Aibu to think this is a good deal?

[User135792468]

I met my dh young and we have built our wealth and life together so I’m in a totally different situation.

My friend met a lovely guy a while back now. He is wealthy but also has 4 children from a previous relationship which he sees a lot and provides financial support. My understanding is that his ex comes from a wealthy family also.

Anyway, here is the aibu. He has made it clear that he doesn’t want to get married as he’s concerned that a divorce would impact how he can support his dc and that he plans to split his money between his dc when he passes and that a marriage would just complicate everything. They would like to have a baby together and he has said that their child would be treated equally when it comes to school fees, savings, inheritance etc. My friend, however, is really set on getting married for the reasons everyone mentions on here like financial security etc. especially if she were to give up work. I think she resents how much he does for his dc and thinks that if they’re together, she should be entitled to 50% of everything.

To address her concerns about financial security, he has said that if they have a baby, he will purchase her a buy to let outright (to the tune of around 400k) and put it in her name. She then has a house to fall back on should the worst happen and she has a monthly income. Obviously this amount is a fraction of his wealth. He has made it very clear he doesn’t want to get married. My friend, however, won’t let it drop and I’m worried she’s going to drive this guy away.

Aibu to think that his suggestion isn’t a bad one? I certainly wouldn’t be giving 400k to someone I had no intention of staying with. I’m just interested in hearing other people’s views.

I simply wouldn’t have a baby with someone who wasn’t prepared to get married, for whatever reason. Nothing to do with money. Others may feel differently. I’ve seen too many women get screwed over by men who have plenty of money and are lulled into a false sense of security and then left with nothing after their careers die while they’re enabling his career.

There’s a lot of things he could do with proper financial advice - the outright refusal would be a red flag for me.

When it boils down, marriage is a legal and financial agreement. His priority is protecting the rights of his four existing children plus the potential child. Her only priority is potential baby and her ability to provide for them in the future.
Marriage would be better for her.
Not marrying is better for the older children.

A 400k house could provide a decent income, taxed. But not enough to live on. So she couldn't give up work based on that one property.

They need to have a serious conversation about childcare fees (and school fees) in the future.

He wants to protect his kids. She’s asking for trouble getting involved with a man with 4 kids already. They should both walk away.

If getting married is important to her, then she shouldn’t settle. If marriage was important to me, I’d be pretty pissed off and that I was offered a house instead. What a dick he is to do that.

She resents what he does for his kids. If she’s the sort of person to resent that, then this will only get worse once she has a baby.

I’d advise both of them to walk away. I don’t think it will go well.

Wow! A £400k house is more than generous, as that would also come with child support should they split.

She does not need to give her job up or reduce her hours if she chooses not to, and without marriage then she shouldn't be doing that. If however, he expected her to reduce her hours or leave her job then he definitely needs to provide more. However, the job she is in is also a factor.... Does it have prospects or is it a minimum wage job and that's all she expects to be on for life...

I do however think having a child when someone already has children is purely selfish and people shouldn't do it... But that's another topic and not what the OP was asking!

I think your friend sounds like a gold digger and I'd be advising the guy to walk away!!

She’s not a gold digger like some people are saying. I think she’s just waited so long to meet someone she wants to settle down with, she’s struggling to come to terms with it not being exactly as she had hoped for. I think she’s always thought she would get married one day and doesn’t see them ever splitting up.

With regards to his current dc, she gets on well with them but doesn’t do any of the parenting tasks. Maybe that will change with time. There’s no drama with the ex either which makes life more pleasant for everyone.

It’s just a hard situation but I understand the compromise he wants to make. He has said that if he were to pass away or split, then if the assets are divided 50/50, then their child would get 60% (50% from mum and then 10% from dad if split equally between all the dc) whilst his other dc would only get 10%. This way, they would all get 20% and it would be fair. I’m sure there are things he could put into place like others have suggested but I’m not getting that involved. I lend a listening ear and try to be as non committal or opinionated as I can as it’ll just come back to bite me on the arse.

It’s easy for me to sit back and say, it’s fine, don’t worry as I have been married to dh for a long time now. Whether both dirt poor or both wealthy, this has definitely taught me that life is much more straightforward if you’re both in the same or a similar position.

I think she resents how much he does for his dc so she's already the step-mom-from-hell in making. Not married, no kids and she's already jealous of the kids and wants him less involved. and thinks that if they’re together, she should be entitled to 50% of everything well she is whilst they're together, she's not going to be eating beans on toast in the shed whilst he's feasting on foie gras. Any children will get the same education and an even split of inheritance. What she means is she wants to know she's walking away with 50% of everything when they divorce.

I think she resents how much he does for his dc and thinks that if they’re together, she should be entitled to 50% of everything.

he has said that their child would be treated equally when it comes to school fees, savings, inheritance etc

he will purchase her a buy to let outright (to the tune of around 400k) and put it in her name...My friend, however, won’t let it drop

I’m all for a woman ensuring her financial security but the bits above do make her sound a bit of a golddigger, especially resenting his children!

He sounds sensible to me, he’s putting his children first. If marriage is important to her, she needs to leave and find someone else to procreate with.

He sounds like he’s got his head screwed on and has been honest from the start. Ie. Giving all dc the same.

Giving friend a house is very generous. I presume ex-wife also has a house paid for, so everyone is equal.

The only concerns I have is ongoing support, for both ex-and friend. Has there been any mention for provision for the two mums, for ongoing costs?

Also, regarding school fees, I presumed this will be apportioned to the age of the dc. Ie. A 10 year will have 8 years fees in the pot, whilst dc’s child will have v13 years, etc.

“ I think she resents how much he does for his dc “

That doesn’t bode well for the future.

How can you say your friend isn't a money grabber when she's already thinking about being entitled to 50% of assets which she hasn't contributed to in any way? I think the guy sounds fairly smart, and if he has sense he'll write it into his will explicitly that she isn't entitled to his estate.

Your friend could continue working and thus retain financial independence without needing to be gifted anything in the form of a property. So yes, she sounds grabby and motivated purely by money.

Also if she's resentful of him being a decent father to his children then they're both on a hiding to nothing.

I don’t think either of them are unreasonable, but they are incompatible on this point. I understand why he wants to protect his finances, but she is mid 30s and wants the benefits of marriage, as so many women on here are told to make sure they have.

Yes a £400k house would be a great settlement if they split up in two years, but if they are together for thirty years before splitting, then not so much.

I would feel the same if I was him and I think he’s being quite fair (more than some people would be); her pushing about getting married would be a bit of a red flag if I was him as I’d be thinking why is she pushing so much, what’s her actual intentions

@Pinkdelight3

i disagree with the exit plan comments. She wants a baby and it's very sensible to be thinking about how this effects her financially in future - how many, many times do mumsnetters berate unmarried mums for not thinking these things through? Likewise, he's already divorced and got four kids, so he'd be a fool not to keep a cool head instead of forging ahead blinded by romance. So they're both smart for considering the options, but I agree with OP that it's a good offer and a fair compromise. With four kids in the mix and no doubt some scepticism marriage meaning forever, he's wise not to sign 50% of everything away in a heartbeat, but a £400k property solely in her name gives her more security that many wives/mums have. If your friend can't see that and won't let it drop, then it's perhaps no bad thing if it drives him away before they have a child together.

I agree with Pinkdelight.

She needs to protect herself if she has a baby and he wants to protect his existing 4 children's futures as well. It's a fair proposal. If she doesn't think so, then she should move on.

The reason I said that I don’t think she’s a gold digger is that she seems more caught up on the principle of getting married - if you love someone you get married and only if you’re not sure you want to be with someone forever would you not do it.

I’ve tried saying to her that he’s been burned before and he’s just not comfortable with it. He’s also never misled her in any way. He has quite a clinical way of looking at it but I think I would think the same way as him if I were to ever find myself in that position.

When he split with his ex, everything was split 50/50. She kept the house and other bits and as she was due to come into money, she agreed to no spousal support or child support on the proviso that he paid all schooling expenses until all dc left school. I think it’s around 80k a year at the minute but it will start going down at some point.

When I said I think she resents how much he does for his dc, maybe I wasn’t being fair. The ex doesn’t work and from my understanding was always very accommodating after the split and would still work around his work commitments to allow him to see the dc. She would step in last minute if he had to fly across the world for work and would do pick ups from school on his days to make things easier for the dc. Since Covid hit, he has been wfh and so she has asked herself for things to change sometimes at the last minute. Due to the past, he won’t ever say no and will happily accommodate anything. This is more what I was referring to when I said she can be a bit resentful. This is just something my friend needs to accept and that’s what I’ve told her. She needs to learn (and she is slowly) that maintaining that positive relationship will benefit her in the long run. If she’s at home with a baby and her partner needs to fly off when things open up again, then she won’t be expected to look after the 4 dc as the ex will step in as before.

She can continue to work and I’m sure she will part time. I think she’d just like the option to stay home.

She should also ask for him to make payments into her pension from the family pot for any periods that she is off work or works reduced hours due to pregnancy, childcare etc.

I don’t think they sound compatible. It’s quite normal and acceptable to want to be married before having a baby and he doesn’t want that. Neither is in the wrong with their views on marriage but if they can’t agree on something that fundamental, or the financial aspect of their future, it’s ridiculous to be considering having a baby.

So your friend wants to stay home with baby..... What does he want? Does he want her to stay at home or reduce her hours or is he happy if the child goes into childcare and she goes back full time?

He's been transparent from the start he wouldn't remarry so this shouldn't be a surprise to her. If marriage/no marriage is a deal breaker for your friend (it would be for me) then she should walk away now.

It is weird her focus is on what happens if they split/how she can give up work/school fees. My concerns would be about what happens when he dies - marriage gives protection in terms of death duties that can't be gained any other way.

@User135792468

The reason I said that I don’t think she’s a gold digger is that she seems more caught up on the principle of getting married - if you love someone you get married and only if you’re not sure you want to be with someone forever would you not do it.

I’ve tried saying to her that he’s been burned before and he’s just not comfortable with it. He’s also never misled her in any way. He has quite a clinical way of looking at it but I think I would think the same way as him if I were to ever find myself in that position.

When he split with his ex, everything was split 50/50. She kept the house and other bits and as she was due to come into money, she agreed to no spousal support or child support on the proviso that he paid all schooling expenses until all dc left school. I think it’s around 80k a year at the minute but it will start going down at some point.

When I said I think she resents how much he does for his dc, maybe I wasn’t being fair. The ex doesn’t work and from my understanding was always very accommodating after the split and would still work around his work commitments to allow him to see the dc. She would step in last minute if he had to fly across the world for work and would do pick ups from school on his days to make things easier for the dc. Since Covid hit, he has been wfh and so she has asked herself for things to change sometimes at the last minute. Due to the past, he won’t ever say no and will happily accommodate anything. This is more what I was referring to when I said she can be a bit resentful. This is just something my friend needs to accept and that’s what I’ve told her. She needs to learn (and she is slowly) that maintaining that positive relationship will benefit her in the long run. If she’s at home with a baby and her partner needs to fly off when things open up again, then she won’t be expected to look after the 4 dc as the ex will step in as before.

She can continue to work and I’m sure she will part time. I think she’d just like the option to stay home.

But it just isn't true that the only reason to not marry someone is if you're not sure it's a forever thing.

This man has clearly stated that he's putting the interests of his children above all else and protecting what he sees as being their assets one day. If he marries your friend and then dies, his children lose a lot of what would otherwise be theirs.

I think the buying her a house plan could work but she should also keep working.

Or if he’s already wealthy maybe he could be a sahd and she could work?

having just redone wills this scenario is something that has been discussed.
Me and DH trust each other that if one of us died we would protect the kids future and inheritance in the event we got new partners. I think for both of us that would mean not marrying again so that all assets would go to the kids.

getting involved with someone who has already married and had kids is not going to be as romantic as meeting someone who hasnt dont those things. They will not have rose tinted glasses on as will be fully aware of what can go wrong and rightly will want to protect the future of thier existing children.

I don't think the SAHD idea would work with £80k p.a. school fees to find, plus presumably paying for private school all the way through for this next child, should they have one.

Re. the friend's angle, I think it's quite impractical to stick rigidly to the 'if you loved me you'd marry me' line. That would fly if it was a first marriage with no DC in the mix, but with a divorced man with four kids, it's a pretty naive and uncompromising stance. If it's the legal side she's concerned about, they need to sort it all out with a solicitor. But if it's an abstract romantic ideal then she's picked the wrong man to deliver it, and as OP said he was clear on that from the start, then the emotional blackmail is futile.

I think your friend needs to be pragmatic, taking into account her current situation as well as his.
As she is mid 30s & has most likely worked for 10/ 15 years , it would be interesting to know what she is bringing into the relation financially.
Does she has a pension? Maybe she can continue to contribute to a private pension .
He has been honest with her through out the relationship. If she continues to compare her situation to others such as your own, it would be best for her to try find a partner with no existing children.
If I was her partner, I would definitely want to keep the money I had already accumulated aside for any existing or future children.
Is she going to be contributing any money to their future home or bills while she continues to work?
If she & him want her to be a SAHP , once she has children , then yes she should benefit from his income earned while together. I would expect a 400K house to more than than compensate for this.
If they both agree that she doesnt return to work when the children are older, then she should maybe look into making the private pension contributions.