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?

Fairest approach is to ring fence the % of the house which was his deposit for his children, then, on the basis you are contributing equally, split the remaining value 50/50 and you leave your bit to your sons.

Usually there are legal ways to provide for whoever outlives the other to continue living in the property until their death.

Alternatively, if your partner dies first, inheritance laws apply. You will have to challenge his will which will not succeed (been through this myself - you have to prove incapacity).

Additionally, debt can be inherited: the mortgage will become the liability of the three beneficiaries, and, as the saying goes, if you fail to keep up payments...
Finally, fairness.

What you are saying is that your children, who have never had an interest in the property – who have never played a part in establishing the family home - suddenly will have an interest in the property on the death of your partner, and therefore be entitled to inherit from it. This isn’t fair on the children who have played a part in the property.

Your partner accepted the financial risks and responsibilities when building up the assets on behalf of his children, not yours, and therefore they are entitled to the inheritance.

Perhaps think about how you would feel if you were the one with the house. Would you want your relatively new spouse’s kids to get a slice??

I hate the whole inheritance thing to the point that I’d rather not have it, however I’d be lying if I said that it wouldn’t sting a bit if one of my parents remarried and then my new step brother/sister inherited a chunk of their estate.

Yup. IMO only biological children should get inheritance. Step children don’t have inheritance rights anyway that’s moot point unless will etc. Plus they’re adults now so less of a claim.

I’m only sharing with my 2 biological siblings

@1Raisedeyebrow You have an awful lot to say about something you consider rather trivial. eg 'pass' instead of 'die'.

The use of 'pass' is American and no one used to use it unless they were very religious, because it's an abbreviation for 'pass over to the other side'- applicable to those who believe in an after life.

It's also become a taboo word now to say 'die' as if 'pass' somehow softens the impact of it.

FWIW I know people recently widowed or widowers who can't stand people referring to 'pass ' for these very reasons - it is as if they are afraid of using 'die'.

As for wills, my H and I have wills, They are not 'mutual'. That is something different. It means neither party will change their will without the consent of the other. Ours are mirror wills meaning they are identical so we leave the same to each other and the family.

@SouthernLassies

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Do you remember the bit in the official marriage vows (legally binding) that says something like “all that I have I share with you “.
Marriage makes all wealth held by either party (including previous-to-marriage houses or businesses) into shared assets. All wills made before marriage are cancelled. The marriage makes you equal in wealth, unlike living together. that’s why so many of us on mumsnet get worked up about women being married before having children and giving up their careers.

There are very clear inheritance rules for married couples without a Will made after the marriage. (Easy to google) basically the person who survives gets it all, unless the children are still dependents (under a specified age or with a specified disability). You can make a will (which makes things easier) stating that your half (Yes, you both now own half of all assets) should go to your children. Your husband can have a life interest in things so your children can’t sell the house from under him to get their share- but on his death their share will be earmarked for them. You have to take into account the fact that the spouse owns half of the marital property when making a will. You can’t use a Will to give away the other person’s portion. It no longer belongs to the person who owned it before the marriage.
If your sons are not your dependents they are unlikely to be able to inherit your pension but your husband can inherit some of it depending on the rules of your pension scheme.

And not all legal marriages have vows.

Rubbish, firstly plenty of people get married and don't have those vows, myself included. Secondly, no all of his life's wealth as a 50 something adult with no shared children do not automatically become shared assets.

ou can make a will (which makes things easier) stating that your half (Yes, you both now own half of all assets) should go to your children.

Nonsense.

It no longer belongs to the person who owned it before the marriage.

Again, entirely untrue.

@SouthernLassies you are unhinged aren’t you dear?
It was explained that your preferred word has no relevance. As only the OP is relevant regarding their thoughts on the term used you need to be quiet, you are of no importance to hold such an opinion.

You clearly didn’t know there was a “mutual” and “mirror” will in your original post but tried to comeback by pretending you knew already.

Out of curiosity when did you conduct this survey regarding widowers preferred word?

I agree with @1raisedeyebrow 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@SouthernLassies *You have an awful lot to say about something you consider rather trivial. eg 'pass' instead of 'die'.

The use of 'pass' is American and no one used to use it unless they were very religious, because it's an abbreviation for 'pass over to the other side'- applicable to those who believe in an after life.

It's also become a taboo word now to say 'die' as if 'pass' somehow softens the impact of it.

FWIW I know people recently widowed or widowers who can't stand people referring to 'pass ' for these very reasons - it is as if they are afraid of using 'die'.*

Plenty of people use the term "pass", get over yourself.

You keep saying you're not mon Y minded or grabby etc, but you come across as extremely grabby.

And to say your contribution would be dead money - do you have a roof over your head? Is it warm, safe? Water and all other than amenities? Do you expect to live for free? Of course it's not dead money. It's you contributing to having a home. Should your husband not expect contribution? Should you live there for free?

Total nonsense. It's his house. Your DC have no entitlement to it. They're grown adults. If you want to leave them something, set up a separate wya to do so.

If I was his child, I'd be really upset if I found out that you're trying to steal my inheritance for your children!!

You should sit down and work out how long is left on the mortgage, what amount, worth and equity. You can then work out properly and fairly, what proportion of the house you'll actually be contributing to and, but f that proportion, how much should be yours. Eg proportion of house is 50% and you're contribution half of all bills incl mortgage, the toy will eventually fairly be entitled to 25% when the mortgage is paid off. If you die before your DH, it will go to him unless there is a joint agreement for different plans.

You really need to speak to a solicitor and probably a financial advisor.

As it stands, your DC aren't entitled to anything, and rightly so.

I was widowed. No one asked my opinion on the terminology at the time but if they did i would have said it made no difference. He still wasn't here!

I would make an agreement with your husband that you pay for a life insurance policy on yourself to whatever amount you want then to inherit and thst is entirely for them, and reduce the amount you pay on mortgage by that sum.

Sorry, I have got this wrong.

If you do not have a will then there is a set hierarchy in who will inherit your assets.
If there are surviving children, grandchildren or great grandchildren of the person who died and the estate is valued at more than £322,000, the spouse will inherit:

• all the personal property and belongings of the person who has died, and
• the first £322,000 of the estate, and
• half of the remaining estate.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/death-and-wills/who-can-inherit-if-there-is-no-will-the-rules-of-intestacy/#:~:text=Children%20%2D%20if%20there%20is%20no,be%20divided%20equally%20between%20them. the marital home is part of the assets if it’s in the deceased’s name, it goes to the survivor and is not part of the assets if it’s in joint names. A Will written AFTER the marriage can override this rule. but do check out this with a legal expert. These rules only apply on death of a spouse or civil partner, they’re different in the case of a divorce.

In this case it's not in her name so if she dies before him it doesn't become part of the assets

So if she dies first her son will only get half of anything over £322,000 she leaves excluding the value of the house, (I think).
And is probably not entitled to a share of her pension anyway.
It’s all hypothetical anyway as her husband will have probably made a will. If he makes it as he’s said, leaving her a third, then that third could be passed on to her children, as long as her husband dies first.

You can only pay towards the house uou live in if you own it, otherwise it is rent

It’s all hypothetical anyway as her husband will have probably made a will. If he makes it as he’s said, leaving her a third, then that third could be passed on to her children, as long as her husband dies first.
This
The third is only hers if he dies before her

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. have you seen proof of this otherwise I wouldn’t guarantee you getting 1/3. He sounds very financially savvy in your OP.

@Riv
Words in a legally recognized have no relevance in determining asset distribution when a spouse dies intestate . What is controlling are the laws within the jurisdiction where the deceased lived There are no universal laws governing this process, and the courts have no interest in what is said in a marriage ceremony.

Once married she also owns the house

That would never work. Life insurance isn't a guaranteed payout on death. Only on early death.

Not sure that is strictly true.
Also sure it’s much more complicated than that.
Without a will the spouse could inherit all of it or 50% if over £250,000.
With a will and without any documentation to show she has shared ownership - she’s not on the mortgage or deeds- I’m not sure she gets anything.
If she pre-deceases it all goes back to him anyway. Then it’s his to do with as he wishes.

Completely agree with all you said