Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Who is being unreasonable – home ownership, inheritance and children from previous relationships

110 replies

Lotalota · 27/03/2017 18:13

I have namechanged for this as I have some potentially identifying posts on here and want to keep this private.

DP and I have been together for 4 years. He has two DDs from a previous relationship. Him and his ex own a house together which they agreed to keep hold of until the youngest leaves primary school as it was just up the road and now the time has come to sell it.

He wants to buy house with me when he sells his house with his ex. As he lives in an expensive area of London where his DC will remain (his ex is wealthier than him) he can not afford to buy there alone and needs my salary in order to get a large enough mortgage. However, when talking about it he says that he would like to leave his share to his children and will not discuss having a clause that would allow me to remain there in the event of his death. I don’t have a problem with not inheriting from him but this does mean that if anything happened to him I would be out on my ear and I don’t fancy losing him and my home at the same time.

As a single person who has not owned a house before I qualify for a government scheme which would enable to part own a house with the share to buy scheme. Although this would not be as good as an investment opportunity it would mean that my home was secure no matter what happened to him. It would have to be in an area not as close to his DC as I can’t afford to do this there and there are no flats on the scheme available there.

I am not sure if this is relevant or not but I feel it may be. DP has always been financially secure. His parents are comfortably off and own two properties in expensive outright which he will one day inherit (he has one sister to share this with). He has always had very well paid jobs and is a just that bit older than me so was able to buy a house in an expensive area of London before houseprices went crazy. In contrasts my parents house was repossessed when I was 21 . I am now 34 and have saved up a small amount on my own but am not set to inherit anything. My pay is OK now but nowhere near his at my age.

He thinks I am being selfish and that he sure his children wouldn’t kick me out but I am not prepared to invest all I have and all I am ever likely to have in a property that isn’t secure. I am more concerned with security than making a profit.

To be clear I don’t think he is being unreasonable to put his DDs interests first but I think he is unreasonable to expect me to invest in a home that I would be forced to leave if he died when I have the option not to. He thinks that I am being selfish and that my refusal to buy with him on his terms is me stopping him living near his children.

Who is the unreasonable one here?

OP posts:
ChipmunkSundays · 27/03/2017 18:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LonnyVonnyWilsonFrickett · 27/03/2017 18:32

It also reminds me of that other thread where a StepMum is expected to pay for all the DSC's food at the weekend because she lives with a tight git.

Are women are supposed to be so nurturing that we'll happily put our own financial security behind the needs of other people's children? I smell sexism.

CharlieSierra · 27/03/2017 18:35

He thinks that I am being selfish and that my refusal to buy with him on his terms is me stopping him living near his children

This tells you all you need to know about him. He's being unreasonable about the house and trying to emotionally blackmail you. Dump him and buy your own house, he doesn't love you and you shouldn't waste any more of your life on him.

littlewoollypervert · 27/03/2017 18:36

Yanbu, he's being a dick.
There are a couple of other options if he really wants to see his kids and you secure for life.
He can take a life assurance policy out on his own life, and put a clause in his will that the payout from it goes to his children. Then they would get the cash much quicker than waiting for the sale of the house to go through.
Also if you cohabit you and he have an insurable interest in each other. You could take out a joint policy so that if one of you dies, the other gets the payout (doesn't go through the estate so you get the cash immediately)
If he looks at the above suggestions and isn't interested then you will have a clearer idea of where you stand (i.e. how little he wants to provide for you).
At the moment he sounds incredibly naïve at best, expecting his children to give up a significant asset for years to benefit you.

Through my job I heard about a case in Ireland a few years ago. Couple were living together, had been for years. She got on very well with his children, no conflict or rows. Her name was not on any of his property/assets. He was terminally ill and they planned on getting married so she would get a fair share (small civil ceremony, no big organisation needed). His children convinced them they didn't need an official legal ceremony, just a small party and to say their own vows in front of friends/family. They promised that of course the DP would get a fair share. He died a few months later. The children kicked the DP out of the house and she didn't get a penny.

Pallisers · 27/03/2017 18:39

Bear in mind that he's presumably very unlikely to die in the near future (unless there's something you're not telling us about his health). You have a job, and if he does drop dead then you and the children would sell the house and you'd have half the equity and your salary with which to start again. As long as your fair share of the equity is preserved then I think you should live in the place that works best for you as a family.

Sorry but that is bad advice. It presumes that everything goes just fine - but life isn't always like that. The OP is being incredibly sensible and presuming that things might unfortunately go wrong. He could die, the children could certainly force a sale (ignore any posts that tell you they cannot - as joint owners they will be able to force a sale - or possibly take possession as in live there), and the OP's economic reality might be that her half of the proceeds of sale are not enough to buy in the same location and she is unable to afford a mortgage for the amount needed.

OP should have a life interest in his half.

Someone asked an interesting question upthread - who does he expect you to leave your half to? Him?

Thinkingblonde · 27/03/2017 18:45

This happened to my neighbour. His wife died, she'd been married before and had two adult daughters. When the will was read, she'd left half of the house to him and her daughters inherited a quarter share each.
The daughters charged him rent for the half of the house he didn't own.

He cashed in insurance policies and shares to buy them out.

I would see a solicitor before agreeing to anything op.

HiMyNameIsUnknown · 27/03/2017 18:45

OP I fully agree with Lonny.

OP his attitude speaks volumes and for me this would be a deal-breaker of the relationship continuing. He can absolutely protect his children's inheritance but it should not be at the expense of you being protected.

lionsleepstonight · 27/03/2017 18:46

I think he can leave his share to his kids in trust, but you are allowed to life there indefinitely. You can sell when you wish. It's also a tax efficient way to leave assets to children and reduce inheritance tax. You are joint tenants rather than tenants in common. It also protects your 'share' as it can't be used to pay for care. Done correctly there are benefits, speak to a solicitor to ensure its done properly.

Familyof3or4 · 27/03/2017 18:50

Yanbu
I wouldn't buy a house with him without this clause. End of.

ImperialBlether · 27/03/2017 18:51

It's time to call a halt to this relationship, OP. He could have put it any other way, couldn't he, but he's saying that you are stopping him from living near his children because you are too selfish and are thinking of yourself when you're old. Who do you think you are, needing somewhere to live when you're a pensioner?!

If I were you I'd leave, get somewhere with that scheme you mentioned and look for a really decent guy instead.

ImperialBlether · 27/03/2017 18:51

Even if he changed his mind now, I wouldn't live with him. His first instinct was to rip you off.

ToadsforJustice · 27/03/2017 18:53

Run away. Buy a house on your own. He is a dick.

Crickeycrumbsblimey · 27/03/2017 18:54

YADNBU

Protect yourself - so many women don't and get shafted.

Sounds like you have worked hard to be financially secure - please don't put that at risj

beepbeeprichie · 27/03/2017 18:55

What does he expect to happen to your half of the house if you predecease him???

Firesuit · 27/03/2017 18:56

The simplest solution that is that OP pays rent on his share of the house to children after his death.

Another possibility is that she insures his life so that if he dies, she gets a sum big enough to buy his share from his estate. In that case she could make a will leaving her share to a cats home, so he will have to take out similar insurance to buy out her share.

mypropertea · 27/03/2017 18:56

What happens if you have children together?

dahliaaa · 27/03/2017 18:56

YADDNBU
This would be a deal breaker for me.

Firesuit · 27/03/2017 18:58

The simplest solution that doesn't require anyone to give anything away, I meant.

Trifleorbust · 27/03/2017 18:59

No way. If I was married (I am) I would live in my home until my death. Not being married, why would you take the risk of tying your finances to his, only to be living at the behest of his children in your later life? Crazy.

Firesuit · 27/03/2017 18:59

I also want to know why isn't he worried about losing the house if OP dies first? What his plan?

harderandharder2breathe · 27/03/2017 19:00

Slightly different as my mothers house was hers before she met her current partner but it's to be left to me and my sister, with a set period of time that her partner can live there before it can be sold.

My father and stepmothers house was bought from the capital of her previous home although they've improved it jointly. It's to be left to my step siblings but my dad can live there til he dies or chooses to leave.

So it's very common, probably especially in stepfamilies, for such clauses. Yanbu to refuse to invest in s house you would be forced to leave if he died. I would expect a MINIMUM of a year to sort yourself out before it had to be sold and half to you and half to his dds if that's what you agree on. If he can't buy where he wants without your money then he needs to compromise on this to protect you as well as his daughters.

Butterymuffin · 27/03/2017 19:02

His attitude is not one I'd want in a life partner and co-owner of property. And how entitled is he saying it's your fault he can't afford the place he wants! Better get a second job eh, buster?

AdaColeman · 27/03/2017 19:06

He can't afford to live in an expensive area, so he is trying to bully you into providing your money to enable him to do so, and expects you to do so without any security of tenure?
Do not buy property with this man, he is all out for financial gain at your expense.

One thing I have discovered about financially mean people is that their attitude leaks into all aspects of their life, they become mean with emotions, like joy and love.

Gatehouse77 · 27/03/2017 19:12

If you buy as tenants in common then you're covered with staying in the home and his DDs are covered with their share either when you die or sell up.

If he won't entertain you being tenants in common then I wouldn't be buying with him.

Wando1986 · 27/03/2017 19:15

I'm sorry but no. If you're buying a house together then if you die the other half should go to the other home owner/partner. They are not your kids. He should make account of any other money he wishes to leave for them in his will but the property should be yours. Nothing to do with them whatsoever.