If you are a second wife, do you expect to inherit everything from your husband?

[rickyrickygrimes]

… or do you expect him to leave something to his children from a previous marriage?

This subject comes up often on here: man is widowed, inherits everything from his wife, remarries, then dies - leaving everything to his second wife and his children inherit nothing.

this happened quite recently to a friend of mine, which not only did not inherit but also lost his livelihood as he was employed in his fathers business, which his second wife chose to sell as she wasn’t interested in running it.

I’m in France where (as I understand it) children cannot be completely disinherited from a will i.e. part of the estate is always reserved for children and the spouse does not inherit everything. This leads to some very complicated situations but does mean that all children will inherit something from their parents, no matter what the relationship between the parents / children is like.

we often hear from the children on here but not often the pov of the second wife. So I’m interested to know what you think? Do you expect to inherit everything from your husband (which is pretty standard between married couples in the UK)? Or would you expect his children from previous relationships to be included / recognised in his will - especially if he has previously inherited from their mother?

Haven’t RTFT, but my Dad and step-Mum were in this position, both previously married and got together later in life so no joint children.

They decided to keep their assets completely separate, her side got hers, his assets will go to his side.

Luckily they were already looking at retirement housing when she died so my Dad moved ahead with that and the house was sold.

Obviously it’s different if one spouse is financially dependent on the other, but I certainly appreciated the fact that they’d discussed it and got everything sorted out. They informed both sides of the family as well so we all knew the situation.

Second wife here. Our wills leave everything to the surviving partner; the surviving partner’s will leaves everything to the DCs. My SDCs will get less than our joint DCs solely because they’ll also inherit from their DM on her death. I suppose in theory if my DH dies first, I could then rewrite my will to exclude my SDCs — but obviously wouldn’t dream of it.

Have you thought the other way?

if you die first?

I can think of several things that could go “wrong”.

your dh redoes his will to leaves everything equally between all his children.

your dh gets remarried, doesn’t bother to redo his will and everything goes to his new wife, children get nothing.

I would also like to point out to those people whose husbands have previously been married that pension beneficiaries have been changed. If he set up a pension when married to an ex and named her as beneficiary, she will get the pension on his death.

I am second wife and if my husband dies first his children will get his whole pension fund which is equivalent to half a house -
it is simple -
they get their share straight away - they don’t have to wait for me to die. They don’t have to trust me -
and it is very tax efficient!

They will not inherit anything else - and there is the risk that my own children might get nothing if it all goes on care home fees.

He will not be drawing down his pension- which will

preserve this value for them

there are lots of ways to manage these things but life interests in a house can be horribly complicated and i wanted to avoid that

I have 3 DC from my first marriage. I'm now married to my second DH. He has no DC of his own but has spent 17 years helping me bring up my DC. We have quite a few assets including our 6 bedroom family home, 7 bedroom holiday home in France and 2 btl houses between us but I also have a further 5 btl houses of my own, with small mortgages on them still. We also have a ltd company that owns 3 btl houses with small mortgages. If I die first our house will belong to DH and also the 2 btl homes we own jointly. I'm leaving each of my 3 DC and 2 DGC a house each albeit with small mortgages on so they could be rented out. My 3 DC have their own homes to live in. DH will get half my pension for life and some annuity too. He's got his own excellent pension. I can't think he'd need more than that. Money in joint and joint savings will be for DH and my personal savings used for funeral and the rest split between my 3 DC. It's complicated because we have a foster child who has lived with us since he was 5 and we love him very much he's late teens now but he has quite severe learning disabilities and it's unlikely he could ever live alone. We were planning on leaving him a house with a small mortgage on but his SW says if we do that we'll be taking away his entitlement to state benefits and he'd be expected to sell it to pay for his own care. DH has looked into this and it seems we can set up a special trust to own the house but he can be the beneficiary and live there, but not own it. He maybe could have a carer live in the house with him. DH says if he does first I'll get our house, French house and joint btl properties and half his pension for lifetime and all joint savings. His personal savings will pay for his funeral then the rest split between my 3 DC. The ltd company will revert solely to me but I'll share with my 3 DC and 2 DGC. 1 house will be tied up in the trust. I can't see either of us marrying again if one of us died. I think there will be enough money for all of us and the French house will be in trust so all of our family, my 3 DC and 2 DGS's, my 4 sister's and BiL, DH brother, and both of our nieces and nephews. If the house is let for just 4 weeks a year it pays for the French taxes and electricity for the whole year.

Thank you for the compliment! I trust my bloke and he trusts me. We don’t want to pay inheritance tax when we don’t need to and leaving everything to the other is the most tax efficient thing to do. All our kids - one of mine, three of his - will get a quarter of everything on the second death. I suppose you think I’m “a bit of a cunt” because my son’s not getting half too.

My will leaves everything split equally between my DC. 2 of whom are from a previous marriage. My DH gets nothing. We own our house as tenants in common so he will have to buy them out (which he could easily do).

None of what you day makes sense.

Any person who married again and does not have a will, doesn't provide for his children from first marriage, alongside providing for his wife from the second marriage, is basically very very silly.

The second man, works for his dad in the family business, and yet second wife was able to sell it. How how on earth was she possibly able to sell it if it's the father's business and if he's working for the business. If she owns 100% of the shares who sent that up because that's just ridiculous as well.

All the mothers of my 3 friends trusted their DH’s too.
But when those men re-married after my friends’ mums died they also trusted the (invariably younger) women they married. Or were too dilatory and lazy to make a will… and my friends ended up with nothing of what their Mums had contributed.

Men never seem to behave as you expect them to once a new relationship is on the horizon. In divorce or bereavement.

He’s not getting married again @TempleOfBloom. His grandfather did what you describe and he saw his dad and aunts get nothing. He most definitely wouldn’t do it to our kids

Sorry he had to see that happen.

Get your life policies written into trust then proceeds are paid outside of your estate and not subject to IHT.

It’s late where I am so I am not going to read all posts but I have seen enough to know there are loads of incorrect assumptions.

This topic needs to be discussed and proper wills need to be put in place to protect everyone. Take expert advice with a solicitor who really understands the law or an expert estate planner.

NB. Much of Europe has a system of forced heirship so the situation is different to the UK.

I would also like to point out to those people whose husbands have previously been married that pension beneficiaries have been changed. If he set up a pension when married to an ex and named her as beneficiary, she will get the pension on his death.

Not necessarily. The trustees have to decide whether to follow the written form or not. If there has been a remarriage, or a divorce, it's very likely they would not give the money to an ex. They would usually look at who was financially dependent on the individual and look into whether there was an updated will.

Having said that, as a person who has had to advise trustees in various circumstances, I would very much like people to keep their forms up to date please!

Not necessarily all his children though.

Although for some reason on MN people
often seem to think they’re the only children who matter.

Completely agree, @Meowandthen.
When my step-Mum died, I was so glad for everyone involved that she and my Dad had everything properly drawn up by solicitors, it really reduced stress at a sad time.

OTOH, I have a close friend whose Dad wrote his own Will without legal advice (no idea why, he had plenty of assets) and two years later, the family is still trying to sort everything out. It wasn’t worded correctly and has created an expensive legal mess for his widow.

This is exactly the sort of scenario that can go badly wrong.

BetterWithPockets
Second wife here. Our wills leave everything to the surviving partner; the surviving partner’s will leaves everything to the DCs. My SDCs will get less than our joint DCs solely because they’ll also inherit from their DM on her death. I suppose in theory if my DH dies first, I could then rewrite my will to exclude my SDCs — but obviously wouldn’t dream of it.

This is exactly what we did. There is a thing called trust, but it seems a lot of mumsnetters don't hold much store by that. Imho that's the problem with todays generation, lack of trust in a relationship.

The incidence of targeting of vulnerable older people is rising very fast. It isn't really about trust, it is about recognising that scammers and gold diggers are enjoying free rein. Certainly in all the cases I know of, it has been exploitation and manipulation of a lonely, elderly or sick person.

Don’t understand what you’re getting at here – if you say ‘his children’, it covers all his children.

You don’t need to divide them up according to what relationship they’re from

Do you honestly think someone would marry to gain inheritance?

This thread is about second wives.

@Brumbies Why would you think they wouldn't?? Ok, it's not common but it definitely happens.

You may do for inheritance purposes though. It may well matter that the children are from a previous relationship.

The assumption many people seem to make is that they’re all ‘his assets’ and should be shared between ‘his children’ equally. But that may not be the case.

He might have come into the relationship with two children and no assets beyond his pension (but his exW has the equity in the former marital home etc). He might meet a single woman who has her own home with a chunk of equity. He moves in and she contributes the bulk of the living costs (because he’s got child maintenance to pay). They marry and have two more children. she continues to work and contribute disproportionately to her household.

So, in determining what is fair for inheritance, it matters quite a lot that some of the children are from a previous relationship. Splitting the house and marital assets 4 ways between the children.

Even if you ignore the fact the man had contributed far more to the assets (sometimes despite being the lower earner!), it still wouldn’t be fair to split everything 4 ways.

2 of the children have another parent - who owns a house that they will inherit. 2 of them are children of this relationship. At most the father’s half of the house should be split between his 4 children. But the 2 children from that relationship should share heir mother’s half. That means that the SC get 1/8 each, while the younger children get 3/8 each. And not while their mother/SM is alive either - because why should she lose her house so the SC can get the money immediately?

But, in some cases, arguably all the children are just going to be inheriting via their mothers because their father has somehow managed to avoid paying towards housing anyone for many years. There is at least one example of this on the thread.

Which is why it may well matter that they are ‘his children from a previous relationship’.

Give me an example please?

I'm not linking to my thesis but this is something I came across when I was doing my PhD in this area. It's not that common but it happens. Sorry, you'll just have to take my word for it, though!