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

[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!

Answers to your questions-

1. He is. Massively.
2. Run for the hills

@Mirw

She can will the house to her children with her partner getting lifelong rent. She can also will money to whoever she feels like. The spouse then gets what is left. Therefore he can't take everything and give it to his children... Greedy F!

This isn't true at all. The Inheritance Act 1975 give a spouse very strong rights over the family home.

A prenuptial agreement is something he will sign as a legally binding agreement, and the Will would cement this. Then he can't wriggle out of it.

This is why I won't marry DP. If I die, my life insurance pays off the mortgage, the house gets sold and my DC get the proceeds of sale, my death in service and my pension. I haven't even written in a lifetime interest as tbh, I wouldn't want my DC to have to wait decades for my hard earned money. DP would get his half of the mortgage paid off because I am dead, which I think is enough of a benefit and I put in a bigger deposit initially. It means I don't get his pension, death in service etc if he dies first (he has no DC so I don't know who will get his assets but it's none of my business) but I would rather my DC benefit long term than me. And I always financially planned for being single. DP was a nice surprise but why should my DC miss out because I basically need a sex life and companionship? Maybe frame it like that to your DMum?

ONG what kind of hold has he got over her? She’s got money and property. He’s got nothing. He plans to inherit everything and give everything to his children and nothing to hers? Is she frightened of him? She should get rid and fast.

Also wanted to say that EVERYTHING that your DM's partner has said is a crock of shit.

His DC should get NOTHING of your DM's assets unless she explicitly says so.
It is his responsibility to provide for his DC, not your DM's.

Again another reason why:

1. She shouldn't marry this low life
2. If she does marry him, she needs to do a will to make sure her DC get her house and assets. If she marries him and does nothing, he will get EVERYTHING

@Anotherinheritanceq ask your mum how she’d feel if you were the one marrying a gold digger who would inherit all your assets and money and leave his deceased wife’s dc penniless. It’s really scary that your mum can’t see the red flags. Why is she so desperate to get married when she’s got everything to lose and the gold digger has everything to gain?

@PurpleCarpets

She should leave her assets on trust to him for his lifetime and then to her children after he's gone.

This.

That's how to avoid the issue of sideways disinheritance.

@Anotherinheritanceq

Hopefully you'll get your mum to a solicitor and hopefully she'll listen.

I'm sure the solicitor will cover this, BUT if she does decide to do a 'life tenancy' that it states that he is able to live in the house until he dies or is unable to remain in the house, remarries, or cohabits with anyone (including moving his children in).

This is the way my aunt framed her life estate for her 2nd husband. Phrasing it this way left the house 'empty' if he died as no one else was allowed to take up residence, and also would have allowed the children to sell the house if he'd had to go into permanent care. The attorney said that this would prevent her heirs from having to 'evict' anyone from the house (like a wife or his adult child) if he died, and would mean that the house wouldn't sit vacant or mean an expensive court fight to sell if he had to go into a home and ended up living for years. Luckily, he died first.

Oh and there was also a clause about 'maintaining in good repair'. If he was not able to keep the house in 'functional order' he would have to allow it to be sold.

@ivykaty44

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.

a person who put their own children first is fine

a person who steals from someone else inheritance to give to their own children is morally bankrupt

I think my answer would have been, "If I took the same approach as you and put my children first, we shouldn't get married."

I have to ask....what does this man have that has made willingly choose to risk her own financial future for him?

He has made clear his priorities. Her miney and his kids and doesn't even want all the kids to be treated equally. He wants it all.

There has to be some redeeming qualities?

Be interesting to find out how they met...I'd bet money he's steered this relationship.

hes only in it for what he can get for his kids. she shd tell him she is going to leave some to him for his lifetime bt not for his kids, then it goes to hers. watch him run .... she shd definitely be aiming higher, not this loser, tho she may be blinded by love

My husband and I have five kids: three from his previous marriage; one from my previous marriage; one child who is both of ours. I wrote my will last year. Due to inheritance, I have become much more financially comfortable than him, and wanted to protect my assets for my children. I have left all of my money to our shared daughter and my daughter from my first marriage. But, if I die first, he of course has the house until he dies/sells, and the house/proceeds are then split equally between all five children. So all will benefit. Equally, when he - finally! - writes his will, any money that is his will be split four ways: between his three kids from his first marriage, and our shared child. We both feel this is a fair and equitable arrangement.

From what I've been told if she leaves him 1p he can't then contest the will.

@anotherinheritanceq

I have advised her against marrying him to protect her assets but I have no control over the situation and it seems she is going to marry him anyway.

I am a child in this situation also, both ways, step father has limited contact with his kids but obvs will still inherit something, everything they together have my mother had before their marriage, my step mother will stand to inherit millions from my father in the instance of his demise and isn't interested in any of his children at present so I can't see that changing. I don't expect anything and neither do my siblings, but on both sides morally and rightfully should be ours, we probably wouldn't even argue it tbh, except maybe my childhood home, and some of my mothers things that have great sentimental value, worthless but you know the stuff, old paste jewellery that was my great nanas, a table that belonged to my great great uncle, some trinkets. I'd obvs much rather have my parents, but can't help wondering what will happen in the future.

You can't change her decision, just support her in getting the correct things in place for if the worst should happen, men like that seem to show their true colours sooner rather than later so hold your nerve op. Good luck.

[quote Anotherinheritanceq]@whenthedoveslie

So at first you say I'm either a troll or moron as if this couldn't happen. Then in the next post you say it happens to lots of people. You also give the impression I should have cut her off, but then say yourself you would support her firstly, but that is what I am trying to do... support her! I posted on here to just check my suspicions and feelings are correct, as it's an awkward situation with me being her child. Maybe actually read the thread next time, although you declare it's a waste of your time so I'm not sure why you want to join the thread anyway. A number of people in the thread said it happened to them too. It is not like he said this to my mum and then she laughed and said "yeah, screw my children, I don't care anyway I'll be dead by then". No, she was upset about it![/quote]
Huh?

Who are you posting as? The OP is presenting a question as in a scenario close to them one assumes.

Your anger is misdirected.

You or they asked.

I responded.

@PurpleCarpets

She should leave her assets on trust to him for his lifetime and then to her children after he's gone.

Perfect

I don’t think inheritance is your problem. Your mum is only in her 40s! A LOT can happen between now and a naturally timed death.

If she goes ahead and protects her assets from him in her will, you can bet your bottom dollar he’ll deplete them while they’re both still alive. He will pressure her every which way. He thinks he deserves that money, and he will ensure he gets it.

It’s good that your mum is thinking about this. She’s obviously aware something isn’t right. Keep at it. He’s a nasty man, he’s not thinking of her or anyone but himself.

[quote anotherinheritanceq]@UniversalAunt okay, I didn't know that about marriage unless a pre-nup was involved which I thought was an American thing, but PPs earlier in the thread said you can absolutely have a pre-nup.

Honestly I am not happy about the situation and don't understand why she feels the need to marry this man. She married my dad and clearly that didn't work out for her so she knows it doesn't guarantee a lifetime together, I don't understand what she can get out of a marriage that she can't get out of simply cohabiting. I just feel like, if you can only get married if you have pre-nups and complicated wills etc to protect your assets, then what is even the point? Obviously if she is going to marry him she needs to sort this stuff out though and I'd rather her do that than nothing at all while still marrying him.[/quote]
I would say that her will is only part of the problem. If she marries him she is very vulnerable financially if they divorced. He could take half her assets at that point. If she is only in her late forties I’d think that was a greater likelihood.
I cannot understand your mum at all. Her actions completely baffle me.

She is being unreasonable! I would be walking away if somebody was talking about my children like that.

As a couple of PPs have said, there must be a way of her putting her assets in to a trust for you (and your siblings if you have any) should she pass before him. Perhaps allowing for him to remain in the property for the end of his days but it would come to you once he dies. Hopefully if she gets some professional financial advice it will make her see sense.

@crazyexornot

From what I've been told if she leaves him 1p he can't then contest the will.

My understanding is that there is less chance of contesting a will, if the person contesting has actually been mentioned in the will. It doesn't matter what they are left, it's about the fact that they we re not just "forgotten" in the provisions of the will.

Red flags as far as the eye can see here. I'm honestly worried for this woman if she decides to marry this man. Get her away from him, and fast.