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.

Truthfully @Burntt it doesn’t sound as if either of you are ready for this there is still so much to sort and sacrifices to make on both sides

You don’t have the same approach to finances and that’s a huge issue for a couple. You need to have the same goals and approach to problems.

And you are the more vulnerable in this situation. If it all goes wrong he will be no worse off. You can’t say the same as you found out last time. I mean, FFS, he had to go to counselling to understand that you were burning through your savings and still couldn’t afford a coffee with your mates.

You living together financially seems lose lose. He wouldn’t have been so broke the last time if he’d be living on his own, and you could have accessed state support for you & DS. Then he could have had lunch out etc without arguments.

I do think that you aren’t considering his kids enough, particularly when you are concerned about DD uni & how inheritance needs to make it up to her when compared to two children who have different parents. Your financial circumstances are not your fault and you have most certainly had it very hard. It would be naive to think that his kids will have no emotions about your assets being ring fenced and his being shared. And you’ve only outlined how your DD might feel in light of your own life experience. The other two are almost written off as they’ll be fine when they get uni support whereas that is far from a guarantee of anything.

It’s very difficult to know what’s “fair” because it’s clearly a very complicated situation.

As B is subsidising OP being at home and her children too then I think B’s idea to split is more fair.

EDIT

Just seen OP’s updates and I don’t think they should move in together. Resentment will end this relationship

This is a slight oversimplification but it seems to boil down to:

He has a much higher income which you and your children will benefit from

You have more assets which you want his children not to benefit from

This doesn't seem very fair

OP is listing every possible reason why her kids should inherit more. Her dd's university fees and her own dynamic with her parents, her son's disability (understandably) and her SC's potential future inheritance. It's quite clear she thinks her children are more deserving of getting more and that's fine if she wants to ringfence her assets for her children. That makes sense.

But it is absolutely entitled and myopic to not see how this will affect SC and to expect that the shared house should be shared equally, when the SC's dad will be the one paying for the vast majority of it.

Live separately OP. Keep your benefits and ensure your children get your assets. Let your partner buy a house for his children that they and only they, will inherit. You cannot squirrel away everything for your children only.

I don’t get why though inheritance on either side should go to the others children though only joint assets would be split?

the house should definitely be fixed if they do as tenants in common so each keep there assets

I don’t want his money; if we are to live together as he wants then I will need him to pay for that house. I’m no better off either way really it’s him supporting me or UC but because my parents have more money than his my children get less if we split inheritance 5 ways. His children would benifit from an equal split.

It depends on the precise numbers but if he pays for the house you all live in and then leaves it equally to all of the children, that is essentially him leaving some of his money to your children.

I think it would be fairer if he bought on his own in his name, you can live there with him if you both want but he then leaves that house to his children (including your shared child) and you leave your property to your children (shared child again included)

There's probably a middle ground here. You could give some of your parents' inheritance straight to your children using a variation (or set up a trust for your middle child). Or you could split your shared house and rental house 5 ways but not whatever you buy with the inheritance. He could support your children through Uni as they would otherwise have been eligible for the full loan and bursaries.