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!

Some of what OP has said about the children's rights after her partner dies is clearly wrong. I don't know if her partner has misunderstood and given her the wrong information or she has misunderstood what he has said, but whatever his will says the trustees (who may or may not be his children) will not be able to require her to upgrade the property at her expense. Indeed, they can't even upgrade the property at their own expense unless she consents as she is a co-owner. That is the law. She must keep the property in good order, but she cannot be required to do any more than that.

It’s in op first post

Some posters have either not read or misread OPs second post...the children would be able to authorize 'maintenance' at TOTALLY the OPs expense and also veto any work done on the house they don't see as necessary. This could mean extensions, conservatories, redecorating bathrooms and kitchen to add value to their future inheritance; she couldn't say no without being evicted.
By extension, any 'spare' income from the sale of her 100% owned present home would be eaten up by these projects; if she sold to downsize she wouldn't be able to afford a new home.
Don't buy a joint property with him; he can leave his house to his kids. If you want to live with him, do it at either house but have no financial interest in each other's; get that in legally registered writing too.
The cynical part of me would also leave everything, apart from a token item or two, to charity! True colours are coming out now, they see you as a cash cow.

@Wadsworthy you just disagreed with me and then said exactly the same thing I had. I did say that OP is concerned that the children could dictate how she lives in her own house. This is causing her to fixate on the trust.

I know she hasn't disputed that his half of any house is to go to his children. However, she didn't appear to understand that the trust is the main tool for ensuring that happens. But it doesn't confer actual ownership of the property. That would remain with OP.

The trust does not need to be, and should not be, set up to allow the children to dictate or have authority over anything and I myself now live under just such an arrangement. My children have no authority over what I do in my house. It's their share from their Dad that is protected by the trust. They don't have actual ownership. They don't make the decisions.

I've said all of that over several posts now and said that OP needs legal advice of her own to ensure that any wording of the trust is one she is comfortable with. If she and her DP cannot come to any agreement there then they shouldn't buy a place together.i

No she wholly owns her own property.

In complete agreement @Topseyt123 - I think we're talking at cross purposes & I apologise.

But it's the OP's DP who is the one who seems to be fixated on his DC having a say in the property.

I hope the clarity of your explanation is helpful to @Itisallgoingtobeok and also reassuring that there can be a trust set up just as you and your DH did. And I hope it's a tiny sliver of help to you in what must be powerful grief at losing your DH, that he & you were able to be so caring of each other as to set up the kind of trust you outline - I do think people (and it's often men/fathers) who don't do this renege on their final act of care towards their loved ones..

@Itisallgoingtobeok needs to show her DP Topsey123's posts - they explain clearly what should happen & how what he is suggesting is not fair to the OP.

I'm afraid if I were the OP, I would be a bit wary going into something like a house purchase & compromising my financial independence and security at the moment. But neither of them has had a chance to really think it through, and obtain independent legal advice.

To repeat, the children cannot force OP to improve the house at her own expense. They can't even spend their own money on improving the house without her consent. Any attempt to evict her for refusing to agree to an extension, for example, would fail regardless of what it says in her partner's will. All she can legally be required to do is maintain the property in good order.

Also, if OP wants to downsize or move elsewhere, ALL of the equity in the jointly owned home would be available to her.

It’s very fair. I can’t understand why you think it wouldn’t be.

You can't take one comment out of a long conversation and isolate it. Yes of course I know she has 100 % of her own property right now. If you had read the rest of my posts you would have seen that. We were talking about her having an imaginary 250k property to try to explain simple maths.

Spot on !

https://www.fernwills.com/articles/right-to-occupy-trust

When we discussed our wills the solicitor said there could be a “portability” clause included so that if husband dies before me, if I later moved I could take all the equity with me to my next property. I actually felt this would be unfair to step-son. If husband dies before me I would want to downsize anyway. It seems fair that step-son gets his half at that point.

that also then severs the legal/financial tie we have. Even though we get on fine, I think in the circumstances I’d just want to live the rest of my life based on income/assets that are wholly mine.

so are you saying that there is NO WAY that the requirements that the OP belives will go in her partners will would EVER go in a will and be enforceable?

People can put anything they like into their wills and their trusts. Happened to us—though we caught it and declined to do business with the person—here in the US during a house sale.

OP should be careful, take all trusts etc…to her own solicitor, and decline to enter into any contract or marriage that would potentially leave her grieving, struggling, or negotiating with other people after her partner’s death.

that's what i thought....the people who are saying that the OP is wrong and it could never happen are wrong.

It’s a very simple thing you say to your boyfriend: I’m in an ongoing relationship with you, not with your children. Of course you must put your ongoing relationship with your children first, and then your relationship with me second. I don’t have any children, you are my only relationship. Once you’re gone, I’m back to prioritizing myself. We are fundamentally different in this regard. You must look after your children; I must look after me. I’m not interested in a deeper relationship with your children, even if they are. We need a different solution.

Yes, type of property and area is important, and you know your local area, I just don"t think in general many people are going to make a profit on 2019 prices, if they bought with a mortgage you also have to account for rising mortgage debt interest costs on a very bubbly (IMO) purchase price.

According to the will writer I last spoke to, if you have it simply in a will like that you are advised to rewrite and specify a Trust as apparently this is much more secure if the will is contested.

This is just a BAD idea, the OP already owns a property outright, don"t blend this with someone else"s children, someone else"s will, if a partner is committed/connected they will still be that whatever personal financial decisions you make.

To simplify, OP currently has an asset (that is also her home) that is wholly hers.

This is a far better situation than finding herself in a home that is partially hers, and partially owned by people who a) don't have her best interests at heart and b) have her selling up/dying as their best case scenario.

It's hardly a recipe for a peaceful old age/widowhood.

Yes, I am saying that for a whole host of reasons, not least of which is that OP will still be co-owner of the property. Her partner's will can affect what happens to his share of the property, but it cannot make any difference to hers. As co-owner with the trust, she will have the same rights over the property as the trust (actually she has slightly more rights in that she has the right to live there without undue interference or harassment, whereas the trust does not have the right to live there nor can it give anyone else that right).

Any major changes to a co-owned property such as building an extension or adding a conservatory require the consent of all co-owners. It is not open to any of the co-owners to make a change unilaterally, and they certainly cannot force other co-owners to pay for the change. So OP must keep the property in good condition, but the trustees cannot force her to do any more than that. They cannot force her to improve the property at all, let alone force her to pay for improving it. If the trustees did alter the property without OP's consent they would have to pay for the alteration themselves and OP would have the legal right to demand that they put the property back how it was at their own expense. If OP allowed the change to stay she would not have to contribute towards it but she would be entitled to 50% of any increase in value of the property. So if the trustees spent, say, £20k on building a conservatory that OP didn't want and it increased the value of the property by £20k, they would in effect have given OP £10k if she allowed it to stay. And if OP decided she didn't want it they would have wasted the £20k plus the cost of removing it and putting the property back how it was.

All of this is basic property law. There is nothing OP's partner can put in his will that can change any of this.

I would also add that the suggestion up thread that they could evict her if she refuses to improve the property in line with their wishes is wide of the mark. It is very difficult to evict a life tenant. The trustees would only be able to evict her if she breached the terms of the trust.

Exactly! The house sale isn't determined by whether you paid cash or not! 😂 I think some people don't really understand what the current housing market is like.

Where did I say that ? Answer: never ! The only reason I said any of that was because someone couldn't understand something , got riled up , decided to attack me and asked me if I owned a house.

Try taking comments into context instead of jumping in to attack someone on part of a conversation. Read.

Thank you. Someone else who understands the facts of this.

Well at least you have moved on from your first post suggesting that I was lying.