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!

There's no way I would marry a man who told me, in advance, that if I died he'd screw my kids over.

If I was a cynical person I'd start hiding notes around the house (and with friends) to indicate I do not like asphyxiation or rough sex. Also get my exes to confirm I never once liked these things.

He seems a ruthless opportunist.

She shouldn't marry him.

Because she is risking alot financially.

But also he has proved he is a cock.

From reference dp promises me that if I died, he would ensure he left it all to the kids. I trust him. But still nor getting married.

I could die tomorrow and he would be 42. He could meet someone else and it all goes to her. As much as I trust dp, I would have my kids financial future dependent on him.

If he said he would cut them out, I wouldn't even be with him. I can't believe this woman is chancunf her kids nit getting anything so she can what? Marry a nasty piece of work?

My mum is dead. If dad considered marrying someone who said the same, I would tell him he was a fucking idiot and ask why he was putring her kids in front of us and his grandkids.

And honestly, I am not even fussed about inheritence. But it does feel like a kick in the teeth.

@SparklyLeprechaun

She can get a will in contemplation of the marriage that will still be valid after they get married. She can also leave all her assets away from him. The problem is that he as the surviving spouse has the right to contest her will.

But she shouldn't marry him not because of the money, but because of his shitty attitude towards her children and his sense of entitlement.

Yes I think this is a concern she may be having that if she did leave everything to her kids he could contest it and succeed anyway.

Heck no. If there a name for this sort of cocklodger? Some sort of black widower version!! I'd be worried he's going to bump her off for the money.

Her house gets protected for her children. I would never marry a man who said this to me.

If she does a Will leaving all her assets to her own children then he will be left with nothing providing the assets etc are in her sole name. However, he could have claim on her estate and claim he is a dependent etc. he would most likely get something but not all and then her children would be left with the majority. She needs to seek legal advice

The cheek. He wants to use the marriage as a means of leaving inheritance to his children?!

She needs to get to a solicitor and get a will sorted, she also needs to ensure that he is not executor of that will and that she chooses someone she trusts to carry out the terms.

www.malcolmcfoy.co.uk/site/library/legal-updates/how-to-protect-your-childrens-inheritance

She needs legal advice so she can see what could go wrong. He could remarry after her death, all these things need to be considered. It is clearly in the best interest of her children that she sorts out seeing a solicitor asap. That is how you appeal to her, remind her of what she wants for her children.

Bizarre that she is still contemplating marrying him.

She needs to as a solicitor. A good one, and pronto.

Like everyone here, in my opinion she should dump him right now. I can't believe that she would put him and his children before her own. That's just appalling and traitorous.

Hopefully a lawyer would put her straight and make a watertight will that benefits her children and will still apply post marriage

Waves giant red flag.

She can leave the house to her children but with the condition that he can remain living in it for life unless he marries someone else. That protects the interests of children and husband.
It's sad he won't have a house to leave his children but presumably he will have some financial asset by the time of his death if the wife dies first - if I was the wife I'd leave the house as above but split financial wealth and personal items between her children and her husband.

@maybemu

Use his argument. Everyone puts their own kids first so I'll be writing a will and won't be marrying you. Utter madness!

This. Why is she accepting this and choosing to put her kids last?

@titchy

Can you even write someone out of the will if you are married? I simply assumed that they had to get something, same as how assets are usually split when divorcing.

Yes of course you can! She could leave him a life interest in her house allowing him to live in it till his death or he finds someone else, then it is sold and the proceeds go to her children. A solicitor can draw that up fairly easily.

Yes she can write what she wants but (assuming she is in England and Wales) he would be able to challenge it under the Inheritance Act 1975 if the will didn't make reasonable provision so advice should be taken on that. A life interest trust would sound like a good avenue to explore.

What's the done thing??? Blast this fucking freeloading LOSER straight into outer space and leave him there!! Jeez!

As a living spouse, even with an airtight will, he could contest this. Meaning after her death, her children could then be dealing with a shit ton of drama that they're better of without.
This man is a walking red flag, and she's better off cutting the strings now and walking away.

God that's terrible and really not what would usually happen - no to marrying without sorting it!

Yes or walking away - or just don't marry. Urgh

I'm pretty sure she wants me to be executor of the will anyway based on discussions she had with me, hence why she was telling me about all this. Luckily I know she is going to sort out a will, she just hasn't done it yet. I was really appalled by what he said too, but I didn't know if I was being biased as I'd be one of said children being disinherited by him! I'm really not a grabby person though and would rather she live a full and happy life than leave me anything.

* He's an utter shit, and if that were me it would be a deal breaker. If she can't trust him to look after her children, she should bin him*

^This. She should not marry him whatsoever.

This type of scenario is why I can’t imagine ever remarrying if something happens to my husband. Sure I can date, even have a serious relationship, but I won’t do anything to jeopardize the inheritance that goes to our child. If needs must, I’d rather get adjacent homes just to make it clear.

She needs a solicitor. He can only challenge if he is dependent on her (which it sounds like he will be)….so she really needs a good solicitor. Leaving everything to her kids with him having a lifetime right to stay in the house might work…better not to marry him!

There's no "naturally he would inherit the whole lot". If she dies intestate, having both a spouse and her own children, her estate would be split and divided between the spouse and the children. The spouse would end up with more, but not with everything, as long as it exceeds the protected share for the spouse.

She should definitely write a will. That's true in any case, but it would be very urgent in this case. Where is she based? In England marriage revokes a will, in Scotland it does not. It's true that a solicitor could draw up the will that it is made in contemplation of the forthcoming marriage, but probably still safer to make another one post-marriage anyway.

It's better to not marry him at all. Are other benefits of doing so and his general attitude really so good as to trump his attitude towards the inheritance of her children? Morally, he should consider that her children have a right to inherit from her and loving her, he should want her wishes about her property respected, which it does not seem that he does. His intention to leave "his" (prospective) property to his own children is understandable, as it seems he has no real relationship with her children - but it is a reason to make sure that the property does not pass to him.

She should absolutely never marry him! I’ve told my dh that if I died then I expect him to have transferred half the house to a trust for the dc before moving someone in or marrying them, he’s completely on board with this and this is my husband and their father. If she can marry him knowing he would not only disinherit her children but thinks that’s a perfectly normal thing to do then I’d lose all respect for her.