What think you?

[SannaK]

I'll keep it brief.

I'm a woman, no real assets at all, apart from the obvious ones lol.

I've been seeing a chap, own home car etc. He has a grown son, the don owns his own quite substantial home and id looking to move abroad.
No prob. Heres the thing.

We talked about marriage. He says (the chap) that if we were to marry he would want the house eventually to go to the son on my death. He says he would get something legal in writing that I would be entitled to live in said home on his passing until I die and that he would also sign over a pension to me etc so that I could stay in the home (No mortgage).

Im not sure at all re this. A male colleague said it was cheeky and that I was just going to be a house sitter.

He is nearly 69 and I'm 55 soon to be. We have not been dating long just six months. Don't worry about upsetting me with your thoughts.

On the one hand I totally get where he's coming from. On the other this arrangement which would involve him drafting details, solicitors andy signing stuff leaves me cold. Not to mention not feeling romantic. Also if be concerned that down the line this could be contested by the son and his mother and I could end up on the streets.

Wise considered thoughts most appreciated.

SK x

Two of my close family have made similar arrangements with their own wills/property. They outright own their own houses and their partners have not contributed to the mortgage. Unfortunately their partners will have to 'move on' should they pass away - the house being left to the children.

Eminently sensible, I think. I would be making a similar arrangement if I had to.

Of course he should leave his house to his son. If you have the right to live there till death, you're sorted for life (unless you envisage moving elsewhere, but that would be your issue).

Someone I know died unexpectedly and naturally left a percentage of their estate to their only child. They were married for a long time but no longer to the child's other parent. They co owned a house. The spouse was able to stay in the house for a limited time but it had to be sold after a while to release the inheritance to the child.

Surviving spouse railed against this despite keeping their share plus a portion from their partner, and having inherited from their own family previously. If it had been the other way round though, they would have left their estate to their own children, so were being pretty hypocritical about the whole thing. And made it very difficult for the grieving (grown up) child.

But she is, in the most basic way, 'inheriting' the house.

She'll have the right to live in it until she dies. That could be another 40 years!With an income from his pension.

If she doesn't want to live in the house she doesn't have to, she just can't sell it and piss the money up the wall move and/or gradually breaking down the asset.
<shrug>

sensible to me. She's had no part in making the money for the house.

I actually think he’s being stupidly generous here and the son should inherit the house immediately with no lifetime rent for you, which could deprive his son of the benefit for many years. You are practically a stranger so it’s pretty obvious what you want from the relationship. How embarrassing to have mentioned your boobs as assets - perhaps you should grow up and buy your own house.

I can't see the problem here. He's offering you lifetime security here.

He wants the asset that he's worked for to go to his child. Good for him and I'd do exactly the same. YABU.

If you want your own assets you need to buy a house yourself.

Oh tried to leave a message it just went... testing

What would you want/expect to happen with his house after you die? Of course it should go to his son and he is just making sure that happens in case you live 20 years after him and arent especially close to his son living abroad 20 years after his dad died.

It’s refreshing to hear of a man protecting his child’s inheritance from a potential gold digging later in life spouse….I think the life interest may be too generous, given that due to your age difference, you might not actually be that much older than the son

This is what life interest trusts are for and he is doing the right thing by his son.

OP, you've started a new thread rather than replying to this one. Report it and ask MNHQ to delete it.

Look on the bright side, if he does die you might have 24 hours to clean out his bank accounts and grab anything valuable from the property.

It's his house snd I wouldn't expect him to do any differently. I'd do exactly the same in his shoes.

YABU he is being extremely generous especially considering you have only been dating 6 months (!)

My grandma has the same deal with her partner of 20 years. He is younger than her and has one daughter. On the odd event he would die first, she has a right to live in the house until her death (he isn’t offering any pension though, so lucky you!) and upon her death his daughter would inherit. My grandma wouldn’t have it any other way and they have been together over two decades. In fact she has said to me multiple time that was he to die first she would vacate the property so his daughter could inherit ASAP as it’s his house and the right thing to do.

Bonkers to want to inherit a house you have never paid into from someone you barely know. I would be glad he wants to do the right thing by his child, so many fathers don’t. I would do the same if I was him, because that’s what makes the most sense and is right by all parties involved.

I think giving you a lifetime interest in the house given you met after retirement age for him is very generous. Of course he wants the bulk of his estate to go to his son. He sounds like a good dad, and probably a good person too if we can interpolate from this one data point.

If you're worried about 'being left on the street' (according to your other thread) now is the time to do something about it. Your partner is doing his best to stop that happening by giving you a life interest in his property, but if that's not enough, start saving so that you can have the cushion of your own money to rent again in future. At 55, you have working years ahead of you and if you have your partner's pension coming in as well as a wage, you should easily be able to build up some savings.

This.

Ok second time

Lol at all those assuming I'm a financial predator. I quit like that actually;)

Yes I meant boobs. It's a joke lighten up. I'm a right looker I am!

Market place Virgin thanks for that info. I'm in between HW n appointment and grateful but a bit taken abavk by all the messages so sorry if I can't reply to everyone.
My friends hubby recently died, they were married had one son. The ex wife and her daughter are now petitioning for the house because her name is not on the deeds. This worries me, but it's early days.
He is a lovely man.

I don't have any financial assets. I have a daughter from a previous she's an adult now.

I did own house n car but through a combination of bad choices in terms of men and my own foolishness I now rent.

Ironically I'm in a more vulnerable position than chap or chaps son. In that having no assets or even savings if he decides to chuck me or if son contests stuff on his demise, I'll be homeless given the state of the rental market.

Why do you think you should inherit the house rather than his son?

You've known this person 6 months! Are you just in this relationship to see what assets you can aquire? If so leave this poor man alone.

Ps Sparkletastic Absolutely!

She sounds well looked after! No mortgage or rent to pay, income from pension after his death.

"A male colleague said it was cheeky and that I was just going to be a house sitter."

He's right really, but not in the way he meant it! If your very generous chap died early in the marriage and you sat in the house until you were maybe 90 just because you could, leaving the adult son to have to deal with the house when he is potentially elderly himself, that would be cheeky! Would you be able to afford to maintain and repair the house from the spouse pension? Usually they are quite small compared to the original pension.

I had a relationship with a woman I couldn't have been any more in love with, and when we were discussing her moving into my house I still proposed that if I died she'd have two years living in my house before it was to be sold so my kids could inherit. If we'd lived together a few years I would have increased the time she had living here. Fair enough she had very extensive assets of her own so she didn't need housing 'protection', but if she'd been without assets it still wouldn't have been my responsibility to provide her with my assets at the expense of my children.

If anything I would say your chap is being extremely generous.

If you want to protect yourself in case everything goes pearshaped, which is a sensible thing to do, I'd save an equivalent amount each month to what you pay in rent now.

At the very least that should enable you to pay a year's rent upfront to get another place if you ever needed to.

That's on the assumption you won't be paying him rent?

So stay living in your rental and don't move in with him?

Would you be better off financially if you did move in with him, would he want you to pay rent? would it be less than your current rent and allow you to start a savings pot for emergencies?

Renting isn't safe, your landlord could decide to sell up and hoof you out at any point also. Your chap is being very generous with his offer, especially after only months of dating. You surely cannot be complaining he will leave his house to his son and not you whilst still offering to allow you to live there until death AND have his pension?

But that's your problem, not his. It's not anyone else's responsibility to support you financially. I'm not a homeowner either but I wouldn't expect a man to leave his assets to me when I did nothing to earn them.