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!

A lot of comments are about how getting the right legal framework in place could give the OP what she wants.

I think this misses the point (and possibly the OP's concerns). If her DP's children get the message from her DP that they'll be able to control what happens in her house if she ends up living there alone, then that could result in her spending uncomfortable years being hassled. Even if it's completely unwarranted. This doesn't have to rise to the level of needing to go to court, or even police involvement, it could simply mean a drag on her quality of life.

The expectations of the DP's children are important here. But they can't necessarily be resolved by a compromise apparently being agreed. People can still have unreasonable expectations even when they've agreed to be reasonable.

OP, would you consider an arrangement that if your DH dies before you then you get the whole house but you buy his half from his children ? In other words you buy out the children at a rate to be determined now - something like the cost of the house currently plus a small amount for each year that has lapsed since you bought the property together ? I realise that’s far from an ideal price formulation as house prices may have gone up or down since you purchased. But you may be able to come up with a better formula, or accept that one party will lose out a little but that’s the price to be paid for years of living together.

Just another option to consider.

If her DP is that serious about living with her, he could take out and pay for insurance to that value, with her as the beneficiary, to pay the children out.

Alternatively, he could then just leave his half of the house to her and make his children the beneficiary of the insurance - they get their money, and she gets her peaceful life and no need to move or have to hand over a lot of money.

But why would any adult submit themselves to this tyranny and even the possibility of litigation or argument? Especially definitionally while they are widowed or elderly.

Its absurd to handwave away the potential for time/energy consuming conflict between future OP and her dp’s children. Its both a very real risk and a very real potential cost to future OP.

The only person who mentioned lying is yourself, you still have no way to predict how much a house will actually sell for.

Sorry - what tyranny? The tyranny of being able to live in her own home?

To repeat, this arrangement is becoming increasingly common and generally works without problems. Yes, occasionally there are horror stories, but you get that with any arrangement. Personally I would recommend making someone other than the children the trustees, so it is clear to the children that they have no right to interfere. That doesn't completely avoid any scope for problems, but it minimises it.

If OP's partner leaves his share of the property to her, his children could end up never inheriting (and she may face an expensive battle with them if they choose to make a claim against his estate under the Inheritance Act - they would lose, but that doesn't always stop people from trying).

If OP's partner leaves his share of the property directly to his children, OP could find herself homeless. Those of us with experience in this area will tell you that this arrangement is far more likely to lead to conflict than a life interest trust.

If they cohabit and continue to own their own properties, there are tax implications for one or both of them, and they won't have as nice a home as they can afford together.

They could, of course, not cohabit, but OP appears to want to cohabit with her partner.

You seem really sure that you know better than those of us who actually deal with this area of law.

I’m not impugning your internet authority. But the commonality of this kind of trust, and your knowledge of this kind of trust, does not in fact mean that the arrangement This man proposes to This woman will work for her. As you yourself have pointed out the trustees appointed can make this arrangement workable or not workable. So even in your model there are fine points to be considered. And there is no certainty that this DP is proposing to follow your model.

Also, to your other point, there are lots of ways for OP snd her partner to cohabit without marriage or without deciding to that she should sell her house and combine to jointly own a new house.

Marriage may put her assets at risk should he divorce her. Marriage as he presents it also doesn’t give her all the protection that it usually would as he is trying to ring fence his assets.

Its just not a given that this is a sensible thing for her to commit to. Nothing to do with your supposed expertise about this area of law.

You asked for a legal opinion and got one.

Whether or not it is a financially sensible move to combine monies given their differing outlooks/expectations is a different question.

No you said that my house increase was highly unlikely . That was your suggestion . I don't know what your problem is . Guess what ? The sale is actually going through right now.

Why should they? None of this is their doing, the father is the one making these stipulations and if the children and OP are mistrustful of each other then it would be better for OP not to live in a house she doesn’t own 100% of, or at least not without a back up.