AIBU to be hurt and offended by husband suggestion of changing will?

[honeylulu]

I wondered whether to put this in legal matters but it's really about how I feel and if I'm being unreasonable to think like this.

Background - married to husband for 25 years (together 30). We have two children together, one a young adult at uni and I've just started secondary. This is my first marriage, he had a short marriage/divorce before we met. Neither of us have any children other than the two from our marriage. When our first baby was born we made mirror wills leaving everything to each other or if predeceased by spouse then to the children of our marriage (worded like that as we knew we would likely have another). Those wills have been in place for over 20 years. If it's relevant I drafted the wills as they were quite simple (I'm a solicitor, not a probate one but know my way around the basics).

Our house is the biggest asset, owned as joint tenants and no mortgage. There is also an age gap - he is 65 and I am 51. I'm also the higher earner and a lot of the lifestyle extras we enjoy (holidays, home improvements) are possible due to my income. We've both had modest inheritances over the years and put them towards paying off mortgage so completely merged into family assets.

Recently my husband's younger brother died suddenly. Still early days but he has left H half his estate. Won't be a vast amount but maybe 150k or so. H dealing with probate solicitors and remarked last week that we ought to get our wills updated (I don't disagree with that as some of the details are now out of date). The shock bit was that he said he is thinking of changing things so that I am only left a life interest in his assets so that they remain untouched for our kids to inherit when I die. Obviously that only applies to cash assets and chattels though he seemed to think it also applied to "his share" of the house (I reminded him that as joint tenants we dont have shares).

I am sensitive to the fact that he is shocked and grieving so we haven't talked about it properly. I did express some surprise and ask for the reason and he said it would be to keep his money safe for the kids in case I got remarried or conned by someone or it all went on care home fees. I have said fairly lightheartedly that I was quite offended as I also have our kids' best interests at heart and there is no way I would remarry etc for those very reasons. Being a lawyer, I'm extremely practical and risk averse.

I did ask why this change now, as it would have made more sense to insist on such a provision when we made the first wills in my early 30s, when it would have been a more realistic possibility that if I was widowed young that i could have remarried/had more children with someone else. He didn't explain further but I think the change is the inheritance he will now receive. I also suspect (which is why I have not pressed it further) that it has been prompted by his grief and sense/fear of his own mortality.

Why is it bothering me so much? It's not the money itself, it's the feeling that he doesn't trust me to do the best for our children. And our marriage vows - all that I have I share with you. It also feels a bit of a slap in the face that all the time I've had more income/savings I've been happy to share the benefits with the whole family but now he's getting a chunk of money he wants to keep it safe from me.

I'm not even sure it would be the best thing because if (assuming i do survive him) if I wanted to give the kids a house deposit or wedding gift I can only do that from my own funds. I couldn't give them anything "from dad" because his money would be locked up until I died.

So, am I right to feel hurt?
Or is he just being practical and sensible (and I should cut him some slack while he's shocked and grieving) considering I won't be left "poor" anyway? To be fair he's also suggested I should do the same in my will which would leave him worse off if I die first.

Sorry it is long. I didn't want to leave out/drip feed anything. There is probably more detail if needed but those are the main points I think.

It's the grief talking plus all the horror stories about widowed spouses remarrying and having their heads turned. Maybe see an estate solicitor together so it's neutral territory and go through things. They might suggest a trust for the children that does not include the family home that belongs to you equally. The wife 🙄

@FrangipaniBlue · Today 17:45

All the posters saying “but but I trust my spouse implicitly to do the right thing…….”
Yeah. So did my mum.
When my DF died he left half to his 2 nieces and the other half (which technically was the share of the house that my DM had paid for, including putting in money from sale of a house she had before meeting my DF) to his new partner. They weren’t even married or living together, she had her own house.
So go right ahead and implicitly trust your spouses….. at least you won’t be around to see the devastation it causes your DC.

@KeepOffTheQuinoa · Today 17:47* *

3 of my friends have seen their Mum's assets (share of house, money inherited from HER parents etc) disappear to a younger second wife and her children and they have inherited not a bean.
Men seem not to be able to manage on their own, or to act responsibly towards their children in the face of lurve with New Woman. Even if they just forget to remake their will after marriage, meaning that the old will is invalid so everything goes to new wife.
All these were loving husbands and fathers of the ' I would never re-marry / de-prioritise our kids yada yada' type.

Exactly. I was going to say something like this. (In both posts!) Beat me to it. For a start, the best thing you can do in life is to TRUST NO-ONE 100%. Not even your husband.... Some people will say 'awww, that's no way to live!' but you really need to stay guarded, and prepare for the worst case scenario.

Just assume your husband WILL remarry. Then if he doesn't, then great, but the plan can be made in case he does. Because as @KeepOffTheQuinoa said, most men do not do well on their own, and do not like to be alone. They NEED a woman, and many will find one soon after their wife dies. And there IS a chance they will marry. DO NOT TAKE THIS RISK!

All the people saying it’s a great idea - he wants to give half. That’s not reasonable for OP given both her contribution and her extra years. They need to have a proper conversation to ensure the surviving spouse will be financially comfortable at the very least. And if I were OP I would begin to question why I’d been subsidising his lifestyle when he has this attitude to their joint money!

whilst a second spouse taking the lot is common - it can be guarded against in different ways than just screwing the surviving spouse over

I would be, am in fact, exactly of the same thought as you DH.

Even if you trust your spouse implicitly, you have no control over what they will do if you die first. My DH says he wouldn’t remarry, but he can’t be 100% certain of that. He just cannot.

To avoid the regular type of thing you read on MN frequently, of adult children being left zilch (as the new wife cops the lot) I’d say people are VERY naive to assume their spouse will do the right thing on their death. No-one knows how their feelings will change 5, 10, 15 years after their spouses death.

OP you should be doing the same too in case you meet an earlier than expected end.

I have a similar fear to your husband.
my husband is awful with admin and budgets. He simply doesn’t know how to do either. I’ve tried to teach him but he doesn’t get it (severe ADHD and left formal education very young).
he is charming and good looking with bags of personality. Whilst it would never be his intention to disinherit his kids if I die first, this could happen by accident. If he met a new partner he would leave all admin up to them. He would merrily sign anything they put in front of him as he would see it as him not having to worry about not understanding or taking responsibility. It would be very easy for this person to make sure she got her hands on half.

i have heard stories of this happening to other people. It’s a legitimate fear even though you are financially astute and understand everything.

I agree. Surely something could be discussed whereby the OP doesn’t lose out?

Mirror wills won't protect your children's inheritance. If you are a solicitor you know this.

He is being practical, you both should be.

How is she losing out? As I've already posted, this will not make OP's life difficult in the event of her husband's death.

Thank you so much everyone, I've read all your responses and really appreciate your views. I'm so glad I posted because it made me realise there is a lot of think about.

I have been pulled up by some posters for overreacting and that gave my head a wobble. I promise I haven't had a go at my husband, that would have been insensitive in his grief. I did make a jokey retort and asked a couple of questions and then bit my tongue to mull things over (with you lot!)

I think he's had a bit of a knee jerk reaction to his brothers sudden death and spoke out loud without thinking things through (he's a bit prone to that anyway). He was one of 4 siblings and they have all died between the ages of 46 and 63 so I think it's given him a real fright, not least because our youngest is still only 11. BIL's death was preventable if he'd sought medical help in time which adds to the agony of grief. I dont want to make it all about me but I'm really quite upset about it myself.

The poster who said separating his brother's legacy might be trying to keep something of his brother is spot on, except I think its more that its the final legacy from his parents, via his brother. Also, His parents (who also died some years ago) were quite comfortably off and particularly MIL had a real bee in her bonnet convinced everyone was "after" their money. I think he's thinking of it has his family's money to go down the bloodline and honour his parents, not get absorbed into marital finances.

I'm reminding myself that his objective is for it to reach our children rather than keep it from me. Of course it's not a bad thing he is putting them first.

Thanks to everyone who suggested ideas and shared information. I'm going to suggest that he doesn't rush into anything and that we both seek advice separately and together about estate planning, IHT etc. We each have a separate appointment with a financial adviser at the end of the FY so it's probably a good place to start before then having a discussion and taking separate or joint legal advice on new wills (depending on how aligned or not our views are).

I feel a bit dim because I hadn't really given my will another thought in recent years but we are now 20 years older and with notably more assets. I think it's going to be about balance as I dont want me/us to end up so restricted that we can't enjoy retirement and the things we want to do. But likewise don't want to just sit on cash assets that might benefit our kids much more.

Retirement goals need some further discussion as H has previously suggested I retire at 60 so we can hopefully have a few years having fun and travelling before he gets too doddery. I think i had assumed we would carry on sharing assets but if some are going to be hived off into trusts or handed down early to our kids then maybe I'll need to work for longer after all.

I think it just really stung because I feel like I'm always the strong stoical one who makes things ok, earns the income that means we have a nice life without thinking about it. I'm not expecting gratitude but I felt a bit, taken for granted, I think. To be told "I'm not sharing this with you" with no real discussion or care for my feelings - you are all right, I don't need the money but I did want to be treated with a bit more love and respect. We usually make decisions that concern our children jointly rather than one of us making an announcement.

Oh and the poster who said it was patronising and disrespectful for him to assume I wouldn't act in my kids best interests - yes it did feel a bit like that. I mean, I'm a solicitor and he spoke to me like I had no clue that remarriage would have legal ramifications. But in context I was 21 when we met and totally clueless about life. He had to explain stuff like how central heating works, mortgages etc. Sometimes I think he forgets I'm no longer that dappy young girl.

Lots to think about but feeling much calmer now. Thanks again all.

Exactly! As has been said, men struggle to be alone. They go from being mollycoddled and waited on hand and foot by their mother, to being mollycoddled and waited on hand and foot by their wives. Most men will not stay alone for long, they will do their best to find a woman to replace their (dead) wife. And in most cases he will marry the new woman.

No matter how much you and your husband may love each other, you cannot trust him to not remarry, should you die first.

So can you choose to have the savings counted first ie under £325k and add the property on top up to £500k?

Or does the person with the 325k house plus savings pay tax on all the savings even if the whole estate is under 500K.

My dad is single so has never benefited from any kind of combined allowance or spousal exemption.

That's another thing about the whole inheritance system, it is so heteronormative and based on archaic ideas about family structure.

@tartyflette you can discuss all you want, but unless you structure your will accordingly and leave your money to your DC, your husband can promise you the moon but still remarry once you’re gone. It’s naive to just assume he’ll keep his word.

Glad it was useful for you op 😀

I am not sure I fully understand your question but:
if there is a property being inherited from a parent/grandparent (i.e. the beneficiary is the direct descendent of the deceased), the total tax-free amount is up to £500k. Doesn’t matter if the house is over £175 (residential nil-rate band).

However, if the house is worth less than £175k (unlikely these days), you cannot transfer the unused tax free amount to other assets with the estate.

E.g house is worth £150k (so £25k of the residence nil-rate band is unused).
There are also cars/investments/jewellery in the estate worth £400k, taking the total estate to £550k - i.e £50k over the IHT-free threshold.
You cannot transfer the unused £25k residential tax free amount to the other items in an attempt to bring down the amount on which you owe IHT from £50k to £25k.

Hope that makes sense!

It isn't about what counts first. You seem very confused about how this works. It is far simpler than you seem to think.

If the deceased leaves their main residence to their children or grandchildren, they get the Residence Nil Rate Band (RNRB) of £175k or the value of the house, whichever is the lower. So if the house is worth £325k, they will get the full RNRB of £175k, but if the house is only worth £125k they will only get £125k RNRB. This is added to their standard nil rate band to give a total of £500k if they have the full RNRB. This is applied to the whole estate. If the estate in total (both the property and all the other assets) is worth less than £500k, there is no IHT to pay. If the estate is worth more than £500k, the estate pays the IHT.

You say your father is single. However, if he was married at some point in the past and his wife died whilst they were still married, he is also entitled to any of her unused nil rate band plus any of her unused RNRB, potentially allowing him to leave up to £1M without any IHT being payable.

That's helpful, thanks.
So a single person can leave a house over £175K plus cash up to £500k to their child with no IHT?

That's brilliant if that's how it works.

The way I had understood it I thought it was only the house that could be over 325k but under 500k and any cash would be taxed if the house was above £325k.

I think every woman with assets in a marriage should do this, if they want the children to inherit.
There are many cases where the inheritance can be watered down.

Thanks for your clear explanation.

It will also put my dad's mind at rest - he has dementia and every time he hears about IHT he is raging about the state getting any of his hard earned, but is way beyond the point of taking any tax planning measures.

Luckily he forgets about it after a few minutes ;)

He is divorced for many decades and my mother married again so there's no double banding.

Max £500k tax free from each parent in total (not per direct descendent) - IF it includes property.

Without property, it’s max £325k.

Anything over will be charged 40% IHT.

As PP mentions, there is spousal exemption. So, if you dad dies and leaves everything to your mum then his nil rates bands remain unused and she effectively inherits that, too.

When your mum dies and if she leaves everything to her direct descendents, then her nil rate band plus your dad’s nil rate band can be used on her estate. This will be up to £1m tax free, if it includes property or £650k without.

If your dad, for example, gave £10k to his nephew in his, then that would reduce the £325k tax-free proportion that is passed to your mum to £315k.
Gifts (not a £5 here or there) but larger sums/high cost items may also reduce the tax free allowance if given with the 7 years preceding death.

It's just my dad, he raised me on his own, I'm an only child.

My dad always wanted to leave me secure as I am disabled, but never really had any financial knowledge about tax or inheritance etc.

He made enquiries about getting a will years ago but as we live in Scotland, if you have no will it all goes to your spouse if you have one and your children if not by default, so my dad was happy with this and didn't bother with a will.

Nobody can really challenge it when it's a single person with a disabled only child.

I don't actually want it for myself, I am more keen to make sure my 3 children are provided for, and I would much rather pass on my money whilst I am living if I have more than my needs.

I would recommend he writes a Will. Being intestate (dying without a Will) can take ages to sort out and probate (validating that you are the rightful beneficiary when sums over generally £50k are involved) can take even longer; they take an age even with a valid Will place. Plus it reduces the risk of someone challenging your inheritance.
It’s really the only way in which you can ensure that your financial wishes are carried out after your death.

Please do get him to make a will. A friend’s husband died intestate. They have a house in Scotland, and the bank wouldn’t talk to or deal with my friend. They let her mortgage get into arrears as they wouldn’t accept payments from her, and won’t even give her an annual statement.

He's got advanced dementia so that ship's sailed.

I don't really like thinking about it but I'll just have to find a solicitor that deals with bereavement when the time comes.

To be honest I thought it was just his house and that would be quite straightforward.

He has always lived a very simple, frugal life, in relative squalor actually before he moved in with us - he had no teeth for a decade at one point - and I assumed he had little money so it came as a shock that he had 200k in savings.

Now that I am managing his finances we are spending some of this on adaptations, home help, day centres etc to facilitate him living with us and make his time as comfortable as possible. He no longer has any concept of money and happily accepts things when he thinks it's free!

Get advice on whether you can apply to the Court of Protection to get a statutory will made on his behalf.

Get advice on whether you can apply to the Court of Protection to get a statutory will made on his behalf.

I will look into that but to be honest we started going down that track with solicitors trying to get a power of attorney and got charged £300 for literally nothing as they did some paperwork and then said he was too far gone to sign it!

I think the whole legal system is a gigantic racket making those running it very rich out of others' misery and would rather not get involved with it again until I have to.

I'm not sure the above option would be any less cost or aggro than just waiting for things to run their course.

It also just makes me really uncomfortable divvying up someone's assets when they are still living, even though I know it is in line with his wishes.

Luckily I don't need the money quickly or anything, I wasn't even aware of its existence until recently, and I have mixed feelings about it because he has watched me struggle all my life and my children fail in sink schools, my middle son has no qualifications and left at 14 after being violently assaulted, pupils were taking knives in, and my dad was just hoarding all that money that could have paid for them to go to private school and have a really good start in life.