AIBU to feel uneasy about my partner's inheritance plan?

[Itisallgoingtobeok]

My partner and I are planning on moving in together. We will each sell our separate properties and buy one together 50/50. He is a widow with 2 DC in their mid twenties. I don't have children.

We are starting to talk about how we would set up finances, and one issue that has come up is that if he dies first he wants his half of the house to pass to his children in trust, whilst I remain able to live in the property until I sell or die. They would then inherit their Dad's half when I die, or get their half if I sell. My half is for me to decide who inherits. FWIW, I would leave my half of the house to him.

This doesn't sit well with me. If he dies first, then half of my home is owned by others. I get on well with them, but I have no idea if they would want to maintain a relationship with me after their Dad's death.

Part of me completely understands why he wants to leave his children his share, but it leaves me in a really tricky position. I really don't like the idea of this at all. AIBU? What have others done in this position? I can't be the first person to have this problem!

I wouldn't buy a house with him for the reasons you are concerned about.
What about other options such as moving into his current property and renting yours out? Or rent out both properties and rent somewhere together. Do you even have to live together?
Either way I'd be holding onto my house in your shoes.

What about if the house is valued say withing 3 months of his death. 50% of that valuation is what his kids get when you die or when you sell up.

Any equity increase after that valuation doesn't come into it. So maintaining the property and home improvements that you pay for will have no bearing on what the kids get. The house is yours but the 50% value at his death is what they get.

No expert so there may be reasons that this can't work but just an idea.

Sorry this was a reply to
mrsneville
Then why does he want specific wording put in.

It's not a question of whether or nor it's reasonable and fair. Your heart doesn't want to do it, so don't. It can also be problematic if you decide after his death that you want to move at some point. Not impossible, but difficult.

I mean OP should be cautious and avoid this arrangement entirely as the children’s interests are not her interests at all. The poster to whom I was replying was handwaving away the fact that the DP’s position is that the children excercise considerable power over the cost/upkeep if the house after DP’s death. They would have the right (seemingly) to dictate OP’s maintenance costs for their benefit just at the time of her life when her income may be fixed.

No it's not. It is her home, not theirs.

@Itisallgoingtobeok

could you not buy a house mainly yourself but with a lump sum contribution from
him (as he has the funds) ? Or he pays for any upgrades you both want to do ?

then his current home could be sold & the funds invested (or rented out).

how old are you both!

I wouldn't put myself in the position of no longer owning my own home. He could live with me or I'd do as above. But I wouldn't be tied into an agreement where his kids have a say over my home if he dies first AND his kids shouldn't have to wait untilyou die or sell to inherit.

My dad has bought a house 50/50 with his partner. Their written agreement is that his half will go to me and my brother and, similarly, her half will go to her children. After the first one dies, the other has 6 months to either sell up or pay half the value to the inheritors. Clear cut and saves things dragging on for years.

OP, I totally get what your concerns are. I’m in a slightly similar position - my DP is selling his house and moving in with me, then we plan to buy a place together. I am child-free (by choice); he has two adult children. Both of us own our houses outright and will be buying a new place 50/50.

We are both making wills leaving the house to the other when one of us dies. We live in a lovely area, and plan to move very close by if/when we can, and neither of us would want to sell the house when the other dies. DP’s kids will get his 50% after we both pop off and my nieces and nephew will get my share. We are in our 60s so a bit older than you.

You’ve mentioned marriage a couple of times (sorry if this point has been made already but I’ve only got up to page 10 so far). Have you considered inheritance tax issues if you are not married? The surviving partner would be liable for it on the other’s death. If you have a property worth over 325k, you will fall into the inheritance tax bracket. If it’s significantly more, there will be a significant amount of inheritance tax to pay.

I have never wanted to get married so we are planning to have a civil partnership which gives us all the same legal rights, including exemption from inheritance tax on the partner’s death.

I think I’m right on this but if anyone knows better, please say! Otherwise, like many have said, you need to see a solicitor to talk all this through. Your partner’s caveats seem very unreasonable in terms of his children having a say in what you do to the house - hopefully he’s just not thought through the implications.

I think this is a perfectly normal arrangement. An alternative may be that a fixed amount is earmarked for repairs from his estate and if anything needs doing to the house this money is used for that purpose.

Plenty of married couple do this, leave their half of their property to their children to avoid care costs in older age.
His children don't have to maintain a relationship with you after his death, they just have to wait for their inheritance.
This is fair at your ages if you're both putting the same amount of money into the property.

First off, I wouldn't sell a sole-owned home and buy with a partner or new spouse in the first place. What I own will go to my children 100% and I wouldn't want any impediment to that (like a surviving spouse with a life-estate). So that being said...........

Not me, but my elderly auntie and her partner set up a prenup before they married. Each owned and were going to keep their home and they would move back and forth between the two. Hers was 'in town', his was in a resort town in the mountains. The initial prenup specified that their respective homes (and separate finances) went to their respective children in the event of a death and the survivor would simply move back into their own 'pre-marriage' home. Easy peasy.

But after they married her husband sold his 'previous marital home' (and kept that money for his DC) so they lived in hers. So there was then a postnup superseding the prenup And it's that postnup which may interest you. It stated that he would have a life estate for 5 years after auntie's death to allow him ample time to figure out what he wanted to do. When the 5 years were up, he was required to vacate. BUT, if he married or cohabited within that 5 years, he had 60 days to vacate. During the 5 years, any needed maintenance would be split between him and my 2 cousins since they'd benefit from it in the long run. If he decided to do any redecorating or 'improvements' or if he caused any damage to the house, those were his financial responsibility. And he had to get my cousin's approval for any actual structural changes or for the repair work for damage he caused. And vice versa, if my cousins had wanted to do any improvements or redecorating during the 5 years, it would have been on their dime and he had the right to veto any unnecessary work whilst he was still living there.

Luckily, he died first.

Not happened to me but I know of someone whose dad died and his 2nd wife has the right to live in the house u til she dies. The house is owned by the 2 children of the marriage. It’s been fine, no problems. I wouldn’t like it though. I guess if you don’t too then you need to decide if you want to buy together after all.

I think you should not buy a house together. You need to protect yourself and your future.

I get that he wants to leave his half to his children, which is fair enough. I know someone who received no inheritance, as their mother left everything to her new partner, who has now met someone else and will leave everything to them.

But you need to think about yourself, and what your situation will be. You dont want fo work hard to buy a property, and end up feeling like a lodger in your own home.

Oh, forgot to add to my post that pre-/post-nups are legally binding where I live.

This is a life interest trust. You get to live in the house until you die or otherwise terminate the trust and only at that point does it pass to the children. No worries about people trying to kick you out. It will impact your inheritance tax position though as the value of the half share of the property in trust will be treated as part of your estate and then any tax due will be paid pro rata between your estate and the trust assets

That’s not generally the standard wording in a deed of trust
generally your required to keep the house in good order not them as you are living there
and they have no power over what you do while your living there

they have no say over say if you wanted to decorate nor can they just walk in / out as they like as you have the right to live there

so I think your right to be wary of such a Clause

it may be that your partner has asked to add such a clause but it’s definitely not the usual

It’s so unusual & unreasonable that I suspect the wording has been misinterpreted.
Which is why the Op needs to go through it with her own solicitor to clarify and explore all her options.

I agree op. I love my DSC dearly and I’ve been in their life for decades but they will not inherit a share of our home. The house comes to me and we have made seperate provision for his DC. It was his idea as he could see that them owning a share could cause difficulties. To be fair, if it works that way and he goes first, they will inherit it all when I die, but he has to rely on my being honest about that because I could change it after his death? I wouldn’t, but I suppose I could?

His terms are perfectly standard. If you’re not happy with them, buy your own property.

I'm not sure if this is feasible or desirable.

If wills were made on the suggested lines BEFORE marriage, they would be negated after marriage. So would OP then inherit her DH's share automatically?
Then "do the right thing" & make a will that includes DH's DC.

its all totally normal, EXCEPT allowing the children to decide what happens with the house during the OP living there.

If his other estate is of equal value to yours, couldn't you just pay them out if you wanted to and own the whole house yourself?

This seems premature. There may well be a solution and the person who can tell you about it will be a solicitor with experience in wills. It is a relatively common situation and you would benefit from discussing it with a professional.

My partner's father left his home to his adult children, but his partner is allowed to live there for life. They have a very clear agreement over which items of building maintenance the adult children are responsible for - they have to pay for structural repairs. The occupier runs the property as her own and does what she wants to it. They have no say in what she does to the property, they just have to organise and fund any structural repairs and pay for the insurance. In practice this means she has full security and privacy, and they have obligations now and the hope of an inheritance if they outlive her.

Perhaps on his death you sell up and move to a new property bought outright with your half of the estate and his share passes to his children at that point? So instead of staying indefinitely in the shared home you need to sell and move within two years or similar.

Standard apart from the fact he also wants his children to be able to demand improvements and upgrades along with regular house maintenance. She is happy where she is and where she has security. He is the one who wants to marry and get a bigger better house and can only afford it by the OP selling the house she owns. He is the one pushing this and it's not for her security it's for his. She then will own half of the shiny new investment and when he dies won't be allowed to make decisions about it such as a new kitchen or bathroom but his children will while she has to shut up and pay for it. Oh and he and his children will get all of her assets should she die before him.

The OP needs to stay put and stay single - although apparently that's a likely deal breaker for him. He's a single daddy looking for a shaggable ATM who might become a nurse and wipe his arse if he needs care. Clever boy thinks if he traps her in marriage he has easier access to her assets and her domestic work too. Many single parents avoid remarrying and prefer to leave their assets to the children. it's better for everyone generally. But I guess there's a profit to be made by getting that someone else to fund a bigger better house and a bigger payoff for his children. The drawback is that the pesky ATM wants her own security too.