AIBU to want to protect my Dad's money?

[Dazedandconfused28]

My DH and I are in the process of buying a house - a large proportion of the deposit being inheritance from my Dad - who died when I was much younger. The money has only just been released after the sale of his property.

Whilst we are very happily married, I feel that it would be foolish not to protect this sum of money, more so because I feel like it is my Dad's. We plan to split the mortgage repayments 50/50 - and we've both saved towards the remainder of the deposit & associated costs. We don't yet have children together.

The problem is whenever I have tentatively raised the subject of protecting just that sum of money (with say, a written declaration of trust) he becomes incredibly offended and says I'm acting as though this is my property, not ours - which is not how I feel at all. I'd welcome your thoughts on this matter! AIBU?

I was given some money by family that allowed us to buy our first home outright (when property prices were less crazy). I never worried about sharing with dh, what's mine is yours and all of that. dh said he would never dream of taking any of it regardless of what happened in the future. I believed him and I think he believed himself too. However things went tits up, and when he discovered that he could take half of the value of the property he did take half of it. We'd otherwise contributed pretty equally (although dh always spent more).

It's lovely to think that nothing will go wrong and that your dh will always remain the loving and committed man he is today, but when things go wrong it's often every man/women for his/herself.

Having said that I'm not sure how much you can actually protect the funds, regardless of what is recorded, but at least it captures intent which may count for something.

Get the deed of trust.

He's already being iffy with regards to money he has had, the joint account, and the fact he never even knew your dad.

I have friends who got a deed of trust to cover the money one of them had got in a divorce settlement.

Everything was crystal clear at the beginning of their relationship.

They are splitting up now sadly, don't stop one making a play for the money and challenging the deed of trust.

Don't leave this to chance. It will only ever be relevant IF you split up. But by god it'll potentially save your life if you do.

He invested in himself, you both reap the benefits and that's enough.

You're investing in a home, stating what that money is and both of you will benefit. It's utterly comparable.

If he doesn't like this, then it's alarm bells time, and more reason to get the deed of trust.

Yanbu at all.

Protect your own interest here.

A friend recently separated from her husband. When he had inherited from his parents, he had kept it separate. When she inherited from hers, she used it to pay off the joint mortgage.

She has no right to his inheritance money, but he effectively got half of hers.

Why exactly is he opposed to a joint account? You don't seem to have said much about that.

It could be, as many posters have suggested, that he suffers from a what's yours is mine and what's mine is my own mentality. You'd want to get that sorted before ML. On the other hand, he might be quite happy to share everything and just not want a joint account. DH and I have very communal finances, we don't have my money and your money. We also don't have a joint account and I would never want one. You really need to work out which camp he's in.

I don't think having inherited money prior to the marriage that he used on education and then expecting inheritances during the marriage to be shared is necessarily wrong, either. The main thing would be, what attitude would he take if he were to suddenly receive a bequest now? And what would he say if you decided you wanted to use some of your inheritance on education?

Everyone should have the money conversation before getting married. Not to do so is utterly irresponsible.

OP, you need to sit down with your DH discuss EVERYTHING financial. Use a facilitator/mediator/counsellor if needed but do it before you buy a house and before you have children.

The one rule for him, one for you doesn't sit comfortably with me - nor does the resistance to joint accounts - I'd be careful given something in the back of your mind is making you question your decision

I benefited from an inheritance when DH and I were buying a house. When we put the offer in he was only my boyfriend and I told the solicitor I wanted to protect the money. Then we got engaged, so I didn't pursue that as I'm of the 'all the money in one pot' school of thought. As is DH.

That was 15 years ago, we're still happily married and if we ever split up in the future I would automatically assume that assets were split equally without worrying about the inheritance - there's been lots of water under the bridge since then. I can imagine that in different circumstances I might have regretted it though.

I think I would get a deed of trust or some such to protect it. Couldn't you change your mind later anyway? I am not sure his inheritance early on in the relationship is the same unless you mean early on in the marital relationship. If you do then it's pretty outrageous he isn't more sensitive about your feelings on your own inheritance now. I am curious if you think there is more to your feelings though. I can see why you see it as your dad's money but I do think that will soften over time.

And his resistance to a joint account is a red flag, as others have said, given his attitude towards your money.

I think you are being sensible tbh

"I don't understand why inheritance is any different to earned income. Your salary is individual, it's just for you. Unless your dad specifically said he didn't want you to share it with Dh in any way, I think yabu."

I don't agree with this at all.
My uncle gave my sister the deposit for her first home, bought jointly with her (then) fiancé. The money wasn't ring-fenced as it was a gift to the couple.
15 years (and three homes and four kids down the line after 14 years of marriage) they were able to buy a new much bigger family home using the proceeds from the sale of their previous home and my sister's inheritance from my Uncle's estate: a six figure sum. The solicitor drew up a legal document to protect my sister's inheritance in the event of divorce or her death (so it would go to her own children, not her the B-i-L's putative second wife). The B-i-L was totally OK with that - they are still together after 35 years.
Perhaps my view is influenced by the fact that I live in a country which has "forced inheritance laws": you can't disinherit your kids, but on the other hand although your salary and other income is considered joint, any inheritance is considered separate and will autmatically go to your own kids rather than to your spouse. My half of the generous Uncle's money is mine to do as I like with - and it is invested to provide retirement income for me and an inheritance for my children. DH's inheritance from his mother is his alone, but it will also pass to our (joint) children.
So I am definitely of the opinion that - especially considering the fact that she doesn't yet have any children - the OP should safe-guard her inheritance - and her DH is BU to be offended , since as long as they stay married he will benefit from the inheritance anyway..

When my sister became disabled my Dad gave them £20,000 to help pay the mortgage. Didn't stop him pissing off with her carer - and living in her house with her. YANBU.

You're married it has to be joint money. If he had inherited money and wanted to buy a property for you both to live in but effectively put a legal fence around it saying in the event of anything happening it remained his that would be a huge red flag.

Your actions suggest you don't trust him and are attempting to safeguard the money for yourself. You're not protecting your dads money because it's not for your dad, it's for you.

No wonder he's offended.

YANBU my PIL gave us some cash to help with a deposit. We got an agreement drawn up through the solicitor to protect the money in the even we were to separate (which I was more than happy to do), so it's protected for my husband in that event but for the both of us in any other event. Just discuss it and get a solicitor involved - very simple process!

You're married it has to be joint money.

No it doesn't. Don't be so ridiculous.

If he had inherited money and wanted to buy a property for you both to live in but effectively put a legal fence around it saying in the event of anything happening it remained his that would be a huge red flag.

But the Op#s hubby DID inherit money and chose NOT to share it and an instead spent it on HIMSELF.

What would happen in the event of a divorce if the house was owned by OP and her DH as Tennants in Common, rather than Joint Tennants? When (then) DP (now DH) and I bought our first house, I put in more equity so we split the ownership of the house by an appropriate percentage to reflect this. If the OP were to do the same, would this split be taken into account in any divorce settlement?

I still struggle to see that spending on education is spending on himself. That is an investment for the family unless she was totally against it in the first place .

The reluctance of him wanting a joint account is much more of an issue. I would not be expecting to pay everything 50/50 and keeping everything separate if he sees your inheritance as joint. That's called wanting the best of both worlds.

Well, they share the benefits of his education as long as they're togther but in the event of a divorce he walks away with it. Which I think is what the OP wants for her inheritance.

Yeah education is sort of a middle ground in that respect. It's not like he spunked it all on new clothes and computer games that OP got no benefit from, but it's also not the same as a solid asset they could both walk away with a share of like a house, gold etc. It's possible but very unusual for a spouse to get a share of the other spouse's future earnings in a divorce, so OP has to assume she wouldn't. Effectively it's an investment for them both, but only for the duration of the marriage. OTOH, it's also possible that OP has benefitted/will benefit more financially from the proceeds of this education than DH would from being entitled to 50% of her inheritance.

I still don't see how people can consider the joint account thing to be a red flag until we get more information either. Perfectly possible for a couple to have joint finances but prefer not to have a joint account.

I read coverage of a divorce case in which it was decided that an inheritance was a marital asset because the money hadn't been kept separate. (Was put into the family home.) So apparently if the money had never been mixed with family money that woman could have kept it. (I think the jurisdiction was England, but might be wrong.)

I still struggle to see that spending on education is spending on himself. That is an investment for the family

Unless slavery is legalised, knowledge and skills acquired by a person can only belong to them. (The extra income he earns as a result may or may not benefit the family in future, the income is a separate issue to the human capital that generates it.)

Listen to Cruze and others OP. Protect your money.

A friend generously shared inheritances from her parents & grandma with her husband. And set up education funds for his kids. She also brought savings to the marriage and no debt. He brought nothing but debt and support obligations for existing children. She is main breadwinner.

The marriage deteriorated fast, he is an abusive spendthrift and she is financially trapped now. If they split -and he is straying already -she will lose most of her family legacy. It's heartbreaking.

Check the law. Where I am, inheritance does not automatically become joint/marital property.

To me, if you don't want shared finances then don't get married, its as simple as that. Just live together instead.

By getting married you are pledging to share everything. I think YABU.

Nonsense. There are many legal/practical reasons to be married; that doesn't mean the individuals give up all autonomy or separate interests.

Many married couples maintain separate finances. Some out of personal taste, some because one spouse or the other has issues with money, or a poor history of misusing credit, or legal obligations the second spouse doesn't want to be embroiled in.

some because one spouse or the other has issues with money, or a poor history of misusing credit, or legal obligations the second spouse doesn't want to be embroiled in. Why the hell would you marry someone like that?