Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

It's an inheritance one, who is right here?

679 replies

anotherinheritanceq · 27/01/2022 21:14

This one is more about what's morally right than legalities iyswim, hence why I'm posting here.

So someone I know has assets over half a million, not sure on figure but I know she owns her big house outright and has money in the bank etc. She has children from previous marriage, and she is engaged to her partner who also has children. He can't work and doesn't have any assets, he's on disability benefits. Obviously when marrying what's hers is his, fair enough.

However they've been talking about things including wills, and basically it's come up that if she were to die first (and naturally he would inherit the whole lot), once he dies he would pass everything including the house onto his children and not a penny for his wife's children. Of course she says that's not fair that her children would get nothing if she happens to die first, all her children grew up in that home etc. He argues that everyone puts their own children first and it'll be the only opportunity of giving anything to his children because of his disability/not being able to work.

Who is being unreasonable? What's the done thing in these situations?

I know she is now on about writing a will to leave something to her kids but obviously she can't leave her partner homeless and penniless!

OP posts:
QuestionsorComments · 28/01/2022 10:55

I was widowed young and whilst I'd like to think I won't be alone forever, I won't ever marry, cohabit or combine finances again. I just can't see a satisfactory way to solve this. Of course if the new spouse is effectively a dependent, he should be provided for, but that's going to disadvantage the children.

rebeccachoc · 28/01/2022 10:56

He is being incredibly selfish. In my family in a similar situation the wife left a will saying the house can be lived in by the husband until his death then it will be spilt by her kids, the house never went into his name at all I believe. So at least that way he gets to live safely but her kids eventually get the house. As for the money, she can will part of the cash to her kids on her death and leave some to her husband to help him live on, but he'll have the house rent free so less living costs, so he won't need so much cash left. But this is just what my family did (with the house not the cash). Best she gets solicitors advice.

QuestionsorComments · 28/01/2022 10:57

@GreenFingersWouldBeHandy

Can you even write someone out of the will if you are married?

Of course you can. You can leave whatever you want to whoever you want.

And this is none of your business anyway.

I don't think you can if they can show they were dependent. You don't have to leave them "everything" but you can't leave them destitute. And assuming this is someone you love, why would you want to?
c190 · 28/01/2022 11:03

H and I both have mirror wills that give half our assets to each other, and then the other half direct to the children (in trust if they are

DaveGahansRealWife · 28/01/2022 11:04

@WindowWanker

My sister has married a man but intends to leave her assets to her children. She was told that she can leave everything to her children, but she cannot make him effectively homeless if she dies first.
I own the majority of a property with my second H. I have written in an official Right to Reside for him as he literally could not afford to buy my part out. He cannot use the property to buy something else and he has to relinquish it if he remarries. My majority share of the property will go to my dependents when he dies or leaves it. There was no need for me to do this.I could have effectively made him homeless. I could have asked that he buys my dependents out when I die. Re your sister - it depends on who owns house and how. This is not the case for everyone.
Sidneysussex · 28/01/2022 11:10

Firstly she absolutely should not marry him . Her first duty is to her children!
If she is a fool and does she has a will leaving everything to her children with him allowed to live in house until death.
My grandmother did this step grandad lived in her house and downsized to bungalow etc but never had access to her savings or owned the property. He was furious when the will was read. But it protected her children!

Jk987 · 28/01/2022 11:11

What an absolute joke! His wife's children are his step children, they are his family too. Does he really dislike his wife's kids or something?

Anyway there must be a job he can do to earn his own money. In what way his he disabled? Perhaps he can do a wfh desk job or something. He doesn't sound much of a catch, more of a free loader.

QuestionsorComments · 28/01/2022 11:13

@anotherinheritanceq

This one is more about what's morally right than legalities iyswim, hence why I'm posting here.

So someone I know has assets over half a million, not sure on figure but I know she owns her big house outright and has money in the bank etc. She has children from previous marriage, and she is engaged to her partner who also has children. He can't work and doesn't have any assets, he's on disability benefits. Obviously when marrying what's hers is his, fair enough.

However they've been talking about things including wills, and basically it's come up that if she were to die first (and naturally he would inherit the whole lot), once he dies he would pass everything including the house onto his children and not a penny for his wife's children. Of course she says that's not fair that her children would get nothing if she happens to die first, all her children grew up in that home etc. He argues that everyone puts their own children first and it'll be the only opportunity of giving anything to his children because of his disability/not being able to work.

Who is being unreasonable? What's the done thing in these situations?

I know she is now on about writing a will to leave something to her kids but obviously she can't leave her partner homeless and penniless!

I suppose at least he's being honest. This is what happens in very many cases, even when there's been an "agreement" that the surviving partner will see all the children treated equally.
babyjellyfish · 28/01/2022 11:13

Thank goodness she has had this conversation with him now.

If she is determined to marry him, she needs to make a will. In normal circumstances a will is invalidated by marriage or divorce, but you can make a will in anticipation of marriage which remains valid.

If she dies without a will and they are married, he will be her primary beneficiary under the intestacy rules (but I think her children would still get something).

If she makes a will she is not legally obliged to leave him anything, but if she doesn't, he might try to challenge her will in the courts. This would be difficult and expensive and there is no guarantee that he would succeed, but it is a risk.

If she makes a will she can decide how much to leave to her husband and how much to leave to her children. It is also possible to create a trust giving her husband the right to live in the house during his life, but her children inherit it afterwards.

It's also worth noting that even if he said he would provide for her children in his will, if he outlives her she will be dead and will have no way of ensuring that he makes good on that promise. So regardless of any conversations they might have and what he says either now or later, she needs to take her own independent legal advice and ensure that she provides for her children in her will.

She needs to see a solicitor and make a will before she gets married.

DaveGahansRealWife · 28/01/2022 11:13

There is a hell of a lot of misinformation on this thread and @anotherinheritanceq as you have now admitted you know very little about the actual legalities. We came to our marriage both with children and assets and it is all legally taken care of - his assets to his children and vice versa. The big difference in your case @anotherinheritanceq is that this man seems not to be on an equal financial footing and I do see where your concern comes from. I would be helping your mother to get the best advice here on the way forward. Hopefully she will see that this man is a cocklodger present and future. Maybe a good solicitor will help her see sense. I do hope so.

throwa · 28/01/2022 11:30

She should not get married. This is one of those instances where there is no benefit to doing so and there is an awful lot to lose financially should she do so.

If she wants to, then she needs watertight legal advice from an actual lawyer, not people on the internet. There are legal ways of leaving her assets to her kids, with eg a life interest in the house to her husband whilst he still lives, but you need a decent lawyer for these.

godmum56 · 28/01/2022 11:31

well he has been honest.....me I wouldn't marry him and in fact would be kicking him out the door as we speak but at very least she should be getting proper legal advice and making a will as fast as she can.

babyjellyfish · 28/01/2022 11:36

She should probably also think through the implications of leaving her husband even a life interest in the house.

You say they are in their 40s now. Say she marries him and dies next year. (It's horrible to think about but it could happen.) He could potentially live for another 50 years, meaning that you and your siblings would be waiting for your inheritance until you retire basically. It means you wouldn't be able to use the money to do things like buy your own house or pay for your children's university education.

He already sounds like a bit of a cocklodger. That's bad enough while your mum is still alive, let alone if he is still able to do it for decades after she has died.

I get that it's difficult to voice these concerns without being grabby. Can you suggest that your mum makes an appointment with a solicitor and offer to go along with her?

Proudboomer · 28/01/2022 11:42

I am a widow and this is one of the reasons why I am not interested in any new relationship. The assets that myself and my late husband have earned are for our children and I would never put myself in a position where anyone would have any sort of claim on them.

ChickenStripper · 28/01/2022 11:43

@Proudboomer

I am a widow and this is one of the reasons why I am not interested in any new relationship. The assets that myself and my late husband have earned are for our children and I would never put myself in a position where anyone would have any sort of claim on them.
You do know that this doesn't have to happen?
Proudboomer · 28/01/2022 11:50

It is just a risk that I am not prepared to take as I have seen relatives act disgracefully over what they see as money when other relatives have died. People who you think are lovely nice individuals who suddenly turn into money grabbing arseholes when they think free money is to be had.

Blossomtoes · 28/01/2022 11:50

@Proudboomer

I am a widow and this is one of the reasons why I am not interested in any new relationship. The assets that myself and my late husband have earned are for our children and I would never put myself in a position where anyone would have any sort of claim on them.
I don’t imagine that’s your only reason. I’ve reached the point in my life where I think men are redundant. I’m happy to carry on with the current one but if I was widowed I wouldn’t want another one.
Muckymaisonette · 28/01/2022 11:57

What happens a few years down the line when the romance has lost its shine and she starts to resent the fact she does provides for everything and he’s hoping she’ll pop her clogs.

Does he provide in any way for his children or will she be doing that too.

QuestionsorComments · 28/01/2022 12:02

When you (anyone) marry at what point would you expect assets to become marital assets? If she's remarrying in her 40s, she could potentially be married to him longer than she was married to her children's father.

The both need to make sure all their children are provided for, but I'm not sure it's (morally) as clear cut as all the deceased father's and surviving mother's money should go to their DC.

babyjellyfish · 28/01/2022 12:09

@QuestionsorComments

When you (anyone) marry at what point would you expect assets to become marital assets? If she's remarrying in her 40s, she could potentially be married to him longer than she was married to her children's father.

The both need to make sure all their children are provided for, but I'm not sure it's (morally) as clear cut as all the deceased father's and surviving mother's money should go to their DC.

I think it would be different if they both had assets and the surviving partner agreed to provide for all the children.

But in this situation she has assets and he doesn't, and he is already saying that if she dies first he will leave the lot to his children and cut hers out.

QuestionsorComments · 28/01/2022 12:13

But in this situation she has assets and he doesn't, and he is already saying that if she dies first he will leave the lot to his children and cut hers out.

It's often the case that one person takes more into a marriage than the other though.

It is very odd that he's saying this out loud though. It's the sort of thing that usually happens when family have been led to believe they'll be looked after.

ChickenStripper · 28/01/2022 12:13

@Blossomtoes women always say that when they are married. You possibly have no idea what it is like to live alone esp when you are older.

Blossomtoes · 28/01/2022 12:16

[quote ChickenStripper]@Blossomtoes women always say that when they are married. You possibly have no idea what it is like to live alone esp when you are older.[/quote]
I lived alone for over ten years before I married this one and he was away Monday to Friday for most of our married life. There will never be another man in my bed after this one.

babyjellyfish · 28/01/2022 12:18

@QuestionsorComments

But in this situation she has assets and he doesn't, and he is already saying that if she dies first he will leave the lot to his children and cut hers out.

It's often the case that one person takes more into a marriage than the other though.

It is very odd that he's saying this out loud though. It's the sort of thing that usually happens when family have been led to believe they'll be looked after.

I think in a way it's a blessing that he has said this out loud.

Children being accidentally disinherited by a parent who assumes their subsequent spouse will do the right thing is such a common problem now with blended families.

Even if the OP's mother was marrying a man with plenty of his own money who didn't rely on her financially, the OP and her siblings would be at exactly the same risk of being left without a penny if their mother dies first and their stepfather decides to leave everything to his own children (or even a new spouse).

Absolutely everybody who has children from a previous relationship needs to think about this when they get married.

Proudboomer · 28/01/2022 12:19

I don’t imagine that’s your only reason. I’ve reached the point in my life where I think men are redundant. I’m happy to carry on with the current one but if I was widowed I wouldn’t want another one.

There other considerations but protecting my assets plays a big part and maybe I am just to set in my ways to want to have to consider the wants and needs of a partner.