Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Husband not included me in will

285 replies

Finallyfeelstrong · 29/06/2019 04:26

I’ve just been given a copy of will my husband had done at Christmas.
We have been together for 7 years and married for 1year. He has grown up sons, grandchildren and a son who lives with us as his home life was chaotic. I also have two grown up children and a younger one living with us.
I work full time and husband has a business. When I met him it was only just keeping a float. Since then he has built it into a million pound business. I have worked, payed the mortgage and the cost of renovations on the house we bought that I lived in initially as I had all children at home and neither house was big enough. So I lived across the road and paid £650 a month rent as it covered full renovation and the mortgage is £210. I continue to pay the mortgage on that house and renovations and my adult children with one of his live in their. I also pay towards bills and groceries etc in the house we all live in.
I look after both his and my younger children and raise him as my own. My own child goes to his fathers every weekend and half of every holiday and his son sees his mum for a couple of hours once a week.
Anyway I was given a copy of the will my husband wrote after we were married as he had promised his exw that kids would be looked after. Which is what I also would expect.
The will states I’m to be guardian of his younger child, his mum hasn’t been informed, that the business, all the properties, 500k in life insurance will be given to children of his marriage and kept in trust, for his kids and their futures.
That I can live in the house I’ve actually paid for rent free for the rest of my life but can’t sell it etc even though he told me it could be and on death to be split between all our kids
It explicitly states that other than the house I pay for that is already covered in a different clause. Should-my name- benefit from any part of my estate other than the property named.

OP posts:
bratzilla · 30/06/2019 15:50

It’s awful that he wants you to be his sons legal guardian but won’t make sure you’re financially stable. Even with free rent it’d end up costing you.

JinglingHellsBells · 30/06/2019 17:56

The house and rent/mortgage deal was supposed to revert to my being on the house deeds and him taking his off but he has changed his mind since I got married

Something can only 'revert' if it was there originally. (Revert= go back to.)

The house was never in the OP's name, she was a tenant, so it was never about 'reverting' it was whether he would change the ownership to include her.

Some posters seem to have missed the detail
The OP is a teacher and will have a decent pension at the end of it and also a state pension. There is no risk of her being left penniless.

He has said she can carry on living in the house for the rest of her life (the one where her adult children live now) but that when she dies, the house will be sold and will be divided amongst his children.

As others have said, this is a very common set up- that a 2nd wife's own children do not walk away with an inheritance that her DH wishes to go to their own children, not their step children.

What are you suggesting he gives her?

JinglingHellsBells · 30/06/2019 17:59

@Bratzilla She is financially 'stable' as she will have two pensions of her own and a house for life.

RB68 · 30/06/2019 18:09

The youngest Son will have a share or trust of money for him - it will have executors (and you should be one if you have guardianship) that decide how that money should be used. it is valid to use that money for care of the son if no other provisions have been made. Guardian doesn't mean have living with etc either just that you are legally responsible for - so they can live elsewhere

Contraceptionismyfriend · 30/06/2019 18:16

Just out of curiosity.

In the event that a widow remains in the house until death/moving of own free will but the children of the deceased owns the house.

Who is responsible for the maintenance of the property?

JinglingHellsBells · 30/06/2019 19:20

I think that is something that could be detailed in the Will, but in theory it ought to be the owners. They have a vested interest to maintain it as it's theirs and if they sell it they can't allow it to go to wreck and ruin, can they? A family friend was in this situation; she lived in her late Dh's home for some time after he died but in her case I am sure she maintained it.

Contraceptionismyfriend · 30/06/2019 19:23

But what if they don't have the finances to maintain two homes. I'm just thinking hypothetically. But if I suddenly inherited a house that I couldn't charge rent on, couldn't sell but was expected to maintain id be 1. Rather pissed. And 2. Pretty broke.

JinglingHellsBells · 30/06/2019 19:35

I have no idea. Ask a lawyer.

I think on the one hand that the wife should pay for it all as she's lived there rent free so ought to have budgeted for repairs to an extent, but at the same time the owners have a vested interest to keep it in good repair. This is the sort of thing that would be in the Will.

Contraceptionismyfriend · 30/06/2019 19:52

I have a criminal Barrister firmed I wonder if she'd be able to find out.
Not relevant to me at all but this thread has really made me think.

Just shows why you should always inform those around you of your wills details.

Notashandyta · 30/06/2019 20:06

Can't even dignify some of these latest posts with any comment Confused

She has been with this man for 8 years. They're married ffs. She isn't asking for much out of a substantial estate. Her feelings are rightly hurt. Nitpicking wasn't really needed. What sad lives some lead Sad
Hope you're ok, op. You really need to talk to your husband. Explain what youve said here, and see what he says. And also get proper legal advice, not the wannabe experts who seem intent on dishing out their limited knowledge in the harshest of ways.

GreenTulips · 30/06/2019 20:49

It’s interesting though isn’t it?

How can she as a married woman technically own half of everything, but yet in death as he has his name on the negate can leave everything to the dogs hole if he so chose?

Doesn’t line up does it?

BigSexyCrimeUnit · 30/06/2019 20:52

Agreed Notashandyta it's absolutely pathetic of posters to criticise and aggressively question someone who has lost a child and then discovered a very hurtful will. The nitpicking about the typing of PhD was a particularly low point.

hellodarkness · 30/06/2019 22:28

"And also get proper legal advice, not the wannabe experts who seem intent on dishing out their limited knowledge in the harshest of ways."

Well any of us can offer sympathy, but I thought op was after practical advice.

My xh has legally protected his estate in a very similar way, and I am in the process of protecting mine, so do have some understanding.

My intention was not to upset op but to counter the LTB posts and offer a perspective from the other side as it were.

I believe that, in a short marriage without children, you should not expect to leave it with substantially more than you arrived with.

I think a woman posting from the perspective of OP's dp would be advised to protect everything.

Her dp is leaving his estate to his dc - not ow, xw or the dogs home, but his own kids. OP has a good job, two pensions and a home for life. By all means get legal advice but I'd be surprised if she was advised that going for more would yield results. Perhaps the best thing would be to take out a separate life insurance policy?

JinglingHellsBells · 30/06/2019 22:42

@BigSexyCrimeUnit You are being a bit unfair because in all of my posts I did acknowledge the OP's loss and offer sympathy. I did however separate that and the current situation - they are different issues. The OP has a back story of this man treating her badly going back some time, and there are also some discrepancies around things which I won't go into to, but which did make me ask some questions.

You are being unfair to the 'Dh' if you cannot see that he is doing what many people do- making sure their bio children from the first marriage get their due inheritance. There is no doubt he is being ungenerous, but there are also some misunderstandings on this thread about what belongs to whom. The OP does not necessarily get half his business just because they are married, in the event of his death or divorce. He clearly thinks his grown up children have more 'right' to his estate than a woman he's been married to for a year. Is that so hard to understand?

JinglingHellsBells · 01/07/2019 07:53

@Finallyfeelstrong
Should I just lose everything alongside losing my husband. But to then worry where I would live? My pension is automatically halved and given to both husband and wife, so I would then struggle to live, have to ask who ever lives in my house to leave and move into a strange home, alongside grieving for my husband?

No. Your pension cannot be halved ( and given to your husband) if he is dead. Your husband receives half your pension if you die first, if you choose to name him.

You would also have the house he left you for life, so you'd not have to move.

Are you confused over a few things re your pension?

EggysMom · 01/07/2019 19:58

Bear in mind, OP, that if DH has built up a successful business since being married to you, it could be argued that you contributed to his success and therefore are entitled to a share of the business .... Definitely consult a solicitor when you are ready to leave him and, in the meantime, get copies of as many documents as you can!

GreenTulips · 01/07/2019 20:47

You would also have the house he left you for life, so you'd not have to move

What if OP wants to move? Go into a care home or finish her days in southern France?

What if she meets someone else and wants to share a home?

She’s stuck basically in a house she doesn’t own and can’t sell, only give up. She may also be left with repairs. Or it may be needed to be sold to cover other expenses.

At least if she part owned it, she’d have some choices

prh47bridge · 01/07/2019 21:21

I think the OP has misunderstood. It would be very unusual these days for a life trust to be written in such a way that the house cannot be sold. If this is a standard life trust she can sell the house and, if she wants, buy a new property. Any money that isn't spent on a new property must be invested. She can spend the interest but cannot touch the capital.

In the event that a widow remains in the house until death/moving of own free will but the children of the deceased owns the house. Who is responsible for the maintenance of the property?

The children of the deceased will not own the house. It will be held in trust for them. As the trust has no assets other than the house and no income it is not in a position to pay for maintenance of the property. It is therefore up to the widow to pay.

How can she as a married woman technically own half of everything, but yet in death as he has his name on the negate can leave everything to the dogs hole if he so chose?

She doesn't technically own half of everything. In the event of divorce it is all regarded as assets of the marriage, which is not the same thing. And if he did try to leave everything to the dog's home his widow would be able to make a claim under the Inheritance Act. She is entitled to reasonable provision. In broad terms that means she would inherit at least as much as she would have received in a divorce settlement regardless of what the will says.

ScrewBalls99 · 01/07/2019 21:43

I would go get legal advice tomorrow. Also enquire about divorce. Please do come away with half, you deserve it as have supported him and worked as a team throughout the marriage xx

prh47bridge · 02/07/2019 07:43

Please do come away with half, you deserve it

The OP deserves a fair share. That may not be half. Depending on the facts it may be more or less than half. And it is, of course, a fair share of everything including any assets that she owns.

JinglingHellsBells · 02/07/2019 08:33

@prh47bridge Are you a family solicitor?

Reason I ask is that a close family friend was left a house for life. It was her 2nd marriage (and his) and they were both widowed. She sold her own house when they married (40 years ago and had little equity from it) and moved into his home.

The agreement was if he died first, she could live in the house for life but his children were left it as their inheritance.

When he did die, she inherited his pension and some of his savings.

She herself had to go into a care home and funded it with the above funds and her own state pension.

The house was sold by his children.

There was never any chance of her selling it and using the cash to find a smaller house for herself.

This was quite recently- the last couple of years - so am very interested in your assertion that it's 'rare'.

prh47bridge · 02/07/2019 08:36

@Finallyfeelstrong - Just to clarify a couple of things...

In one of your posts you express concern that the house might be sold leaving you homeless. That can't happen. You have, as I understand it, been left a life interest in the house. That means it cannot be sold without your consent as long as you are alive.

You also say that you cannot sell the house. If this is a standard life interest trust that is not true. If you want to move or downsize the house can be sold with the proceeds used to buy you a new property. Your life interest would then transfer to the new property. Any money left over would be invested. You would be able to spend the interest but not the capital.

It is impossible to be sure from the information you have posted but it sounds like he has failed to make adequate provision for you in his will. Blended families are difficult as people want to protect their biological children and ensure they aren't disinherited, but it sounds like he may have gone too far down that path. If that is the case, should he die you will have a claim under the Inheritance Act. In broad terms, you should get at least as much as you would have got if you had divorced on the day of his death.

JinglingHellsBells · 02/07/2019 08:42

@Greentulips You might be interested in my post above.

The point is, no one can use the law to completely override someone's wishes. It comes down to personal choice- 'Do I stay in this marriage or not?'

You may perceive something as unfair, but the fact is that as the OP knows the score, she will have many years to decide what to do. This could include divorcing him (if she thinks the deal is unfair) OR making sure she can support herself if he dies first.

She says she is a teacher, she will have a good pension , she has the opportunity to save now and invest some of her income and prepare for old age(because she is only 39, works full time and her only outgoings are a contribution to food and bills. Unlike most women her age who are also paying a mortgage.) She may even be able to get a mortgage now and buy an investment property.

JinglingHellsBells · 02/07/2019 08:43

prh47bridge

Are you a solicitor? I'm asking as your post is completely contradictory to my own personal experience with a family friend, now in her 90s.

If you dish out legal advice you do need to say whether you are legally qualified to do so.

JinglingHellsBells · 02/07/2019 08:45

@prh47bridge

You've said this twice and I know of an example where this was not possible. How do you know your advice is correct?

You also say that you cannot sell the house. If this is a standard life interest trust that is not true. If you want to move or downsize the house can be sold with the proceeds used to buy you a new property. Your life interest would then transfer to the new property. Any money left over would be invested. You would be able to spend the interest but not the capital

This was never the case with my 'aunt' as I called her. ALL proceeds from the house sale had to go to her stepsons.