I still think he needs to consider your needs - but this could explain why hes less than keen?
However in that instance he needs to find a way to buy on his own - rather than expecting you to stump up half.
Could you see a lawyer together to try to find a solution that works for you both?
You are in a better position here, in that you can buy without him but he can't buy without you. I'd forge a path that makes sense for you and let him.join in if it works for you
No he's 7 years older than me. I hope his children outlive me by a long way
Definitely do not buy with him unless you have a lifetime interest in the house.
If they can force a sale then no way. I'm not sure of the legalities.
Bear in mind that he's presumably very unlikely to die in the near future (unless there's something you're not telling us about his health). You have a job, and if he does drop dead then you and the children would sell the house and you'd have half the equity and your salary with which to start again. As long as your fair share of the equity is preserved then I think you should live in the place that works best for you as a family.
HecateAntaia has made a good point. Ask him if he is sure they would let you stay until you die or wish to move then why won't he put that clause in writing. I suspect he will not answer that because deep down he does not care about you that much. My DH and I have so many provisions for each other on our death because we care about making sure the other is looked after the best we can.
Without a life interest no I would not do it.
Has he spoken to a solicitor? This can be quite simply arranged to protect you and to guarantee his children get their share (eventually).
His kids will own his share and you yours so they won't be able to kick you out. They won't be able to sell your half.
Check with a solicitor.
He should leave his share to you and get life insurance to cover the amount he would like to leave his children.
No way would I agree to his terms.
Out of interest, what does your DP expect to happen to your share of the house if you pre-decease him?
The thing is, this happens all the time and there is 100% a way to protect your interests (life interest, as every one has already said). The fact he's not prepared to do this speaks volumes, tbh - it's simple to do, protects all parties and with the growth in blended families it's really common too.
It's also exceptionally cheeky to 'need' your income to do this and to then not protect you in the event of his death. Yuck. YANBU.
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.