Is this inheritance set up unreasonable?

[Burntt]

Couple have been together 8 years.

Thinking of buying a house together/getting married. Blended family and need to have the wills discussion before financial entanglement.

Person A. 2 kids from previous relationship. One is disabled meaning they can’t really work anymore now a full time carer. Kids primary age.

Person B. 2 children from previous relationship now teenagers. Well paid job.

One shared child.

Person A owns a property and will rent it out for some income but it’s pennies compared to person B salary.

The new house will be both on the deeds and eventually spilt evenly between all children in the wills.

Other parent of children B also a high earner and has no other children. While we cannot know how that will go it’s likely children B will inherit well from both parents. Children A will get nothing from their other parent.

The question is about person A property and inheritance likely to come from grandparents.

Person B thinks the rental and both sets of inheritance should be split equally between all children in the wills. Person A would likely use inheritance to get a second rental and the rent would be joint money but once A is dead both rentals divide by 3 children (2 previous and shared child).

I’d like some outside perspective without having to talk money with friends and family.

So person B supports A's lifestyle and dc and splits their inheritance equally between all the dc, but person A doesn't?

It sounds like a case of what's yours is mine and what's mine is mine.

Either everything gets split equally or nothing does.

Of course it's OK to set up a trust to cover the additional needs of the disabled child. All others should be treated equally, regardless of parentage.

Or each parent leaves their stuff to their own dc.

Pick and mix is not fair.

Why by the sounds of it person B is bankrolling the house that person a kids are going to get a share in
so persons a kids get a share of the house (asset) person b has paid majority of but persons b kids get nothing from persons A’s assets

I think it depends.

What Parent B's children get from their other parent is irrelevant, in my opinion.

What inheritance will there be from Parent B, aside from the new, shared house? Does Parent B have savings or investments, for example? How will they be split between the children?

If Parent B's assets will be divided equally across all children, then I think it's fair to expect assets on Parent A's side will be split equally too.

But if Parent B plans to only give 'their side' of the inheritance to the 3 biological kids, then I think it's double standards to expect Parent A to split between all children.

What complicates things is if Parent B doesn't have any assets, or is effectively using their assets (perhaps payout from home shared with previous partner?) to put the deposit down for the new property.... If this is the case, I think the two fairest options would be:

1. Parent A sells their property and contributes equally to to the purchase of the new property.
2. Parent A agrees that proceeds from sale of that property will be split between all children, since Parent B has used their inheritance to buy the shared property, which will be split equally.

I must admit that if I was B, I wouldn’t be marrying A and would be protecting my assets and finances given their CF attitude.

Or more accurately, what’s your is ours and what’s mine is ours…. But you just have a whole lot more to share than I do 😑

Yep

Completely agree with this.

If the grandparents want their money to go only to person A’s kids then they need to leave the money to the kids.

Assuming anyone will inherit anything from a parent is a complete flight of fancy a lot of the time.

When my children were little I worked in a care home and a common reason for emergency admissions was the death of the extremely elderly (90+) person's last remaining child... Especially common for women in their 90s to have outlived sons who died in their late 60s or early 70s.

You are already financially entangled as you have a shared child. Equal seems fine to me

My dad and SM had mirror wills leaving everything equally between the 4 of us - 2 kids each. My SM never worked and my dad effectively paid for everything, but I never saw this as unfair - all kids were treated equally. In this scenario - I would look to divide everything by 5, after maybe looking to see if the disabled child is helped by having a larger proportion. You would have to check that a later will could not disinherit your own kids though OP.

Even without the risk of taxes and carer/care home fees, the expectation of an inheritance is a gamble because few can guarantee how long they will live. It’s possible the grandparents will outlive the grandchildren or their estates will have nothing left.

Whatever his children get from their mother is irrelevant. If you are all together as a family, all five should inherit from both of you at the same level, with an exception for whatever further provision needs to be made for the child with disabilities.

This is the only way.

I don’t agree with person B saying person A’s assets should be divided between children that are not his/hers. Person A splits assets between their children equally and person B should do the same.

Does B have any assets? What kind of amounts might each child inherit if you didn't blend families?

Don’t get married it over complicated what is already complicated and could very much make things harder!

any inheritance from either side stays that side

A keeps their hiuse
B buys the new house in their name

both go to their respective children

Mixed responses! This is very helpful thank you.

To answer some questions;
B will be bankrolling the family essentially if they merge . A does work a bit but is low pay and B earn very well.

A bought their house before disabled child’s needs become so great they impacted earning potential.

currently A is assets roach but money poor. B had high income but rents with no assests. Over time it will even put as B will find the family home.

A kids if we dont merge will be better off due to grand parents inheritance. Obviously this isn’t gaurenteed due to care costs. But even with care costs there is likely to be a decent amount. B kids it’s hard to say as as it stands they won’t get anything from their parent as he rents and has no assests and doesn’t plan to buy unless merging families.

B has been about since youngest of A children was 1 (the disabled child). He’s been a father figure much much more that their own father. He has seen how the disability progressed, supported practically with childcare and has such a beautiful amazing bond with the disabled child. Genuinely like it’s his own child. A has the kids full time. B has his kids every other weekend and being older the bond hasn’t been as strong between A and the B kids. They will have bedrooms and always be welcome but they don’t live with us to bond like the younger kids have so it feels uncomfortable leaving A inheritance to them. They also have a good mother so don’t need the step mum like A kids have latched to the stable and loving step dad. Also with having a disabled child A knows they will never build more inheritance than they built pre kids so the rental is more precious. B earns well and has career prospects and will have A at home keeping house to facilitate this.

curently A supports herself on UC and child maintenance. WitAs B earns well and currently pays maintenance for the shared child it’s manageable. As A owns a property she gets less UC than if renting and could not survive without the maintenance from B. Moving in together with the increased expenses of mortgage etc day to day A and A kids will be worse off. Finances have to merge as A looses UC and child benefit. B breaks even as he saves his current maintenance for the shared child. But he builds assests with the house. I do t want to insult him he’s a great guy but he’s not financially sensible considering he has such a good income it’s madness to me he hasn’t got assests.

I think I will keep reading responses and have another conversation. This has been a very helpful thread so far thanks so much.

This. If I was B I’d be seeing A quite differently.

A isn't facilitating B earning well. He already did that.

B earns well and has career prospects and will have A at home keeping house to facilitate this.

If B wasn’t with A he could just pay a cleaner. A isn’t facilitating his career at all.

How is the deposit for the new house being funded? By B's savings? (I would count this as "assets" btw)

Given your update I would either have the new house willed to Bs 3 kids and A’s house and inheritance set aside for A’s kids or I would have all 5 kids down to inherit both properties equally but any inheritance from grandparents (or assets bought from the inheritance) on either side just going to that persons kids.

Presumably after you and B die, you want your combined children to continue having a relationship and getting on. Therefore, trying to give your children more is just going to cause resentment amongst them.

Yes and if B did decide to split he could go for 50/50 custody and that would be the end of A leaching off of him.

B should leg it as fast as he possibly can.