Stepdaughter and Inheritance.

[nevereveragain2]

DH has 2 previous children from ex wife, i have my own ds and we share a child together. my husband bought our house, put in his own deposit and his name only on mortgage as i had bad credit and currently in a debt management plan trying to get debt free.
i do pay towards house household and bills etc
topic came up if were to pass away before me, he said the house would be paid off and could remain living there. but when and if house was sold his assets and property would be split 4 ways 25% each to his 2 dc our child and me. nothing to my own child who is his stepdaughter. what are people’s thoughts on this ? i feel i suppose its fair as its all his money and not mine.
i will one day inherit from my parents and i would split that between my own 2 children so i suppose its fair. my step children will also inherit a large amount from their own mother. ak

I think that sounds fair as he has split between you and his three biological children. If you are paying towards the mortgage though you should get an interest in the property in your own name.

Please tell me you have life assurance to protect you in the event of his death.

Effectively he is dividing his assets in half - with his half going to his children from his first marriage, and the other half going to you and your children.

If you jointly owned the house, he could leave his half to his 3 children but then you would have the remaining half. If you chose to leave this to your 2 children - so your joint child and sole child - then there is a likelihood of unfair distribution: his children would get 1/6 each, your joint child would get 1/4+1/6 and your own child would get 1/4 [assuming neither of you need social care and the entirety of the house is available to leave at all].

Theoretically I assume this was meant to be an attempt to trying to treat your child the same as his in the will (ie ensure every child gets 25%). This assumes that you will leave that share in its entirety to your sole child, when in fact you will likely split it between both your children. The result is likely to be that a) your sole child, his step daughter, will not benefit until you die, b) they will actually only get 12.5% of the total pot [half of the 25% you inherit], c) your shared child will ultimately inherit twice - 25% when DH dies and and further 12.5% when you die - and d) only if you have not had to spend the money on care bills before then.
This set up will likely cause conflict between your shared child and ALL their siblings, I’m afraid.

Additionally, he is making sure that you have to stay with him for the rest of your life in order to benefit from the asset, as you would unlikely be awarded half of the marital home in a divorce at this stage in your life. It also means that when he does die (if he does not outlive you) you will only have 25% of the value of the property to invest in a home of your own, unless he has also given you a lifetime interest (ie right) to remain in it until your death. This may not be an issue if that 25% is enough to buy a retirement flat for one person.

However, if he does outlive you, your sole child may ultimately be excluded entirely as he can rewrite his will to divide it between his own three children.

Then, if you have a right to remain in the property after his death, whilst only owning a 25% share, then he needs to be clear upon how maintenance and ongoing costs of the property would be split - because he would be imposing upon his three children the financial and legal responsibility to maintain the property during your continued occupancy (which I think creates a host of legal issues and may create conflict should any of the three be unable to afford to do this).

Not sure there is a perfect solution as this is the sort of complex issue that arises in a blended family scenario, and is complicated by you not being named on the title deeds. It is not unreasonable that he would want to protect his assets for his own biological children but I think you might want to speak to a legal advisor and ask what your rights are in terms of where you live if/when you outlive him?

No sorry what I mean is that it shouldn’t be separate, it should be both his and hers, irrespective of whether she is on the mortgage. She needs to get him to add her to the property, officially, as with the exception of the ringfenced deposit (if they do ringfence it) the house is 50% hers.

You need to be in his will which needs to specifically state that you have right of residence if that is how he wants it to work. Make sure this is the case.

It's fine he's not leaving anything to your daughter. You have years, presumably, to save up now that you are living with no mortgage or rent. You - as her mother - should be putting something away for her to inherit, if that's your wish.

But if you are paying towards the mortgage, you should be on the deeds.

What should or shouldn’t be has no bearing on what is. Marriage does not mean all assets and finances will be considered joint.

The house remains in his sole ownership, despite their being married. This may or may not be something OP could challenge in the event of a divorce, depending on whether he has put financial protections in place.

You’re misunderstanding me, I’m not trying to say what is, I am saying that as his wife she should be putting her foot down and not letting him treat her this way. Just because he is on the mortgage doesn’t mean she isn’t contributing to family life. I’m saying that she should be getting him to change the property so that she is named on it because morally it is hers, not legally yet, so she needs to make sure it is also legally reflected too.

I wasn’t arguing the legal basis for who it belongs to, rather that as they live their lives together as husband and wife, their individual earnings should be irrelevant. Why should he be allowed to build equity because she didn’t have a good credit rating, it is a home they run together. Now that her credit will be fixed, she should be addressing it with him to have the home put in both of their names, but with the deposit protected as his. They should both want to do this, because it is morally correct, otherwise what about SAHMs, they’d have nothing if it went based on who paid the mortgage.

His plan is entirely fair. It is very hypocritical of you to question it considering you’d have no intention of leaving anything to your step children.

I was in a similar position to him
before my DH died and when writing a will I was advised that I was obliged to make some provision so that my DH wouldn’t become completely homeless in the event of my death, but ultimately there was no problem with the expectation he would have to massively downsize to enable my children from a previous relationship to inherit the majority of the house proceeds, even if they had to wait until
his death for the full amount.

I hope your husband has a water tight will to protect his children.

Your child will inherit the 25% from your husband after you die. So they do get 1/4 only delayed. Which I think is fair. I have a similar issue 3 children. 1 has a step daughter who we never see and don’t have a relationship with but if I leave her stepmum a third she ends up with more than the others who I see regularly. I think what your husband has done is fair and reasonable.

If seems fair to me, in that you're both benefitting individual who you choose, rather than treating all children/step-children the same.

Also, as mentioned above, inheritance isn't guaranteed.

But all they can do now is make plans so I don't get your point.