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!

Talk to a solicitor, a specialist in this area - they'll have seen these types of situations and will give you both options. If the options don't work for you then two properties could work maybe? I do get that this is unsettling for you and having to move on top of grieving might be quite hard on you but I also get he is trying to protect his children's inheritance. Best to find out what the options are first.

You missed the bit where OP has to pay ALL of the maintenance and upgrade costs.

And his DC can demand that she puts in, for example, a new kitchen or bathroom or anything, at any point, to keep the property updated and easy to sell when SHE dies.

My first real arguments with DP were over imaginary scenarios when writing our wills in the same situation as you. The only things I would add (if no one has suggested it already) are:

If I have another partner after DP dies, they may live with me, and if I die before that partner, they have the right to stay on in the property for 6 months before it is put on the market to sell, and

I may choose to move home using the entire capital of the property as many times as I want if DP dies before me but the estate will only pay legal fees/moving expenses/stamp duty once.

Much of my discussion with DP centred around how would he feel if he had the same terms imposed on him - and if you have anyone you would want to leave your estate to, talk in terms of mirroring your will to his in favour of that person benefitting from a lifetime interest in the property and see if that makes him change his suggested terms.

My parents also had the same set up, and I owned part of my Mum's house for a while before she died. However, she's was my Mum, she wasn't my Dad's new partner. I think the family relationship makes a difference here.

This is fairly standard my son and his partner have done this as he was married with children before.
To be honest if I was mortgage free in my own home there is no way I would sell to buy another with someone else. I believe you should protect your own interests. Im mid fifties also so get what you are saying.

My widowed uncle insisted that when his second partner moved into his farm, she kept her house and rented it out. The farm was destined for his son, so he wanted to be sure she had a home to return to. No life interest in the farmhouse. Everyone was in agreement.

Is he much older than you?

I actually believe that you are overthinking this.

As PPs have said it's a normal arrangement and is fair to you as it guarantees you a property for life (unless you move) and fair to his children.

The obligations on maintenance etc are normal too. They are not usually onerous. But obviously the ultimate 50pc beneficiaries wouldn't want you to do something that diminished the value of their future entitlement.

If your relationship is otherwise strong it would seem a shame to me to torpedo it over this arrangement.

The other aspect of this OP is that you might die first. Do you really want to leave your half to him and onto his kids? Are there no relatives/friends/charities you'd rather your half or a proportion of it go to?

This is how we set up our wills. I also suspect it is what OP's partner means and it isn't at all unreasonable and it is very normal. Nor does it mean that someone else has control over your home.

My DH died in March.

My property is now going to remain 50% mine with DH's half going into trust for our three DDs, who are now all adults. I have the right to remain in the house and they cannot make me leave or sell it. Nor do they have any say over anything else regarding the house including decor. We are just awaiting the grant of probate to be able to finalise it all.

I remain free to sell the house and downsize if I decide to in the future. Whatever property I buy then the trust for the DDs moves with me just as it is.

If things had happened the other way round and I had predeceased DH then it would have been my half that would have gone into trust for the DDs, with him able to live in the property for as long as he wished.

The maintenance and update provisions are NOT normal (solicitor upthread has confirmed this, from a legal viewpoint)

With this sort of set up these days there would need to be a caveat allowing a period of transfer
Id say at least two years as legally it can take that long to get tenants to move out if they don’t want to.
One year is quite normal, so two would give OP assurances she isn’t left homeless

@Topseyt123 That is exactly how we have set up our wills

Absolutely. This conversation only happened last night, so no time to get advice. There has been some really useful suggestions on this thread that I can take and discuss with a solicitor.

It seems the most logical thing to do is not buy a house with him. You can live together with one of you owning the house and one owning a buy to let.

My situation is similar. Each own our own houses, DP has one adult son and two young grandchildren, I have no children.

We are talking about sharing his house soon. I would keep my house, moving in with DP and will contribute to bills and whatever. I do not want any interest in DP's house if he dies, so I will have an agreement drawn up that specifies that on his death I will have no claim to any part or portion of his house. The house will go to his son. I will be bequeathed a lump sum and other things, but not the house.

A family member and his family would live in my house and pay me rent, with all the usual legalities as a landlord/tenant sorted out.

I will leave my house to nieces and nephews, but I am stipulating that it should be sold asap after my death and the proceeds distributed. No arguments, just in case the family member is still living there when I die! I am of course leaving a similar bequest to DP as he is leaving to me.

These are just thoughts in my head at the moment, and of course I will see my solicitor before deciding anything.

Or...... we may decide to just stay as we are, each in our own houses, which has worked fine for many years, and I can recommend it! 😊

True. The unforeseen consequences of government interference.

Keep your house. Tell him that you’ve reconsidered combining finances and living together and put the ball back in his court. You don’t need him, as you are financially secure yourself.

I would be so unimpressed if someone tried to foist something like this on me because it’s not standard so he must have gone out of his way to craft something where you get a raw deal. I’m guessing there’s nothing in there to say that only reasonable maintenance needs to be carried out either? So the DC could ask you to fund and carry out a big renovation or extension to boost the value and you just have to go along with it? Awful.

My parents actually did this 15 years ago. Each parent left their half of the house to me and my sibling but whichever parent was remaining had the absolute right to live there.

i think it's standard and is fair that he's protecting his children's inheritance but no detriment to you. Just ensure there's a clause stating you have the right to live there @Itisallgoingtobeok

His plan is completely normal. Both my dad and my step-mum have this agreement.

All it basically means is that his children won’t get their inheritance until you pass. They don’t have a say in the property (unless you sell it).

I understand your concern is more about feeling pressure/control from his adult kids in relation to how you want to live in your home.

What if your DH leaves you 1% of the house and 24.5% to each if his children (with you having a lifetime trust to live there) That way you would own 51% of the house and they combined would own 49%. Would you feel like you had more control in that situation, since you own the greater share of the property.

The missing 0.5% of value for each child could be accounted for from a portion of the remainder of your DHs estate

I haven’t read the whole thread, but if you do go ahead I don’t see why the half of the house held in trust for the children cannot be controlled by you. Surely you could be the trustee so it would have nothing to do with the children until you die/sell.

@Topseyt123 - I am sorry to hear about the death of your DH. I can't imagine how hard things must be right now.

Thank you for your posts though, they are very useful. I think I need the part where it states they have no right to force me to sell, or any say in the house itself.

He wants them to have a say. That's the main issue for me.

But it's not just your home OP. I think this is where the mismatch lies. You can't think of it as only your home. It's your DP's home and by extension his kids (considering he wants them to inherit). Either you accept that you'll only ever control 50% of the house at most, or you don't move in with him.