He still has his ex as next of kin on all paperwork, including pensions - AIBU he should change it?

[Monochromepink]

Hello,

this is my first time dating a man who is separated. They have 3 children together, youngest is 4.

They split 2 years ago and it’s a strained split, don’t get on well at all. I have noticed all his paperwork still has all her details as his next of kin, in passports, and named as a beneficiary in life insurance documents and pension documents etc.

We’ve been together just under a year, am I being unreasonable thinking to myself he should be changing all these things?

In future he knows I want to have my own children and has agreed to this, wouldn’t that become very messy if she is still named on documents?

So put it in the children’s names then.

she can facilitate what they need exactly the same. But the children get any remainder once they turn 18 rather then the ex.

putting it in the children’s names makes sure they get it. And not the ex, or the ex’s new partner should anything then happen to her.

Maybe he’s a normal caring human who acknowledges that the mother of his children will need money to raise 3 children if he passes unexpectedly and doesn’t feel the need or desire to ensure his money is locked away until his children are 18 and unable to be used to raise them.

TBF, we don't know which type of pension scheme he is in. It could be that there is a partner/spousal pension and a lump sum. There could also be a separate short term children's pension.

If there is a partner/spouse pension, then he couldn't put it in his children's names even if he wanted to.

So put it in the children’s names then.

And what's the ex supposed to do with the loss of maintenance which she may well be relying on to pay her rent? She couldn't ask the trustees of her kids' pension for some cash for rent can she?

Is/was he married? It’s not clear from your posts.

I really wouldn’t be making plans to move in with/have children with a married man.

If you didn’t think he should change his beneficiary to you, who did you think it should be?

Pensions consultant here. No insurance company or set of pension scheme trustees will pay direct to children under 18. A child cannot give a valid receipt for the money and so the company or trustees would not be relieved of their liability. In cases where children are named, the general practice is to pay to whoever is acually taking care of them.

Curious who is your beneficiary @Monochromepink on “all” your “paperwork” 🤣

Wow no he’s not being unreasonable at all, you are being so unreasonable.

Are they still married and not yet divorced? If so she'd get most of it anyway.

@Monochromepink

Of course you want to be the beneficiary-who are you trying to kid?

You say quite clearly that you have told him you want children, that he has agreed and that if you do it , "will become very messy if she is named on the documents", so obviously you mean her off and you on.

I'll tell you this though, that if you have children with someone who is just a boyfriend (and that is all he is unless you go through a LEGAL partnership ceremony or marriage-if not you can call him partner all you want-he will still be just a boyfriend) then he can keep his wife on all documents and you will be sitting on the side of the road if he dies.

All this will be academic if you marry him before having children because then you will have automatic rights. That would be a better move but it doesn't sound as if he has put this option forward.

Your snooping and his lack of proposal have at least told you that in his mind, you're an also ran, second best. Now you know, have a bit of wit and don't have a baby with him.

Good grief, YABU and over invested/grabby. I wouldn’t put my pension or any other financial documents to your name having already a child even if I was engaged to you and we had been dating for years. Children’s security come first, all the time.

Next of kin is another thing, and one that is much simpler than you think. But again, you have been together for a short time and you don’t have yet the very strong links he has with his ex (CHILDREN).

For those saying that the beneficiaries should be the children. They probably won’t be able to get access to their money until they are 18. Unless the mum is very affluent this would make the children very vulnerable.

What’s the point of getting a small or big inheritance at 18 when the kids would have missed so many opportunities for development and career preparation growing up in financial hardship?

He already has three children, the youngest of which is only four! Does nobody think of the kids in these situations? 3 kids isn't enough for him so he's promised you (someone he's been with for 12 months) more kids! I know that isn't the point but I can't abide how people do this. No thought for the existing multiple children, let's just make some more.

My advice would be for your boyfriend to invest in a lockable drawer

I think he needs to book himself in for the snip.