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

She'd be better off if she married a man her own age with 12 years earnings each ahead of them, claimed the couple rate of SRP when the time came, rent covered by benefit, and hopefully grow old together rather than sacrifice the last of her good years with an elderly man.

Because if she gets him to marry her, she can lay her hands on his assets and as he's significantly older than her, he may well die relatively soon, leaving all his wealth to her and solving her asset-less problem! Such a nuisance that he has a child and that he wants to ensure his child is not denied his inheritance!

"She'd be better off if she married a man her own age with 12 years earnings each ahead of them, claimed the couple rate of SRP when the time came, rent covered by benefit, and hopefully grow old together rather than sacrifice the last of her good years with an elderly man."

Hardly a sacrifice if she can live off his wealth.

That's a matter of opinion. There's some things money can't compensate for. Besides which his 'assets' are a house and a car according to the OP, so its not even a particularly good deal. I'm sure there's some 55 year old blokes knocking about with that.

Because if she gets him to marry her, she can lay her hands on his assets and as he's significantly older than her, he may well die relatively soon

Or, he may end up with dementia and she ends up being his carer.

Be careful what you wish for OP- this could backfire on you spectacularly with that kind of age gap.

“rent covered by benefits” - that’s the first issue here. Benefits in no way match up to private rent which is why if you’re a renter, retirement can be a scary prospect.
Financially it makes sense to marry an older wealthier bloke. Or one her age maybe they’re wanting a 40 year old woman to marry.
Anyway, it’s the DH and son losing out here, not the OP.

Move in on basis he proposes, and get a btl property - with what you would spend on rent pay into the btl to build an asset on the side?

What exactly does she have to bargain with? If I met a 55 year old with basically nothing to their name and they started placing demands on me to propose and buy them a buy to let property I’d tell them to sling their hook. And the bank won’t just lend you the full price of a BTL - if she hasn’t managed to buy somewhere for herself then she’s not going to be in a position to buy a BTL.

Obviously everyone’s circumstances are different but if you can get on the property ladder when younger, do it because without property and private pension, retirement looks bleak. And then a marriage proposal from just about any solvent man looks attractive which sounds anti feminist but is sadly true.

Its very much dependent on where they live. In my area there are plenty of properties priced within the market rent remit. Its also comparatively easy for retired people to access social housing compared to other parts of the country.
But its subjective, isn't it? There's no way I'd trade the lifestyle I have at 55, even if that came with a low current and future income, for the one I'd have to contend with married to an old man, all for the sake of a half share in his house and car. Which for all we know could be a semi in Wolverhampton and a ten year old Fiesta. The OP doesnt specify.
Regardless, no amount of financial benefit would be worth it to me personally. He's 'only' 69, so all being well has another 15 years of life left, by which time OP would be 70 herself. What a waste.
I guess other people may feel differently, but the OP asked for thoughts. I'm her age and those are mine.

No I wouldn’t do it either. I’d rather be poor than live with someone I didn’t love. But on an objectively financial level this benefits the OP, not her DH and if she was the one with the money we’d all tell her never to marry this guy in a million years

So you're proposing she moves in and contributes nothing financially? If that was a man she'd be (rightly) called a cocklodger!

Not "nothing" but I'm not sure I would give up a HA property to live with a man and pay an arbitrary amount of rent on a mortgage free property I was going to have to leave a few years later. Bills/council tax/insurance contribution, yes - obviously.

No that is not what I am suggesting- she should contribute half of bills and their living expenses as they see fit, but what she is saving from rent could go to an asset - as she should not be paying in to a property that she has no rights to.

I've only read the first page. I too can't see a problem. It's what many older people.i know have agreed.

He's mortgage free so no housing costs for you and he'll leave you his pension so you can afford to live there.

How does that look any diffeent to him leaving it to you on a day to day basis?

It means you can't sell it or leave it to a cats' home when you die and ensures it goes to his son. All of those is fair enough. It's not going to be of any use to you when you're dead anyway!

If he already owns it outright and you haven't contributed to any of the mortgage costs, I think it's a pretty fair situation tbh

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)

That's a pretty standard and fair way of doing it, OP; it means that you wouldn't be homeless and the DCs would still get the inheritance DP wishes them to

I imagine those DCs will have views on you moving in if, by your own choices, you're bringing little to the table finance-wise, but it's not actually their business.
After all the money's not yet theirs any more than it's yours

Of course it should go to his son, you CF!