to ask ex to put DD into his will

[sevenkeystomysoul]

Ex (DDs father) owns a house outright (inherited after his wife, the mother of his DS, passed away). His DS is in his will to inherit house. But now he has DD also, AIBU to want her to have an equal share of the house should anything happen to ex or myself?

OP - is your ex's DS under 18? If your ex was to drop dead tomorrow, would you take in ex's DS, raise him as your own, clothe, feed, provide for his education and future? or would expect a member of ex's or his late wife's family to do that? If something happened to your ex tomorrow your DD has you - his DS is on his own to a certain extent - I would expect any will to be favouring him to allow for the fact that no one would be there for him.

also, is this house your ex's only asset? does he definately not have insurance policies, cash reserves, shares etc? I can see why emotionally he would feel he had to leave the house that was the family home he had with his first wife to her child.

A house isn't just an asset to most people in the way that cash or shares are, it's got a lot of emotion wrapped up in it, and i'd say probably in his case, was the location of his grief. you can't be grabby with that.

Your DD is not his EXW's daughter so YABU- when his DS is older and has children of his own will you babysit for them, buy presents every birthday- be their Grandma?

I believe you are not trying to be insensative but you will appear very callous and money grabbing if you persue this.

Inheritance is more than money it is about legacy etc.

So you'd take the childs home knowing it was bought and paid for by his mother and father (regardless of the insurance aspect as they paid for the insurance in case something went wrong).

YABVU and totally grasping, how horrible that you have even thought of this.

If you want your child to inherit a house, have an insurance policy then you provide them. If your ex wants to leave anything to your child in his will he will do so, asking him to is simply crass.

I can see that you think you are being reasonable but I don't think you are. The points have all been made already. The house should probably go to the boy.

What makes me uncomfortable is that you lived with the child for some years and yet are not looking out for the interests of both children (one who has no mother). It doesn't seem nice. Don't you see that?

i can see your point, his estate should be split between his children, however i do hink it makes a difference where the money came from in this case.

Can i ask will his estate basically be made up of the house and that's it?

OK I would expect our dh to leave something in his will for your daughter but not necessarily an equal share of the house. I'm basing this on my own family situation which I grant is very different but I hope you'll see the point I'm making!

I am included in my parents will but their house will be left entirely to my brother. The reason being that he has autism and although he lives independantly and a has a part time job his financial security and ability to keep a stable income in the future is to say the least far more uncertain than mine. I'm happy with this situation. We aren't getting an equal share because our lives aren't equal.

Your dd's life is not the same as our ex's dh. He does not and never has had a mother. If your ex dies your daughter will have you his son will have no parent. I know our situation are definately not the same but I hope you can see the point I'm trying to make.

your ex dh that should say NOT our

Your DD's brother has noone else to provide for him. He wasn't left the house by his Mother as he wasn't born at that point but I'm sure she would have wanted it to be left to her only child!

By being so greedy on her behalf you could ruin the relationship your DD has with her brohter. Her Father will, I'm sure, provide for her. However, he clearly sees the house as something belonging to his wife, son and him. I think morally it would be utterly wrong to split the house. It is the only security his DS has and should be for him alone. The house was bought and paid for long beofre your DD was born.

Under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, a child (ie under 18) who is financially dependant on a parent has the right to claim under that parent's will or under the intestacy rules for financial provision if they are not already provided for.

So if your dd receives maintenance from her father, that maintenance will continue to be paid in the event of the father's death before her 18th birthday.

There is NO OBLIGATION for the father to put your daughter into his will, as she has protection under the 1975 Act.

I agree YABU. Maybe your Ex could specify something else in his will to go to your DD - but the house should be the DS's alone. When you die, your DD will inherit from you - your DD still has two parents to inherit something from, unlike the DS.

He is NOT legally obliged to add her to his will.

At the end of the day its his wife's house so why should her children have to share their inheritance with your DD?

At the end of the day its his choice and you really cant ask him to add her to his will.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect your dd to get a share of the house, but I think if he has anything else to leave - savings, life insurance etc, your dd should be considered in respect of these. Also, I would think that if his DS has the house maybe that should be taken into account before divvying up other leavings.

Also IMO this isn't actually anything to do with you at all. If when your dd is older she wants to address it then that's between her and her father.

Of course he should provide for your DD, but why does that need to be the house?

DH and I have our affairs sorted so in the event of one of us dying the insurance will pay the Mortgage and the surviving spouse will own the house. DD has money and shares that are in trust for her. However if something happpened to me and DH remarried and had more kids then no - I wouldn't want them to inherit part of the house DH and bought and that was paid of by the insurance we paid for.

If the house was sold and he and his new DW contributed equally to a new property (deposits etc.) then yes that property should be split between all their kids. Again I would expect any left over money from the house DH and I bought to go to our DC.

I think yabu. I'm a mum of 2 girls, both of whom are named in my will. My DH would inherit my life assurance which would pay off the mortgage and leave that as an inheritance to our children. I do not think if he later had more children by someone else that they should get an equal share of what quite frankly is the inheritance I would leave behind for MY motherless daughter's! I would expect him to provide for any future children out of his future earnings etc but not out of what I have left for my girls, I have worked hard to ensure there is a sizeable payout should anything happen to me, I have done that to ensure my children at least have some financial stability if, god forbid, there world should be rocked by the death of their mother.

My goodness, how could you even think that your DD is entitled to that house! My parents gifted me a house before my marriage, there is no way anyone is getting it except MY children, I don't care about the sensitivities or equality to any others who may come who have no connection to me. I feel so sorry for the poor boy who has lost his mother and now has greedy hands trying to grab what should be his.

If I died, I would want to protect any assets I may have so they will go to DD (via OH if necessary) and NOT go to any future partner or children my OH may go on to have (though of course I would wish him well in that respect)

In no way do I think that is unreasonable.

THis is an interesting issue.

I see a lot of people have pointed out that if anyhting, the house should be split unequally, with a larger portion going to your ex's ds.

Would these posters be advocating the same in our position, I wonder (PLEASE NOTE THAT MY AND DH'S WILL SPLIT EVERYTHING EQUALLY BETWEEN ALL CHILDREN INVOLVED)

I am dh's second wife. he has 2 chidren fromhis first marriage. Well loved, well provided for children. He sees them regularly, and provides for them well, as he should do. He also left his ex with a mortgage free house, and alimony for a good number of years (in fact until the youngest had left school). She also works in a good job, with a good income (I mention this ONLY as background, nothing else meant by it)

dh and I have 2 children also. One of whom is severely disabled, meaning I am unable to work.

So, in our situation, where my step-children have both parents able to provide for them, and are set to inherit well form their mother (which was provided by dh initially, and substantially added to by their mother as well), woiuld you also advocate that dh's will favours our children more than his children from his first marriage. As, my step children will effectively "inherit twice" by the calculations some of you are setting out here, whereas our children will only inherit once (all being well, with dh & I staying together)

Because, as many f you have pinted out, there is more to this than money. THere is the fact that children (even as adults) need to know they were loved equally by their parents, and, more importantly, considered equally (and it is the consideration that is moreimportant, I believe). IN fact, emotions over this run so high at times (in general, I mean, not in our situation) that we agonise over what we will do about providing for dd1 (who is disabled, and will need more care overher lifetime, with little hope of her providing for herself) and how to present it as "fair" when it would beeasy to be misconstrued.

Sometimes, especially when there have been blended families, where everyone is just trying to get on as best they can, it is not as easy as trying to go by the rules.

I think that if you leave an inheritance to someone you have no control over who they then leave it to when they die, so you can't leave your DC money via your DH for example. You can leave your DC money in trust for when they reach an age decided by you but I believe anything that is left directly and simply to your DH, he can do what he likes with.

Silverfrog, I am not in your position but having read your post and thought about your situation, I would probably consider leaving a larger portion or even all of my inheritence to the disabled child. I have a colleague in a similar position to you and that is what she is doing - she has 2 daughters who have well paid jobs and have "married well" who don't really need the inheritance whereas her son who is an adult but still dependent on her and her husband has a greater need of it as he will need care for the rest of his life.

It is a can of worms, isn't it and has people have said, much complicated by the situation with stepfamilies etc.

But this poor boy would have noone should his Father die! His Mother is dead, he does not have a Step-Mother and his sister is only 2!

Imagine if the worst happened to OP when her DD was the same age as the boy is now, say 13. Her DD would still have a Father AND she would have a brother who would be 23 and able to help her, maybe not financially, but definetly emotionally.

The daughter is in a much securer position than her brother and their Father is only right to really consider this.

Thanks, tryharder. Our wills were written a few years back when it was not apparent how disabled dd1 actually is. I guess at some point we will amend them (and I know that should be sooner ratherthan later) to do just that.

But I don't doubt that this will be seen as unfair by some, along the lines of "why should the otherchildren (and quite often, people mean children from first marriage when they saytthis) miss out because Mrsilverfrog had more.children"

It is, as you say, a whole can of worms.

Can some of you please explain a few things as I am really confused at many of the replies.

Why is it the Ex Wife's house? It does not appear to be a house she inherited from her family nor a house she owned outright before meeting the 7's EX. It would appear to be a house Ex & Wife bought together* in the normal way, with an insurance policy paying off the mortgage when his wife died.

*Why (considering these facts) is it not half his ex-wifes (estate) and half OP EX's?

*I agree that half of the houses value should go to his DS (his Wife's half share of the house) and then a further 1/4 value of the house to the DS (half of his Fathers half) and the remaining 1/4 half to his DD.

*7 has already said that her EX has no emotional-family-home attachment to the house - it is an asset (not a deeply treasure family home - seemingly). Tis neither here nor there whether you say it's a share in the house or a share of his assets made up of other things. (RE Posts like Lonnies - sorry Lonnie not 'picking' on you, I just remembered your name).

If I were to die, my half (of the value of) the house/other assets would go (in trust) to my children (with provisions for him to sell the actual house if he wanted/live in it forever etc until he dies). What my DH does with his half of the assets in his will, should I die first, is his business. I would expect him to share his current and future assets amongst our DC and any other DC he may end up having. I would not expect all of our joint assets to go solely to my children - because they may not be all of his children.

Someone said that the house was owned outright by 7's EX before he had his DD therefore she shouldn't benefit from it - that makes NO sense - your children would normally inherit things you may have paid for in full before they were born.

Very, very poor taste... The mother would obviously have left her house in her will to her son under the guardianship of his father had she known she was going to die, as any mother would.

It is a pity she had not the time to put this provision in her will to protect her son from someone like you.

I am sure her son believes the house is rightfully his, making him sell it and give half to your daughter on his fathers death may well destroy any relationship they have as brother and sister as it would be wholly unfair.