Would you sign this?!

[Istherealawyerinhere]

Would you sign something your PIL wanted after marriage to say that anything your husband inherits you have no claim to should you get divorced (and vice versa).

I just don’t think that’s how my marriage works and I think inheritance becomes OURS (from both sides) and would be ours if the worst should happen. But possibly IABU and people do this often?

I think the trouble in this scenario is it’s a proposition based on one specific outcome.

That’s of divorce. You never get divorced, it’s never a part of your reality. Perhaps friends of theirs children have recently seperated, a rock solid couple in their eyes: perhaps they are hearing about all kinds of awful tit for tar behaviour in the breakdown of a relationship (who isn’t?) and thought, gosh wouldn’t it be terrible if that happened...and she’s in our private jet with some toy boy?! (Or any other indecent behaviour in their eyes.)

No one in the nice family bubble wants to raise divorce, which is partly why so many people are left shell shocked when it becomes a consideration.

Much as you are offended by their mere mention of divorce and have taken it as a personal sleight, you don’t want his inheritance off the table purely because you do appreciate that divorce is something that could happen.

I feel quite mixed about this. My in laws have said similar although not to this extent. They have a lot of cash and we are struggling to bridge the gap between a flat and a house (2 kids sharing a room but SN so not ideal - SN happens to be genetic inheritance from them though). When discussing one portion of the cash we suggested it would help us massively, benefit the grandchildren etc. They refused because they think we’ll divorce and they don’t want me to have it. Perversely we are more likely to divorce if we continue to live in a cramped flat or stretch ourselves financially. The sum was less than 10% of the total estate, most of which is cash which is losing value is low interest accounts. It doesn’t make sense to me, they’d be making a huge difference to their son’s and grandchildren’s lives, but it’s their decision and I accept that. Less acceptable is that they may offer the money for us to move away as they disapprove of where we currently live. When first buying our flat I did offer to protect DH’s deposit but it seems silly after kids and everything I sacrificed (financial and health).

Ok, I have really reflected on this thanks to all the posting and I am sure people will be nasty about this but I think this is the real crux of what upsets me:

The idea that; even if we are married for another 30 years before divorcing and have 10 children, I will never REALLY be a member of their family to them. Particularly FIL as I do not have a father.

OP, I've just seen your last post. This could have adverse financial implications and you shouldn't sign it. I suggested it might be helpful if your DP told his parents that he is not willing to introduce this change into his marriage so you can still be seen to have had sight of this but are not perceived to be interested in this money. What's been good enough for his SAHM is good enough for the mother of his DC.

That said, I'd be wary of taking too much intent from this. It could be your PILs view the money categorically differently to you. It might not be helpful for you to perceive they view you as separate from their family based on this hurtful financial incident. I can see it and might think the same but it might not be their intent.

Good luck and glad to hear you and your DP are on the same page.

Your hurt on a personal front makes total sense here. Unfortunately it probably won't help to raise it. I just don't see a good way to have that conversation calmly.

If they are offering to pay for you to see a lawyer, take them up on it. Whatever white shoe fancy law firm they are using, find out which one is their keenest competitor and hire the head of their estate practice (not sure what it's called in UK, sorry!)

Explain the situation to that lawyer at an in person meeting. Perhaps with an associate and paralegal present, just so it costs the maximum amount possible. (They have private jet money so no real impact, but will make a point to their lawyer.) Have your lawyer write a letter saying your initial understanding was that you were going to be signing something that protected his parents investment in your house. This document goes wildly beyond that. Would they care to explain?

If your husband is right and this situation is caused by the lawyers over lawyering (it can happen), then apologies all around and it gets fixed.

If this was intentional on their part, it will be out in the open and negotiations can begin.

The winners will be the white shoe lawyers who will take in immense fees, but you will have things out in the open and ultimately be protected on a personal level.

Good luck!

Have your lawyer write a letter saying your initial understanding was that you were going to be signing something that protected his parents investment in your house

The thing is it wasn’t even to protect the house, it was because the money was coming from trust which creates a paper trail for me to go after the trust if we divorce (obviously that’s batshit and I would not do that). Which was offensive in of itself but I was told by DH it was in case his siblings marry people they don’t like, to make sure we set the precedent for those spouses to sign too...

Then either substitute that batshit part if your DH wants (although your lawyer won't want to as it makes no sense, at least what I put initially makes some sense). But do the rest. Particularly the initial meeting with many expensive lawyers to charge to their account. Make it a lunch meeting too. Catered. 😇

Hahaha i appreciate the sentiment but I don’t know that it sets the right tone of “I am not a gold digger* if I start spending their money willy nilly with no outcome for them!

I am tempted to say I am meeting a lawyer to get a morning off from my baby/make DH babysit though 🙈😂🤷🏻‍♀️

Of course your PIL will never set you on the same level as their children, OP. Sorry, but those are the facts. My child has my undying love without condition; whoever they marry I might like, dislike, grow to love, but will never love them like my children.

You need to separate them from your DH. Financial arrangements in your family are between you and your husband and nobody else.

herculepoirot

Of course not the same as their children, but still close and part of the family? I mean at some point after 20- 30 years, you have been part of the family for bloody ages and then surely it means something?!

It might, it might not, OP. You are investing far too much in their view of you and you need to be more objective. They didn’t marry you; their son did. He is the one who needs to treat you as family and that involves telling his parents that you won’t be signing anything.

You are investing far too much in their view of you and you need to be more objective

This is completely true and I do this all the time, in all my personal relationships! The whole thing makes me feel quite petty though and I’m not sure why I bother doing their cards and presents and arranging meetings with them. Might just leave it all to DH now 🤷🏻‍♀️ Will let him deal with every aspect, including this.

👍

And don’t sign anything!

OP, I'm not sure it's the 'paper trail' from the trust, rather the substance of your DP receiving a payment from the trust.

My limited understanding of English family law (Happy to be wrong, I've not seen any relevant cases from recently) is that a trust that a potential beneficiary who has never benefited from the trust would be relatively protected from any claim by a spouse on divorce.

Once a beneficiary (your DP) has drawn from a trust then I understand there could be a potential claim from a spouse on divorce that a share (or all if the spouse is the only beneficiary of the trust) of the trust's value could be taken into account when looking at the assets of both the divorcing parties when assessing a settlement.

I'm not saying you would try and claim against the trust on divorce (which I know you don't have in mind) though I don't think it would of itself be unreasonable to do that.

But what you've just said does now make sense.

The line about not the reason for this is setting a precedent should they not like any spouses of your DP's siblings just sounds like they're trying to sugar coat what they want to do.

Yes, definitely do leave his family relationships to him. They will surely see and hear less from you that way.

As an aside, are you responsible for all the "wife work" in your relationship? Your comments about getting DH to babysit (it's not, he's parenting) and how you do all the domestic work of gifts, etc. Would seem to indicate so. Perhaps it would be wise to use that in law subsidized legal time to look at your protection as a SAHM in case of a split?

I like your DH's suggestion that he just vetos it without asking you.

OP, one for the future but if this trust represents a significant part of your DP's family wealth then does your DP have sight of the trust deed, know who the trustees are, know whether your DC automatically become beneficiaries or would need to be added in and so on. If not then it might be an idea for your DP to find out at some point in the future when things have quietened down.

My in laws discussed a pre nup for me, and later there was discussion of a post nup when we bought a house.

DH told them on both occasions to get fucked. I'm actually the higher earner so the balance is a bit different but no way would we have agreed to this.

You might have a 30+ year marriage and then split. Any number of different situations could arise during that time, and a situation that says you can never have any claim over any inheritance will put you in a position where every decision needs to be looked at through that lense. When you're talking about a large sum that is likely to change how you live then you (and the kids) could be left with a drastically reduced living standard if you divorced.

Of course you shouldn't sign this and your DH should deal with it and tell them this. It's really interfering. I wouldn't have my PIL help with money towards a house though, I think often people think that by contributing in such a way it gives them rights to control decisions or the people, and I would rather not have to deal with all of that in the long run.

A gift if truly a gift is given without any strings attached to it. Anything else I'd rather just not get involved in.

And how would all this work in reality anyway? If you inherit 3 Million, you're not going to leave it in a bank account and never spend it ready to hand it over if you divorce.

So do they expect you to keep track of what the money has been spent on throughout your marriage so you can say this car was bought from the inheritance money and not our savings or other income so can't be split in a divorce scenario, but this piano over here was bought from our savings etc, so is a marital asset? It just isn't very practical and it would also make me not want to spend any of the money. I wouldn't feel comfortable buying a house that I know I'd have no rights to in the case of a divorce - I think I'd feel constantly vulnerable and not able to enjoy anything. I'd rather just not have any of it.

The PIL need to decide if they are leaving money to their son and if they are it's a gift and they can't dictate how he spends it or how he lives his life. Anything else isn't a gift at all.

My parents changed their will leaving everything (no jets ! but a house and family heirlooms) to me (if they both died) , when my brother got engaged to someone they considered a gold digger. TBF, she did present that way at the time and he had already had two failed marriages, resulting in money and sentimental and valuable heirlooms left to him by our grandparents being split and 'lost'. (Though my first sister in law did offer to return jewelry that my grandmother had given her on marriage, which was very thoughtful of her but absolutely refused )

I was deeply uncomfortable about it at the time and said I would pass on half to him when it came to it - they didn't actually tell him what they had done so he never knew about it, though he did know they had reservations about the fiancee.

The relationship did fail and she did go on to someone even richer but that may have had nothing to do with money and more to do with my DBs inability to sustain relationships (another story entirely)

Everything passed to my mother on my father's death and I then asked her to remake her will, splitting everything fairly.

So I can see how these things happen - but also see why the OP is so upset with her in laws when its a long relationship and with children.

Zilla1

Your explanation of the legalities is absolutely correct; yes. Sorry for not explaining well!

cloudchaos

I am also not sure how this is supposed to work from a practical point of view to be honest!

craftyyankee

Yes, as the SAHM i am responsible for 100% of housework and childcare. Including all “wifework”. When I started getting serious with DH actually he was not close to his family at all: he can be quite emotionally shut. Family is extremely important to me as I had a somewhat unhappy and abusive childhood and I tried exceptionally hard to build bridges with DH and his parents. It has gone from him not even sending a birthday card and seeing them maybe twice a year to a very strong relationship in my opinion where they talk several times a week and meet a few times a month. I am not exaggerating when I say I am almost entirely responsible for this and I did it because I thought DH should have a more functional family dynamic (unlike mine!)

There is something too calculating in this.
It may be a warning as to their future behaviour.

So don't sign it.

See, the thing is, now they’ve put the idea in your head. Money does strange things to people, as can middle age/ appreciation of mortality.

After 30 more years of marriage and 10 children, me being a SAHM and my DH working and inheriting millions, if he decided to leave me holding the kids for his young, nubile PA for whom he buys a flat in Monaco and flies to Dubai in his private jet for dinner on a Saturday night - you can bet your bottom dollar I’d be wanting to hurt him right where it hurts. I’d be going straight after that money....