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

You've made poor choices, you can't expect others to pick up the pieces of that.

Just stay in your own rental and keep your own security instead of relying on someone else.

I think thats fine. He is providing for his son. Hes being open about it from the start

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

So then dont move in. You cant blackmail him into handing everything over to you.

How would you feel if you had assets and your daughter got nothing after you died?

You are being really unreasonable here- your finances are not his responsibility- especially not after just 6 months 🙄

But your landlord could sell up any time they want- why do you assume you are safe now but wont be if you move in with him?

Im not in a private rental Biscuits. I'm ina housing association .

Thank you to all who took the time to answer. Nigelswife n RefRobyn. Stuff to ponder there. X

I really appreciate your time. I feel much better now. Thank you all and have a great day.

Im not in a private rental Biscuits. I'm ina housing association

So stay there then. Are you literally saying you think everything he owns should go to you, house, pension, money etc and nothing at all should go to his son?

My dad put the same arrangement in his will for his wife, I don’t think it’s uncommon when you have adult children. He worked to buy his house, his second wife didn’t contribute to the house as he had already bought it.

I like that this man is being upfront with you now, he sounds mature. He wants you to have housing for life. But also recognises that your lack of assets is your own responsibility

God, stay there! You'd be mad to give up a housing association property.

On the other this arrangement which would involve him drafting details, solicitors andy signing stuff leaves me cold. Not to mention not feeling romantic

I would have a different perspective. By involving lawyers, he’d be protecting you. And involving lawyers is the most romantic and caring thing he could do. It is absolutely incredibly romantic and loving if he drew up his will giving you a life interest in his house and half his pension.

How can you not see this?

A woman that I know has this and it’s incredibly frustrating to his heirs not to be able to sell the house (he’s already passed away now) but there’s nothing they can do. Even if your chap’s ex contested, which is unlikely as she’s the ex and even if the son contested, which is unlikely if he has his own home, and as long as your chap is of sound mind, there’d be little grounds to contest.

His suggestions are all incredibly in your favour given your circumstances (particularly offering this on the back of a relatively new relationship!) and presuming that you love him, your hesitation is quite hard to fathom. And your work colleague is a dick. You wouldn’t be house sitting fgs, you’d have a life interest in the house.

There’s nothing ‘ironic’ about the fact that you don’t have any property or savings, and your possible future husband and his son do. You say yourself that you made poor choices and poor previous relationship decisions which contributed to this situation. Your boyfriend is simply making sure that he’s not ‘making a poor relationship decision’ by securing his son’s inheritance. You’ve known this guy six months! It’s not his job to repair your previous bad luck/poor choices.

His proposition gives you a free place to live for life and an income via his pension. If that were successfully contested by his son (and I have no idea what grounds there would need to be), you would presumably be back in the situation you are in now, renting and either working or on a state/private pension for an income. At 54, you still have plenty of working years to build up savings, or pay into a pension.

This is exactly the set up that DP and I have (not married but we own a property together. When one of us dies, the other can stay on the property until they die, and then the property will be split between our kids (not joint).

My mum had this type of arrangement, it was put in place years before her husband died. In the event, her husband's son, who she had previously had a good relationship with, became more and more bullying and made it unbearable for her to stay, what was written in the will turned out to be useless to her. She lived in a small community where the husband's family was very powerful, she was effectively shunned by the whole community.

6 months into relationship is not long enough to give up security.

If relationship works out and lasts then the arrangement if he dies is very fair. But the bigger worry is what you would do if you split.

Spend more time at his if you like, but keep your own rental.

Thank you Dr BB. You're right of course. And to be clear, he's not proposed yet.

Lol at Beesneez.

Thank you everyone x:)

I'll keep you in the loop re developments.

Ellie1015. Yes this needs unpacking.

Lundland...yes this. We all have our dark sides. X

His offer is a bonus to you and quite generous after just 6 months. You would need your own solicitor to make sure it’s watertight from your perspective.

But you don’t have to accept it, you can stay safely in your HA if that feels more secure.
Or you could accept his offer and still work your way up in your career towards a more a secure future for yourself as well.

Rely on yourself, is always my advice. (But don’t reject his idea for your future if it feels right because you can still rely on yourself at the same time)

YABU. The house is his today and if he died tomorrow it would probably go to his son. If he marries you, it’s not fair that the house would become yours and then pass to your family members on your death instead of his son. It’s generous enough that he would put a provision in so that you can live there for the rest of your life.

Sounds totally fair if you're not paying for mortgage. You get to live there for free and the money you would have spent on rent/mortgage you get to save up for your own place to rent out or something until you need to move if he dies

Why the hell would you care where the house goes after you die? He is nice enough to say you could live in it until you die.

To all the PPs who say 'of course you shouldn't get any share of his assets if he dies first:

When you marry someone, there isn't a probation period, before which you don't inherit your husband's assets but after which you do.

When you marry someone the law dictates that assets become jointly owned. Because marriage forms a team.

Yes, he is within his rights to make pre-nuptial type arrangements to vary the norm. But it is the norm that the surviving spouse inherits all their late spouse's assets- regardless of how long they were married or how much the surviving spouse financially contributed.

Yes, he is within his rights to make pre-nuptial type arrangements to vary the norm

Its also very normal for people to want some of their estate to go to their children and to put something in place to ensure very new partner doesnt get everything.

Thats quite "normal" too. Most people would want their children to inherit something- hardly unusual.

Also entirely the norm to ringfence assets for children from previous relationships.

It sounds quite normal - he wants the house to ultimately benefit his son, not your next husband.

I understand that you would be leaving a security of housing association rental, so there is something to lose on your side, but well written right to stay in the house should cover that.

If it comes to the marriage, get a legal advice on how your right to stay there should be written to be as safe as possible.

So you have a man that is putting is child first and making sure that his lifetime of work goes to his kid. Excellent, check.
A man that is also being open and honest in his discussions before big decisions are made. Excellent, check.
A man who is being intentional with his pursuit of you, wanting to marry, etc. Excellent check.
A man who wants to provide for his future wife. Excellent, check.

I don't actually see the problem.

You didn't build that pot of money with him, therefore you are not entitled to it. I hear so many stories of second wives/husbands swanning in at the end of a lifetime and taking the money and the kids don't get to benefit from their parents hard work as their parent did want.

I think you've got a good man there, and you've stupid to doubt it. Marriage is a contract. A legally binding one. Love and marriage are romantic, but I think going into any legal contract and marriage being open and honest is the right way.

Yes, and many parents make arrangements for children to inherit some of their estate at the point the first spouse dies.

What I'm pointing out to the sneery, nasty PPs who have leapt to 'why should you benefit a penny from a short marriage/ you haven't paid in' is that the law doesn't care who has paid in what. Nor should it! Women would lose out massively if that were the case!