Inheritance argument with DP

[Closie]

I’ll start with some background. DP and I have been together for 14 years, lived together for 10. We were both married before and had a son each from our previous relationships. His son is 28, my son is 27. I got divorced, my ex is alive and involved with DS always has been. DPs wife passed away.

Our current home is the home DP and his wife bought together before their son was born. When his wife died the life insurance paid off what was left of the mortgage, covered his sons uni costs and took them on holidays etc.
When I got divorced we sold our marital home, I saved my half and lived in a rental for 6 years as I couldn’t afford a mortgage alone. The money I saved has since been used for DS’ uni costs and gap year.

DP has decided we need to get our wills in order and a point of contention is the house we currently live in. He believes it should be left to his DS in entirety when we both die, his argument being that it was paid for first by his and his late wife’s hard work, then by his late wife’s life insurance so I haven’t actually contributed anything. I disagree, I’ve lived here for 10 years which has prevented me from having an asset of my own and I’ve contributed to upkeep and repairs. I think at the very least it should be 25/75 though ideally 33/66. We have agreed though that however it is split I should be allowed to continue living here if he were to die first.
He also thinks we should leave everything else we have (life insurance or pensions) to our respective children, I think I’m ok with this.
Now I’m not sure if this is clouding my judgement so I will mention that his
DS has recently inherited from his grandparents on his mother side, a 7 figure sum with which he has bought a house outright. Now I know that technically isn’t relevant but it certainly influences how I feel.

So AIBU to think the house should be split between our children in some way, or is he right?

When I first saw the thread title I misread it as “ Impertinence argument.”

How apt that would have been …

So OP as an adult woman with a grown child from another relationship not being able to afford a property of her own, was coerced into moving into her high earning bfs mortgage free home not expected to pay rent but occasionally paying for decorating out of their JOINT income - OP says that their income is joint in a PP so you would assume she’s spending his money as well as he earns almost 4 times more than her.

What rot! Sounds like OP knew she was onto a good thing and jumped at the chance. No one who wasn’t a money grabber would whine about not getting a share of a home paid for by her boyfriend’s dead wife long before she came on the scene after benefitting so spectacularly as the OP has. She’s just jealous that her SS is getting inheritances that she hasn’t left her DS in a position to get.

I’m sure he would rather his mother was alive to read to her grandchildren in her window seat than the OP live in her house for free full of resentment.

So that ought to have told the OP everything that was necessary.

Why do you say he financially supports her?

OP could be paying rent to him and half the bills.

She could be the one doing most of the domestic work.

Until we know their full respective contribution to the home it’s not fair to say she’s lived there rent free and hasn’t contributed much.

Yep, I know about all that stuff.

I also know about wanting to give up full time work, go on expensive holidays, not having to pay any rent and being a lady of leisure for a decade.

The OP has made some shit choices as far as her own financial security goes. She’s made some even shittier choices if she wanted her son to be able to inherit anything. She hasn’t said a word about financial coercion. She’s a grown woman who knew exactly how much money she had in her bank account, she had free reign over that money to be able to pay for her son’s uni expenses, and she was of an age to understand that if you place all your eggs in one basket, you are going to be absolutely fucked if that basket breaks. And peer pressure? She’s not twelve.

You’re kind of changing the story a little though, aren’t you - she didn’t say he persuaded her to go part time and told her he’d look after her. She just said SHE decided to sell her house, go part time, fund her son’s education and go on nice holidays. While I assume they both contributed to the household bills and lifestyle, I don’t remember reading that she’s done all the housework and raced round tending to his needs like Cinderella.

And who deserves compensating for not remotely putting any thought to their own future?
Plus he hasn’t left her high and dry - he’s said that she can stay in the house for the rest of her life if he dies. He doesn’t have to do that. But they could split up before that - and that really would leave her in the crap.

But I love the word troglodyte!🤣

It’s told her that he’s viewing the situation in exactly the same way MN would advise if he was a woman.

I’m impressed by his clear-sightedness and uncompromising sense of decency over it. Many men would lose the plot with a new partner chewing their ear.

No because she went along with it.

Has she no shame she wants her child to benefit from another losing his mum at a young age?

No.

This Does Not Exist!

@Closie I really think you should see a solicitor. You're not married so could your step son contest the will?

Could you actually afford to stay in the house as a widow. You can never downsize as you age because you have no capital to buy anything.

You've gone part time so no opportunity to put aside a deposit on another property for peace of mind.

You're in such a pickle long term.

Please be really careful with this and take good independent legal advice. Having been through a really long drawn out dispute over a property which was left in a Trust fund it was an experience I wouldn't wish on anyone. Trust funds are designed for country estates and stately homes which pass down through the generations. They are not meant for the 'normal' person who has a typical family home to pass on to their children. I had 18 months of hell and incurred ridiculous legal costs trying to rectify the incorrect legal advice given to a family member in terms of a Trust fund.

This has GOT to be a reverse.

@Wotcher I really can't help your confusion I'm afraid, good luck to you.

I thought that but it can’t be by the deceased mother? 🤷🏻‍♀️

OP, It sounds as if this is the crux of the matter.

And he pictures his son living there, and him as a grandfather - to his son's children - reading in the same place he read to is son....the memories and association with his late wife are so strong.

Your routes to this relationship, and house, are so different. Your Ds lost his family home when you divorced and you built a new one for him. Your Dp's Ds stayed in his when he lost his Mum - and there is so much sentiment invested.

It has focussed on wills, and it seems reasonable that DP's property does go to his DS, but what about his life with you? Hopefully you and he have another 30+ years together - how will he invest in that? He may need to reflect on the possibility that he will live with you for longer than he lived with his late wife. And yet still has his attachment to the memories of your home being his former / first family home.

I would talk to him about this.

Whilst ensuring that he does write his will in a way to give you security of having a roof over your head if he pre-deceases you.

I totally agree with this.

Its likely thanks to DP's late wife's life insurance that you have had the option to go part time. You could have put the extra money in savings for your own son but you chose an easier life.

This post really scares me because the worst could happen to any of us at any time and if it were to happen to me, I just hope my DH would ensure that when the time came, what I left, went in its entirety to our DC and not any new family he formed.

I'm absolutely with your DP on this and can't fathom how you can't see how grasping you are.

This is why I'd never live with anyone again if anything happened to DH. Our family home we've raised our children in would then be mortgage free. Of course it would 100% go to my children, even if a boyfriend with an adult child moved in and lived rent free for a decade. My DC are also likely to receive large inheritances from pil. That's irrelevant and wouldn't make me think oh well, they don't need this house as much as random child of partner does.

I think you 've made very poor financial decisions and DSS's inheritance has made you realise this. You don't have a choice but accept DPs position. Or split up. Either way time to start planning for retirement/investment for DS from your own income/assets.

If he dies first …. Are you homeless?

There is lots to think about in here op.

Could the family home transfer now to the son, and your Dp could go there to read to his grandchildren and connect with all those memories.

Meanwhile, could you and DP purchase something that would be manageable upkeep-wise if you end up there alone and you contribute in equal shares, meaning your DS could benefit from any capital gain to his share? Your DS would also benefit by having your home sorted then inheriting half of a property that shoujd be easier to split ( as would THEN be reasonable) between DS and DSS because neither has the connection of having grown up there. A simple sale and divvy up. At the moment you seem to be expecting DSS to cough up cash for your DS if he is to keep the home with his sentimental ties.

Nope!

If they got married and it's still his house he can still leave it to his Ds.

If they married and got divorced the OP would have a claim on the house because it would be a marital asset. But married people can have their own property and leave it in their wills as they please.

The only claim would be if the op claimed dependency - but the DP is planning on leaving her a life interest anyway, so she would have secure housing for the rest of her life. But may be able to claim some additional cash assets if she was dependent.

I disagree, I’ve lived here for 10 years which has prevented me from having an asset of my own and I’ve contributed to upkeep and repairs

YABVU.
In that time you had the chance to save a large sum of money for your son because you weren't paying mortgage or rent. Or you could have purchased a property to rent out. But instead you chose to work part time even though there was no need to (eg. childcare issues) and earn much less than you could have done.
And now you want your son to inherit a portion of a property which you have not contributed to and which was paid off completely by your DP and his deceased wife.
Nope.

Yeah but his “stance” would be overruled by the divorce courts if you had married.

Yes. Ought to.

Do you still think your son should have a share OP? Have you taken on board that almost everyone disagrees?

TBH I don't think it's inheritance you need to be worried about. You need to worry about what would happen if you split up.