Late mum's husband has new partner - still living in mum's home

[stepparentdilemma2023]

Hi all

Bit of a backstory, my mum remarried a new guy (stepfather - SF) in 2018. They subsequently bought a house together, which mum paid about 80% and him about 20% of, that same year.

Mum sadly was diagnosed with an aggressive form of breast cancer and died relatively quickly in May 2022. SF received a third of her pension in the will, which already raised eyebrows among me and my brother (mum's only children), but mum's investment into the house was protected, so we still own her share.

Since mum died, SF has continued living in the house, which has increased in value quite dramatically since 2018. He has had one of his adult children, who is a bit of a tearaway, living there on off (in life, the adult child was not allowed to stay at the house by my mum as he had been involved in drug debt and had had a brick put through the window of his own mother's house, as well as being briefly kidnapped (!!) to pay off the debt).

We have maintained generally cordial relations with SF, and had arranged via WhatsApp to see him this Christmas when my brother noticed his WhatsApp picture was a photo of him and a new woman. When we eventually did go for our Christmas meetup yesterday at the house, his wedding ring was off, several photographs of mum had been taken down, and he confessed he had been seeing a new woman for a number of months.

Brother is very disappointed as previously SF had gone on about how mum was his soulmate, he'd never love another, etc... only to enter a relationship with someone new in just over a year.

I'm not sure how I feel, because I was never as close to SF in the first place, but I do know I think my mum would've been quite upset at how quickly (in the grand scheme of things) this had all come about.

FWIW, the new woman lives independently to him (as far as we know), is apparently quite wealthy (he's landed on his feet again!) and has two children of her own.

AIBU to now think that if SF has moved on with his life to the extent he is comfortable enough to take off his wedding ring and meet a new woman, that it is time we take back the house and sell?

My brother is getting married in 2025 and could do with some funds for that, and I have had a couple of my own financial issues this year so am now at a stage where the money would be hugely beneficial.

Sorry it was a long one!

Correct. Unless it was an abusive/ coercive relationship (or the one being disadvantage wishes to sell immediately after the other dies or has massive means to home themselves asap_ as no one in their right mind, from the age of 50 which most these second families start, would add a penny to buying a property jointly with their new spouse or DP when the will makes it clear they will be shafted in their old age when the other dies.

Whether this man added 2 or 5% is irrelevant. The fact is that he AIDED op's mum to be able to buy that property. Wonder why Op and her DB didn't give mum 20% of the sale. Thought so, op and DB did not have it and mum relied on new DH for the 20%. So it is his home too.

"If mum had wanted her DH to stay in the house for the rest of his life then she would have put that provision in her will"

OP has not clarified what the will actually stipulates and says she does not have a copy of the will - which means this thread will just go round and round in circles because no-one has enough information to comment meaningfully - so it's a waste of everyone's time.

We do not know what the will says about who now owns what percentage of the property - only a reference to the mother having originally put in around 80% and the SF around 20%.

We do not know what the will says about how long the SF can remain living in the house.

And it does not look as though OP intends to provide that information.

I think this is a good example of why parents should discuss these things with their spouse and kids before they die. It's important to know the implications for everyone with whatever the will arrangement is.

There is, in general, an expectation that the home of a married couple belongs to both of them - it is a home, not a shared asset. Even when the contribute different amounts to purchasing it.

It begins to get complicated when you start to talk about what % each owns, and one spouse tries to leave a chunk of that to their own children. Often because they have no other significant assets to leave as an inheritance. But that can create huge frictions and also financial complications for everyone. And there is a lot of scope for it to suck for the spouse who may be treated like an interloper in his own home.

She doesn't have it. She wasn't named in the will , otherwise she would have been contacted.

Really? Does that mean she may not have been left part of the house at all or that it’s been out in trust.

If someone contacted her about her 40% wouldn’t they have explained the terms?

It would be very odd if it turns out he owns the entire house. Or at least more of it than 20%

It would not be odd at all. Its almost certainly the case. Too bad for OP.

Mum can only direct what happens to her estate, ie the 80% she owns. She can't direct what her husband should do with his share of 20%.

If mum wanted her beneficiaries to have a large amount of cash or assets on her death she wouldn't have gone into the 80/20 arrangement with her husband.

Best they can hope for is SF wants to sell which will free up their share.

It would be odd because the only bit of the will the Op was adamant about was that she definitely owned 40%. Everything else was just a vague ‘I don’t know’.

I highly suspect OP does have 40% but this is in trust as SF has a lifetime interest in the house.
The only reason to consult a solicitor is to find a loophole to oust SF .

Or a possibility not yet considered, there could be another will - OPs mother may have drawn up a different will during her final days, which may have been actioned through probate etc. and the will the brother has a copy of is an out of date one.

But I think you are right, there is a life interest for the SF and the OP is looking for a get out.

I don't understand why she started the thread though? the only person who can answer is a solicitor.

PropertyManager: Or a possibility not yet considered, there could be another will - OPs mother may have drawn up a different will during her final days, which may have been actioned through probate etc. and the will the brother has a copy of is an out of date one.

That would be easy enough for them to check by obtaining a copy online of the will which went through probate and comparing the dates and content with any copy of a will that the brother might hold.

But given the estate has apparently been administered, I still think it would be odd for the OP and her brother not to have had some communication from the executors, a copy of the estate accounts and notification from the executors that the land registry details for the property have been amended to reflect a change of ownership and indeed, a copy of the will, itself.

But OP has not even clarified who the executors were.

If your mother’s will gives her DH a lifetime interest in the house, her wish was that your entitlement to your 40% would be postponed until after her DH dies / moves on (which may indeed be 20 years+. In other words, you don’t actually have any right to the house at the moment. You have a future right only.

In that case I suggest you respect your mother’s wishes and leave her DH to live peacefully in his home rather than scheming to get it off him.

I think op started the thread to seek validation that her looking for a way to get him out of the house was morally/ Ethically justified.

I think she knows he has life time interest but hopes she can get him out by asking. The brother is hoping he can get him out via a loophole.

Both of which have been prompted by him getting a new girlfriend I don’t even think it’s about the money as such. Or at least more for the Op. Op and her brother clearly think he has no right to be there because he has moved on with someone else in a timeline they don’t agree with.

I think she is angry and grieving and think she wanted validation that it was reasonable to try and inflict some sort of punishment on him.

Op very much views it as her mums house but can’t grasp it was their joint home. Which means it is still his home. You don’t have to own any of a property for it to be home. Renters don’t own their property but it’s still their home. Her mother and her husband both put money in and shared a home. She views it as the mothers only and as though he is a lodger because he only ever owned a small part.

The problem with the argument of ‘he hardly put anything in so he should leave’ doesn’t help op from a moral stand point. Because she didn’t put anything in, it never been her home and she never invested in it. So that argument still gives him more right to be there than her. From a moral point of view.

I think Op is grieving and possibly not really thought it through and is just reacting from grief. Perhaps the brother is too. But he has plans for the money. So I think it’s mainly driven by him.

She has been sketchy on the details because she didn’t want to admit that she knows her mother intended for him to live there. She wanted to increase her chances of the validation she was seeking.

Yep, sums it up well

Hope you’re ok @stepparentdilemma2023

My uncle started a relationship with a woman 6 months after his wife and childhood sweetheart of 35 years died. We were all gobsmacked especially his kids. She moved in after 12 months
He confessed to me once (whilst intoxicated at a family party) that he didn't want to be alone as that it would send him under.
15 years later they are still together.

That often happens, bakebeans; I think men experience loneliness more acutely than women. It doesn't always last as it is 'on the rebound', but your uncle's situation sounds successful. I hope his children got over it after a while, and understood.