AIBU to feel uneasy about my partner's inheritance plan?

Keep your own house.

He will rightly look out for his children, I rightly will look out for myself.

And that's the problem, isn't it. Your interests are in conflict and neither will bend, making the idea of moving in together, problematic at best.

I also wouldn't agree to anything that allowed others to control what I did with my own home I was living in, it creates instability and resentment. It has to be your home whilst you live in it. I get this. I do have a shared house situation similar to this, and it means you are dependent on the good relations continuing after the main link to you is gone, and you don't want that, it's too fragile.

This is really not standard wording at all because it places a huge burden on the occupier.
Also if it’s half theirs then they pay half for any upgrades they want. That should shut them up.

Tbh if I were you OP I’d buy something myself outright. If your DP wants to live there with you, fine. If he wants to get married or buy something together, I’d agree to nothing other than joint tenants, where the survivor takes the entire house. That is normal with married couples. Stick to your guns and say those are your terms and be prepared to walk away from the relationship if he says no. You’re being fucked over by what he is proposing.

Actually not, it's been left in trust to some else and they receive it on her death. And yes I have been in this situation before.

You could always buy them out if he died first

I would take your own legal independent advice, OP.

I am facing a similar situation, as have others in my family.

I want my children to have my husband's (who is dead) inheritance through me.

I do think though, that you need to plan for who is the surviving partner, and if and when it might be ok for them to live there/move out/buy another place. If it's their home for 30 years, it doesn't seem fair for them to have to sell within a couple of years as one of my relatives has stipulated in their will. I would also like to have the option to sell the home we have built and established together to do with as I wish; it is odd to be living and investing in a house which is never all yours.

This is a common problem; I'm not sure there's a fair way. I think in your case, your suggestion of giving all his assets to them bar the house is quite reasonable, but it's also true that these might get eaten up by care home fees and all that might be left is the house.

It's also the case if he dropped down suddenly, and you had all the house, you could then move someone else in and establish a whole new family home with them.

There's so many possibilities- I think the desire to secure your children's inheritance is fairly well-established, and as the newer partner, you have to accept that to some extent and secure your own future by your own other assets or even not buy together if you feel that strongly about it.

You could write mutual wills, each leaving your half of the house to each other, then the children get everything after the last surviving partner dies.
The difference from a mirror will is that a mutual will can’t be changed when the first person dies (so the children can’t be subsequently disinherited with a will rewrite).
A solicitor can advise properly.

Leaving his half to his children is normal and reasonable. I don't think you will get him to change his mind. I suggest moving forwards you reconsider your plans as I don't see him agreeing to leave the house to you. That would be awful to his children who should take priority over you.

This is totally normal and sensible. If he dies first, you could always sell up and then buy on your own. Or you could each buy separately now, live in one and rent the other with no pooled assets.

Because it’s half theirs.

im not getting why you wouldn’t just sell the house then, in the event of his death, and take your own half that you started with to then buy your own place.

his suggestion is actually the kindest of the options available towards you, others want their children to be able to have access to their half immediately, so selling the house straight away. Allowing you to stay in a house which you only half own, is actually very generous.

Its worse than having a landlord @Itisallgoingtobeok .
At least landlords are responsible for upgrades.
If you had no financial input I would have more sympathy with your dp, however he is asking you to relinquish control of your half of the assets.
I would suggest to him that you will make a will giving your half of the house to a charity under the same circumstances whereby they control his lifelong usage.
It may wake him up to what he's proposing.

Being a Landlord is not ideal in this situation, can be very stressful if you have tenants who don't pay or worse. If you develop cognitive decline, you are vulnerable as a Landlord. Also not ideal for tenants who are made to move if you move in/die. Speak to a solicitor who has lots of experience in this. The Trust conditions can be similar to ones you see in typical leasehold contracts. e.g. you don't need to put in new kitchens to make things easier to sell but you do need to keep up basic maintenance. Also, the solicitor should be able to arrange that the Trust can allow you to port the capital to a different property in case you downsize but it costs more than half, with any excess released immediately to the beneficiaries.

Of course, he may well live longer than you anyway, especially if you get married :-) www.statista.com/chart/36293/life-expectancy-of-married-never-married-us-men-and-women/

Come on now, she didnt say that.

Errr no. I don’t think any person would be cool with this hugely unfair arrangement. As if you’d agreed to spending an unknown amount of money to maintain the value of a property when you were an old age pensioner. And you couldn’t even decide what needed doing - it was all dictated by someone who didn’t have to pay for it themselves.

I don't think it matters that he has already given them money. We gave given our children money but we still want them to inherit our house. It's natural

You think that the emotionally intelligent thing to do would be to disinherit his children? Really?

What he’s suggesting is the best way to balance wanting them to have the house long term, with giving you a home for life. If you didn’t like it you could always downsize and give them their half at that point.

Well the solution is you sell give them
their share and buy
something else

This is complete rubbish. Have you ever had this arrangement yourself? This wording will say she is free to do what she wants with the house. Its standard wording. And yes fyi I have had this situation myself.

Under his proposal what would happen if he dies and you want to move house, not downsize, but perhaps move to a more suitable property in your old age? The couple I knew - not married, one legally separated with two adult children, and one single - bought their own properties very near to each other and lived between the two. In the end everyone (DP, DW, DCs) pre-deceased the separated man and the property went to his grandchildren.

I totally understand how you are feeling, there is a very real possibility of being pressured to sell or objecting to projects you want to do eg adapting the house as you get older, and I understand that you dont care if the rest of the estate goes to his children ,its just the security of your home that concerns you.
Is there no legal document that can be drawn up that means you have total control over the home and are financially responsible for its upkeep etc but that have the ownership/sale price must pass to them on its sale or your death
If he dies first who are you planning to leave your half to? This could get very messy