To be annoyed I’m not in partners will????

DD should care for him or lose her inheritance. DS doesn't have to care for him but gets his inheritance regardless? I was eldest daughter with an older brother, younger sister and brother. My father neglected all but the oldest son. This oldest son did nothing for father but father was expected to give brother free board/free use of car/a place to hold poker parties (this brother is wealthy from overseas jobs). When father got dementia, who did he expect to rush in and care for him - oh, that would be me. I did it at huge costs to me health wise. It is just not on that a daughter's inheritance depends on caring for her parent while the son runs off into the sun with his inheritance unencumbered.

Yes, I know. Sorry - my post is not terribly clear. The long-term partner protection in Scotland is what I thought might be of relevance - but I'm now pretty certain that the OP is in England.

@TheRealBiscuit What's the reason you are not permitted to live in the house during your lifetime? Why did he rule that out? Surely if he has no plans to upgrade to a younger woman it will not affect him if you stay there when he is dead? Does he worry that you staying in the house will limit his children's financial freedom? Can you get a second or third job, to help get your own place?

OP is not a spouse, that’s what makes her situation so serious.

No, it’s the reality of entering a relationship with a large financial imbalance, and then further disadvantaging yourself by neither working nor agreeing a split of income to make up for not working.

If OP had a home and a career at the start of the relationship, and had kept it going, such that she now had good savings and pension provision, it wouldn’t matter a great deal that she wasn’t married because she’d be able to keep herself now.

The partner is still awful. He should want to, and I think had a moral obligation to, give her a lifetime interest in the house and leave her a significant chunk of cash.

Also you need someone on your side.

Well this is going to be an interesting conversation tonight isn’t it?

Stay calm but firm OP.

It’s a complete falsehood that you get the first hours advice for free generally.

Imagine you are a lawyer and get 6 slots for client appointments a week. You could easily fill those with hour appointments from people who want free advice. Law firms consider them to be loss leaders in that the client needs advice and are coming to test out different approaches by the person they might instruct, rather than the lawyer acting as quasi citizens advice.

We all have bills to pay and we know when we are being pumped for information under false pretences. Please don’t see a lawyer for an hour if you have no intention of using their services.

Good luck OP. Hope your talk with him goes well.

It's clear that you being provided for, is not something he cares about.

If it's not on the lesson plans, why do you think it's your job to exceed what the lesson plans say? I speak as a committed married person but it is not your role to exceed the lesson plan. I'm a Gran now but, as a young mother, I did complain about a teacher "teaching" my child things beyond what they were permitted to. My complaint was upheld. I urge you to stick to your lesson plan. Some of your pupils will likely have unmarried parents you'll be making anxious. A teacher once "taught" me around age 7 people who smoked cut 5 minutes off their life with every cigarette they smoked. After school, despite my mother not being a great mother, I ran home crying thinking she could die any time. I really think you should reflect on the fact some of your pupils will be made anxious by you exceeding your lesson plan by insinuating their unmarried parents are not doing what "you" think they should do.

He doesn't want to.

It's very clear that he wants to keep his money to himself.

He didn't marry her and the house is his. She said she felt like a bolt on to him.

This is the reality of having kids, without the protection of marriage.

Good luck for your talk with him tonight.
If it helps, write down the main points you want to address. If he starts being dismissive stay firm and stress this is very important to you.
If he mentions the word grabby, reply that not wanting to be destitute in old age is not grabby.

Regardless of what he says you should still carry out your plan to top up your pension and buy a property.
You are up shit creek but you still have a paddle.

OP...if you do manage to have a conversation, I'd be mentioning how disadvantaged your daughter will be in the current set up, if he should need care in the future - any money woild disappear rapidly..., and also question why he hasn't decided to put plans in place to enable you to stay in the house after his death.
Although considering he has made a Will change previously without your knowledge, I wouldn't put it past him to do it again in the future.. you need to look out for yourself, and do what you can whilst you're still able to tolerate living under the same roof as a man who you thought had your back

I've been thinking about this today @YourRealBiscuit and odder than the strange division between the kids (and that's odd enough), is the fact that you are being written out after previous inclusion. With the sums involved, a 1/3 to you and same each to DC was at least fair, even if not very sensible tax wise. Even a proper clause to allow you to stay in the house for the rest of your life would be something, but cutting you out? Somethings up. His comment about you outliving him " not happening" (when you're 10 years younger) makes me think that he's planning for a future that doesn't include you long term.

I know it's hard and you can't be feeling great but whatever else you do, prioritise your own wellbeing, because he's showing quite the opposite intent. This not how people who love you behave, at all.

Could your partner leave the house in trust for the children but give you the right to live in it for as long as you want? In that way it can't be sold out from under you.

It is generally against what the legal profession does to advise two people with competing interests. A good Solicitor generally advises you to take advice from a different firm

I am the daughter in this scenario and dh was the son.

Our respective mothers left us nothing

So - he wont marry you, and now he's cutting you out?

I do understand why he wants to pass his assets to his children. Fil always assumed that dh would get his share of his and mil’s estate when she passed. There was even a percentage for dgc

Dfil died 15 years before mil. Bil wrote out a new will (seen the will online and it is in his handwriting) a week before mil was diagnosed with dementia

Dh got nothing.

I do advise that if you want to give someone something after you have gone then put it in your will. Why would you assume that giving everything to someone else and then expect them to do what you didn’t

You can still look after everyone.

One thing I hope this solicitor advises him is the split between the children is straight down the middle for everything

It has to be asked, if he dies before dc are adults and dd gets money and DS gets the house.

Who is looking after the money for Dd and with a house and no money how will DS pay household bills that occur even if no one actually lives there. Where will that money come from?

Why would you stay living in the house and paying bills for a house you don’t own

I would be asking him these questions? Especially as he has written you out of his will as he thinks you are a “gold digger”

If you were a “gold digger” you must be really bad at it because you have given more than you have got back.

He should look in the mirror to see what a true gold digger looks like

Fine, but he needs to make sure there's a provision that she can live in the house for the duration of her lifetime. THEN the children can sell it.

I really think by not providing for you he's leaving his children in a vulnerable position should he die tomorrow or next week. He seems to assume he'll live to a ripe old age having had good health and not needing care of any kind.

I don't wish to appear blunt as I am not that kind of person but I am still not understanding how you know what's in his intended Will and I don't understand how you know his appointment has been moved - how were you able to "look and the appt had been made for earlier in the week then moved so I hadn't been told about it before?"

Thank you for saying that about the solicitor. I'm in Scotland, so wasn't sure whether it was the same.

After my husband died, I got an email from my solicitor to say that DH's daughter had phoned to say that her cheque had bounced. (My knees nearly gave way at that - I thought that someone must have accessed the account.)

It turned out that the bank had stopped the cheque because they erroneously thought that I was being defrauded. I sorted it out with a lengthy phone call to the bank customer services department and then asked the solicitor to let the daughter know that she'd get her money within 10 working days.

The solicitor hadn't kept the daughter's phone number because he's not allowed to act for anyone else.

I went in the same day, gave the solicitor's secretary the number and asked that the office phone on my behalf. A bit convoluted, but that was how it had to be done.