I want the house. AIBU?

Of course she has an insurable interest, it could be considered a family expense, but really would you bother?

You can also take a life insurance policy out on him. He doesn’t need to do it.

Get a policy for both of you to cover the cost of the house and add that to your household bills cost, so you’re both paying for them.

One of you dies, house paid off, split between survivor and the kids, everyone gets plenty. It’s honestly not that complicated.

Ah well then he’s knob and you should def call time on him.

Or he has misunderstood…

the house is only ever owned tenants in common. His % is left to his kids in equal parts, yours is left to yours in equal parts. Joint children benefit from both sides of the equation.

Both of you have a legal right to remain, to move, to see out your days. No one ‘just’ leaves it to the kids, he leaves his portion to a Trust in which you have a life interest and vice versa. Mirror wills are not required (and don’t work). It is also quite normal to have excess life insurance to give current needs.

if he won’t give the life interest then fuck that. If he doesn’t understand how these things work, that’s different.

Either party can decide to give up the life interest, but no one can be made to.

No one gets booted out. Assets from the life insurance don’t exist until a death. If things change in 5 years a will can be rewritten.

That’s not what will happen. To get the mortgage, he needs life insurance. If you find a bank who will do it without then you’re just as stupid as he is. Don’t buy a house with him without insurance. Then he’ll take it out.

It really doesn’t sound like he is the sort of man anyone with sense chooses for their life partner. And you do not at all sound like the right sort of person to be a step mum. Mistakes all round here.

Then he won’t get on the mortgage. It’s very usually a condition of getting a mortgage that you have life insurance.

I’m not talking about now, while he doesn’t have life insurance. I’m talking about when he has a mortgage and is required to have life insurance. Obviously.

Even if the bank doesn’t require it, you should. What idiot buys a house with someone without life insurance to cover the cost?

You’re both as clueless as each other.

You clearly do not understand how this works. Anyone who thinks an ex can sue for “lost CMS” should not be doing anything financial themselves.

Go and see a solicitor.

His life insurance would pay off the mortgage. You would then get half that when the house sold. You are getting something from him. Stop acting like an idiot, it isn’t a good look.

You would get half of a completely paid off house. Exactly the same as he would get if you died once insurance paid out and the house was sold and split. Or if you want to be really shitty about it then his kids can just get his share of whatever he paid in, and you keep all the rest of the equity that the life insurance pays for. But that’s really shitty and exactly why he should run a mile from
you.

Oh FFS. Then don’t buy a house there.

Buy a house somewhere else. Or don’t get involved with a man with kids if you’re going to complain about every aspect of it.

You want him to cut his children out, or take out separate insurance so that one gives you a free house and the his kids get none of it.

What you want is not fair and selfish. What you’re being told is the fair way to do it to protect everyone. Turning round now and saying “but I don’t want that house” is just stupid. It doesn’t change anything.

You don’t want to live there? Then go ahead and sell it, move but his kids are getting his share. He can still have life insurance to pay off the house. If it’s work £800k, then you’d walk away with £500k after it sold because the insurance would have paid off the bank and you get your deposit as well. That’s plenty. His kids would get their share.

But it seems that you really will not be happy until his kids are cut off. He should run a mile from you.

Exactly. It’s his choice and I absolutely wouldn’t be buying a house with him.

Because, once again you’ve misunderstood how these things work.

Buy your own house esp if you can afford to

don’t marry him or you will end up losing half if divorce

you are obv the richer one with common sense esp if he won’t take out life insurance or have a will

what parent wouldn’t do that - to look after their kids if they die young

I would almost say why are you still with this man ?

if you did buy a house together - his 50% needs to be split 4ways for his 4 kids so 25% each of his half - which is really 12.5% each of the house - this meaning your child will had 62.5% of the house profits when comes to sell it and divide the cost - your half and then his half into quarters so his own kids get 1/8 of the house

think that makes sense

yes no one wants to be a single parent. I didnt but I am now

So if you had a child or children from a previous relationship.. Are you honestly saying you would leave the £800k paid-up house to your new partner? The house that you have paid the large deposit into from liquidating an asset you owned before you were even with him?

What a load of cobblers.

Why are you expecting the same from him when your circumstances and responsibilities are completely different? You should be doing the same as him and leaving your share to your child, with stipulations about the surviving partner remaining living there (THAT is the fairest way for BOTH of you, many people have explained it!).

I'm not surprised he doesn't want to make a will if you are insisting he needs to leave everything to you and cut his kids out of his assets.

Just buy as tenants in common - hardly rocket science. Unless of course you want a grabby 'survivor takes all' way forward (which it seems to you). But red flags here - he needs to run for the hills

I have the feeling that you’re going to read that and still just say “well I want the house even if he pays into it for 30 years, so I’m going to go and live as a single mum instead.”

Totally pointless thread from someone who didn’t seek legal advice, didn’t consider the wider picture, made up things to worry about and kept going on about them as an excuse for getting everything (the ex suing which is literally not possible).

You want to deviate from the normal advice for people with kids from a previous relationship. So go and speak to a solicitor. But you’re not going to listen to anyone who doesn’t agree with you so totally pointless.

But is it fair that he pays into an asset that his children will not benefit from? If he leaves the house to you, he disinherits them. Whereas you can be provided for in terms of having a right to remain in the house for the rest of your life without his kids losing their inheritance.

He doesn’t have to be the beneficiary of your share. You can will to your own child.

No, he doesn’t. And you get the exact same. Literally, the exact same.

You die — your half of the house is left to your joint child, with him given the right to live in it until all kids are 21 (or whatever you choose). Then the house is sold and your kid gets half plus your deposit, he gets the other half minus your deposit.

He dies — his half of the house is left to all his kids (including your joint kid), with you given the right to live in it until all kids are 21 (or whatever you choose). Then the house is sold and all the kids split their half between them and you get the other half (plus the deposit).

It is literally exactly the same for both you, expect you get that bit extra because of the deposit (or your kid get it if you’re the one who dies).

This is a totally bog standard arrangement in blended family with previous kids. So everyone is protected and no kids end up cut out of the inheritance.

You are secure. You don’t lose anything. You don’t get kicked out. The ex can’t get anything. Your kid is secure. He is secure. His kids are secure.

You may be providing the deposit, but that doesn’t mean everything belongs to you. He will have an asset and it should be split between his kids to protect them. Your half should go to your kid. It’s all totally normal.

You are not being pushed aside or left with nothing. He is not coming out winning. Everything is fair.

I would not agree to your request

id agree to ringfence deposit
hold as tenants in common in unequal shares
right fir you to remain for x years
my share in trust to split between all children equally

Why would you?

Because the arrangement I’ve suggested is the bog standard arrangement when there are children from a previous relationship. It’s nothing new or exciting, it’s nothing offensive to you, it isn’t putting you at risk. Everyone is protected, everything is legal and all the kids inherit from their respective parents so they get what they should get (including yours).

You do it because that’s how you make it fair and safe for everyone. And because you love someone and want to live with them and share your life. But maintain security for children in death.

You are the one who wants to do something different from the norm. And different from all the advice for people in this situation.

You seem hell bent on the idea that he isn’t caring for you and you aren’t looked after, but you are. You just can’t have everything left to you. You are secure, you will have the home to live in, no ex is able to take anything from you, no one will be able to kick you out. You will be secure. But his kids will also be secure and get his share when you pass or choose to sell or your kid ages up - whatever benchmark to two of you decide on. You will be looked after, just not in the way you want because you “want the house.”

Thats not how it is usually done. Go and see a lawyer together, and find out. You won’t like it but this is how it’s done.

If you don’t like it then don’t do it. Live on your own. But it’s really really weird that you’ll give up a happy joint life together with your child just because you don’t want his kids to have his share when he dies…