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!

It's never been their family home, it might be different if decisions about maintaing or updating it had an emotional value but it doesn't and they should view the house as an investment (that may go up or down) they they can't access until you die or sell.

Could it be possible that you would be able to buy them out should he pass? You agree them you have the option to buy them out for a fixed period after his death. lf you could give them cash in return for full ownership and then live in peace!

Yes - agreed. Hadn't seen that part in OPs updates when i first read. That is unusual @Glowingup you are right.

Is it fair that they have decision making rights on the house whilst I live in it after his death? That's the bit that is really getting to me.

Read the blimming updates!!

He wants OP to pay for ALL maintenance and updates, with his DC given the right to demand she does whatever they decide should be done eg install a new bathroom.

It's outrageous.

There are so many people commenting here on this who obviously are not familiar with the legality of this. 🤷‍♀️

As I have said numerous times the legalities do not allow this.

Absolutely, I will have another conversation about this. It only came up last night and I was a little bit taken aback by it.

I want to sell this house I am in, it's not a long term option for me. I would be happy to buy something outright and him live with me. I do need to understand the legal implications of that though. I am not sure what they are.

Tricky, because as a parent he’s absolutely doing the right thing by his kids, but obviously you want to protect your own interests.

Could you not move in together and keep your respective properties?

Also may I point out that it is never “poor advice” to suggest to a middle aged financially secure woman that she keeps her solely owned asset rather than getting financially entangled with a man who clearly does not have her best interests at heart.

Not me! I was responding to @Moveoverdarlin . She suggested it was reasonable for the DC to have the control OP is rightly wary of.

It is in the Quote History

Okay this part should be a no go. They can keep their interest in the property without dictating to you how to live in your own home.

I think the best thing to do is that if he dies before you do, you have x months / years to sell and move to your own place. His children get X% of the net proceeds.

Does he have any other assets?

You seem obsessed with this one idea and people are fuelling your fire. I don't think your husband has explained this properly to you. However you and he would have to come up with a financial amount above which you would both have to contribute eg you would pay for maintenance of boiler annually but if you needed a new boiler both sides would contribute. All of these terms are agreed by yourselves. 50/50 does not mean they have a greater say. If you and he cannot agree then don't do it .

Agreed. Not thinking straight today 🫠

Will they? Is that legally enforcable?
If you own half and they own half between them, nobody has the controling interest.
Practically speaking if you are the one living there, no one can force you to do anything. Although I do understand that they may make you feel bullied or harassed, they still wouldn't have actual control or power to do anything.

Your DH wish that his kids have the power to make decisions would be a thing that was written in a "statement of wishes" letter to go alongside the will, this isn't something that would go in the will, it's not something can can be enforced

I would suggest that you call off moving in together. They are trying to control you and control what happens on DPs death, assuming he goes first. Keep your own property and keep control of your home

My financially secure status was hard earned! There is no way I’m risking it.

I genuinely don’t think he has thought this through. I’ll find out though when I have another chat with him.

Dont put all your eggs in one joint basket /house.
Sell. Keep a small property in your name.rent it out .
Or as suggested buy next door assets. Keep separate properties .
Are you going to get married ?

You say this but if the deed of trust provides that they can insist and OP funds it, I think that would prevail wouldn’t it?

This situation has happened in my family, everyone is lovely and terribly polite but it is still very stressful all round. It’s decades since the person died and their ‘new’ spouse is still alive. Generations of people are having to become trustees and do all sorts of decisions and hassle and what not. You are right to avoid it!

If you can afford something you would like, using only your own money, then that sounds a good option. Do get legal advice but I would think it should be fine if him clarifies in his will that he leaves to you any ownership right in that house that he might have implicitly accrued. It is probably worth him writing that explicitly so there is no debate in the matter.

(NOTE other posters I am not suggesting he leave OP the inheritance that "ought to" have gone to his kids, just clarifying that her own house bought with her own money does not go to his kids.)

A life interest trust is a common approach to ensuring the children inherit, particularly when dealing with a blended family like this. The details of how it works depend on the will. Normally, the surviving partner (the life tenant) is responsible for day to day maintenance, utility bills and standard repairs - the trustees should not have any involvement in that at all.

The trustees (who may be the ultimate beneficiaries, but they could be someone else) own the property and normally pay for any major capital repairs such as a new roof, but the will could make the life tenant responsible for all repairs.

The life tenant is responsible for keeping the property in the same condition as when it started. The trustees cannot force the surviving partner to go beyond that.

If the surviving partner wants to alter the property, e.g. by adding a conservatory, they will need the agreement of the trustees, who should check that the alteration is allowed under the terms of the trust and that it won't damage the future value of the property.

You need to take proper legal advice on the proposed will to make sure you understand exactly how it will work. But if this is a deal breaker for you, you need to be aware that many men with children will want a similar arrangement to make sure that their children will ultimately inherit.

Are you a lawyer?

Or are you basing your wisdom on your own personal experience of having done this once?

We have talked about mariage, but no definite plans yet.

I think you are right about eggs in one basket. It's interesting really, that our different life expereiences are coming out. His wife died when the children were very young. He's been single other than one 9 month relationship. His whole life has been dedicated to parenting his kids. He didn't want them to have a step mother, or a serious of women passing through their lives. I absolutely understand and admire that. His focus rightly, is on the children with our relationship a close second.

My experience was no children (not through choice), and a DH who became mentally unwell and eventually violent. The divorce was awful and he got more than his fair share. My focus is on our relationship, and keeping it healthy and loving, and also safeguarding my safety and security.

This is where I think we are not seeing each other's points of view. We do communicate really well though, so I am hoping another conversation will help move this forward.

Under most normal trust no, the children could not make those demands and could not control how OP would live in her house.

Personally, I am wondering if OP's partner has himself misunderstood what the trusts are actually for and what they permit because he is talking this way. The trusts are to protect his children's legal interest in the property, NOT to allow them to dictate how OP repairs and decorates it.

Both of them need legal advice together to clear this up and OP needs to be crystal clear with him that his children will NOT be allowed to control what she does in her own home. If he can't or won't see that then don't buy a house with him. Who knows what else he might try to encourage his children to do if he continues to talk them about controlling shares.