Worried my Sons will be left with nothing

[JaffaCake70]

My Husband and I are both early 50s and have been married just over a year (together 3 years in October).

Before we met I had been renting private accommodation. When we married I moved into my Husband's house which he had been paying the mortgage on for around 5 years, he had also paid a large deposit when he moved into the property as he had sold a previous property. We now both contribute to the mortgage and all other household expenses. We re-mortgaged to the tune of £10,000 to pay for our wedding and honeymoon.

We haven't really had any serious conversations about finances apart from the agreement of how much I would pay into the home but now I'm starting to worry. I know I need to speak to my Husband about the things I'm about to discuss with you, but I just wanted to see if anyone can advise me where I stand legally before I have the conversation.

My Husband has an adult Son and Daughter, his Daughter lives with us, I have 2 adult Sons, neither of whom live with us.

We both have decent pensions, if anything should happen to him before he cashes his, I would receive it and vice versa (he would receive mine). This has all been put into place.

He has told me that if he should die before me, the proceeds of the house are being split 3 ways between me, his Son and his Daughter.

My worry is: What is being left to my Sons should I die first?

This is really playing on my mind because the way it looks to me on paper is that they wouldn't get anything.

Is there anything I can do to change this? Can I split my pension 3 ways so that my Sons get a 3rd each?

What will happen to my 3rd of the house if I were to die first? I am now paying into the house, surely my Sons should be entitled to something in the event of my death? How does it work though? For example, if I were to die in 10 years time (God forbid) but my Husband then went on to live for another 20 years, maybe even marries again, what happens to my 3rd of the property?

I'm really worried that I've put my Sons in the position of not receiving anything at all if I were to die before my Husband. I don't have any savings to bequeath to them, the only money I have of my own is my pension.

Do I have any legal standing in stating that I want my 3rd of the property to be divided between my Sons in the event of my death. I still feel it's a little unfair that my Sons would be receiving less than my Husband's children (as in his children would still receive a 3rd each, my Sons would have to share my 3rd).

I'm stressing myself out with all of this, I know I need to speak to my Husband but don't want to come across as money grabbing as I'm really not. I just want to know that my Sons will be provided for financially in the event of my death.

YABU - Your Sons should not be entitled to anything from the house

YANBU - You work just as hard as your Husband and are now paying an equal amount into the home therefore your Sons definitely are entitled to a percentage of the house.

But more than YA/YANBU opinions, please can anyone advise as to what I should do/say in this situation?

I think @anonymousxoxo give her or his truest answer to me: ‘My house my rules. I decide who gets what.’ It isn’t for us to speculate on why she or he is inventing data to bolster their preferred outcome.

At least by now the OP can see their bias.

What if she never met him then what? She would have no assets to pass on. The only way the house exists is he paid the deposit.

I'm not sure if you are trying hard NOT to understand and be provocative, or if you simply can't grasp the facts @anonymousxoxo

Are you unable to understand that if the OP is paying monthly towards the mortgage, for another 15 years or however long it is, then she is due some equity when he dies? (Whether she passes anything onto her sons is a separate issue.)

Or are you going to insist her payments are just rent?

You've also ignored my question whether you could buy a house as a single woman supporting two young boys whose father had died.

And what if she dies tomorrow?
What should they be entitled to?

@GoingGoingUp I don’t think the OPbis necessarily being grabby, although we don’t have a full picture.

I think she objects to the fact that as things stand, if she predeceases her husband she will have enhanced his children’s wealth at the expense of her own sons. I am confident that I would not (re)marry for money (should the occasion arise) but I consider this really unfair. Most PPs accusing the OP of being after her husband’s money seem to be missing this point

I worked hard and saved deposit, so I get the say in how it’s used and distributed. Not someone who hasn’t plate a part in it. Very greedy and grabby. Shy of hard work also.

AND how does the house exist? It wouldn’t exist without the deposit.

Thank you, this is exactly my fear. I'm not grabby in the slightest, but I work hard and contribute equal amounts to the house and other outgoings as my Husband does.

Should I live and continue to contribute the same for the next 15, 20, whatever years, I would like to think some of the money I have put in would go to my Sons. I am the only person left in the world who could give them a bit of something. I really don't understand why some posters find this unreasonable.

Why should my Husbands children benefit from my years of hard work and contributions and my own children be left with nothing?

P.S. I'm an extremely hard working NHS worker and have been for many years. I work long hours in a large, busy hospital. To the poster who said I'm work shy I hope you see this and realise how wrong you are.

Just out of interest, on what grounds did you assume that I'm work shy? 🤔🤣

And what were you going to leave your sons if you never met your husband? Would you have asked your landlord for your contributions?

What you are paying are your living costs, not money into a savings account.

How is it at the expense of her sons when she would have paid the same living costs regardless?

Because you want your husbands house that he worked hard to save deposit for. As you’re a NHS worker and have worked for some time, why don’t you have your own house?

Your children will be left with noting because you never invested in a home despite working. You wasted money on rent and not getting a mortgage. NHS is a noble profession, you would have got a mortgage. But fort that you need to save deposit also.

What was your plan if you didn’t meet your husband? You’d have no assets.

You’re being grabby on his house, when you haven’t bothered to invest in one yourself.

So many grabby women. This is why I’d refuse to get remarried. My kids are getting my house. Not step children or a woman I’ve known/married for 3 years. Having a laugh!

@GoingGoingUp Your perspective would make sense if you were talking about the OP’s landlord. But you are talking about her husband. The roles are utterly different. One of them is supposed to be based in love and mutual regard.

No one is proposing to disadvantage the husband’s children, either. The OP is clear on this. But there is no need for her to give them money at the expense if her sons. The experts on this thread have been clear.

Just as the OP acknowledges the prior claim of her husband’s children, one would expect him to acknowledge and honour the limited claim of hers.

Your DH can't just 'put you' on the mortgage or the deeds. You'd have to sign documents to say you accept you are liable for the joint mortgage debt. If he's saying he has done this and you haven't signed anything, he's not telling the truth.

My mum was a tenant in common with her 2nd husband. They both sold their properties, put 50% each in on their joint family home (so an easier split to navigate than yours). Each left their 50% to their own children but it's only released when the final home of the surviving partner is sold. They have a number of other clauses drawn up regarding the house/inheritance.

Maybe agree to be tenants in common with a high/low split now but have it increase over time to 50/50??

Whatever you do, consider talking to all the children about your decision making so they understand and can ask any questions (air any concerns).

Whatever you do, consider talking to all the children about your decision making so they understand and can ask any questions (air any concerns)

Excellent advice here.

oh the misogyny. Excuse me but but she's putting money into that house too, it's actually being bought by both of them so it would make total sense than when she dies her percentage of the house would go to her children. common sense is your friend.

This!
I work for the NHS too. Single parent and managed to get a mortgage. I'm fiercely protective of my assets, albeit its not much it will enable my children to hopefully get on the property ladder.
I didn't grow up with money at all. I grew up in a council house, sat with my Mum crying age 13 as she couldn't afford food. I
was the first to go uni in my family, first homeowner in the family. Really proud of that. Not sharing it with anyone. And I don't blame OP's hubby for doing the same. A division of the share put in seems fair. Not a 50/50 split though!

He and his children's Mother never married, never owned property together, split when the children were still very young.

After this he lived alone for a number of years, then had a partner for around 10 years who didn't work and didn't contribute to his mortgage or any other household outgoings.

@Ap42 if ‘A division of share put in seems fair’ you are agreeing with the expert advice and the OP herself. As I do. Not with @anonymousxoxo who seems content for her sons to be left with nothing.

Please be aware that even if you are on the mortgage you are not automatically also on the deeds. My DH owned our house before we met and we then took out a joint mortgage when we increased it. It was years before I realised I owned half of the debt but none of the house! It's OK in my case however as the only children involved are our joint children and we have wills in which I inherit if he goes first. Your situation is obviously more complicated and never mind leaving money to your sons, make sure you are secure if he dies before you.

If you pay in for 20+ years then yes your kids should be entitled but in your OP you said it's unfair that your kids get less of a share of the house than your husbands kids.

You haven't said why your kids would be entitled to the same share as your husbands kids when your husband has out in so much already.

You also said you both agreed to leave each other your pensions then you suggested your pension should be split 3 ways between your husband and your kids but you would get your husbands full pension.

How is it fair you get your husbands full pension when he dies but your husband has to share your pension with your kids?

I wouldn't use the word grabby but you are trying to get more of a share for your own kids than they deserve.

Thank you. Fairness is all I'm asking for. I'm not trying to take anything from my stepchildren but feel that it would be unfair for them to benefit from money that I have paid in (in years to come) and for my Sons to not receive a bean!

Please give me an answer that makes sense. On what grounds do you assume I'm work shy? Your answer is completely illogical. I'm work shy because I want my Husband's house? Read that back to yourself, It's nonsensical.

Also, in which part of any of my posts do I state that I want my Husband's house? Please quote me directly so that I can remind myself of where I said that.

You are sounding increasingly goady. If you have something constructive to add to the conversation please do so. If you're just here to post goady comments I really don't understand why you would do that when someone has made a post asking for advice 🤔