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?

sadly I think it is because life does not always run smoothly.

for all their lives dh's ex has told the children they are hard-done-by. they genuinely thin k they had a deprived upbringing (I do not want this to turn into an ex-bashing thread, this is all purelyinfo)

unfortunately for us, the time when we could no longer afford their top schools was just after dd1 arrived (dd1 is ASD so no obv disability early on) dh talked ot the children about them moving to an alternate excellent (state) school. they didn't want to, and so dh re-structured the fees. we are stil lpaying this off, despite the children leaving a few years ago now. thiswas taken as my attempt to grab all the money for my child (nothing could be further fromthe truth. I had a father who did not pay a penny for me after he left. I woud notbe with a man who did the same)

so, although I think they would rationally see that dd1should have her care needs addressed, they would still be resentful that it was necessary. sad but true. and of course, the indisputable fact is that if their father hadn't remarried, this situation wouldn't have arisen. (one furhter disclaimer: I am not the other woman. I met dh 6 years after he left his ex)

I haven't read all the replies here but think one point has not been mentioned.

Most people here think it unreasonable for the OP's daughter to get half the house. However, if the exP dies intestate (without making a will), and he is the sole beneficial owner of the house, then the application of the intestacy rules means that is exactly what will happen, as any issue of the deceased (children of the exP) will inherit the estate equally (assuming no spouse). So, the son and the daughter will inherit half each. If any of the children are under eighteen at the time of the death, then the property will be held in trust for them.

Incidentally, it sounds very much to me that when the ex-P's wife sadly died, the reason he owned the house outright was simply that they had a mortgage supported by an endowment policy, which was designed to pay off the mortgage in the event of one of them dying.

So, OP, if he hasn't made a will, then from your point of view it is best he doesn't.

Incidentally, there is no requirement for anyone to provide for their children in their will. As has previously been mentioned, if children are left unprovided for, then an application can be made under the Inheritance Act 1975 for appropriate provision.

Apologies - have just re-read OP and see that exP has made a will leaving house to his son.

However, it is interesting that the intestacy laws in this situation would see it as equitable that they both receive an equal share, no matter how the property was acquired.

Silverfrog, that's so sad. I now understand why you speak as you do. Their mother has a lot to answer for and is clearly unable to consider the interests of any child who is not hers. I believe I would still consider the needs of DD1 to be greater than the needs of the other children and distribute my estate accordingly, however, I don't under estimate the fall out from such a decision and that ultimately such a decision might well cost your husband his relationship with his other children.

it is sad, but we would not be the first familyto fall out over money.

what is it about human nature that ultimately makes us squabble over things that are not, in the scheme of things,that important?

our situation is the legacy of a messy divorce. Again, what makes people behave htis way I do not know. Whatever happened to respect for others and dignity

sadly, dh's family hold similar views - dh's brother remarked (in the hearing of my step-children) that is was unacceptable and irresponsible of dh to have more children.

and I have also been subject to diatribes on how second marriages are not legitimate from my PIL (this while they were guests inour house at Christmas, with, yes, you've guessed it, my step children there again)

so I cannot blame them at all for the views they hold - they have literally been brought up surrounded by them. Due to the age gap, they are not really very close to the dds. I hope this changes as they all get , because it is nice being part of a family.

OP I think you are allowing your natural partiality for your DD to blind you to what is fair and right.

Can I put it another way? Let's suppose that you, sadly, die young, leaving your house and savings to your current DP who made no contribution to either. Your DP remarries and has two more children, and leaves your house and savings to his new wife, and after her, all three children equally.

Would you not feel that your DD would have been shortchanged in all this?

NB AFAIK, there is no obligation for the father to put your daughter into his will - she has some degree of statutory protection though, so perhaps that is the confusion.

surely if it was to be fair - then the ds should inherit 75% of the house and the dd only 25% as the ds would be inheriting from both his mother and father and the dd would only be inheriting from her father with her mother to still be leaving her something.

Incidentally (and I'm sure it's the same for many of us with mortgages) I have life insurance which means that were I to die, my DS would not inherit a load of debt but the mortgage would be paid off in full out of the insurance so that he has a roof over his head should I die when he is still a child (I am a lone parent).

And agree with other posters that YABU. Your ex needs to make provision for his DD but the fact that you're renting and he is living in his ex's house is neither here nor there

Ex may have only paid a small amount towards the mortgage, it was the mothers death which made them financially secure, y are still bu and Yuck !!

Sorry YABU the house and any money from it has nothing to do with your child it is for your Exs son only as it was his mothers.

Your Ex needs to make his own arrangements for your DD leaving out anything from the house

but the house used to be where the op lived AND where her daughter lived - it isn't JUST something associated with the past wife, but WAS their family home for a while. i just think the dad should acknowledge his daughter, and if the house is the only financial support he could offer her, it should (in part) go to her.

how many of us, if we felt our child was being totally ignored, would want to do something, and try to give them security?

So he was married and had a son, his wife owned the house and then died, he had a relationship with you and you have a DD together, I still do not see why you think your DD should have half of a house neither you or your Ex paid for.

If the DD is only 3 though, it's not like she's ever going to remember living there. And it's not his house to give away really, he is holding it in trust for his DS isn't he?

YANBU to think that your daughter has a claim on her father's will. He is her daughter. He has responsibilities towards her, at least until she is an adult. Agree 100% with Chipping's comments and really at some of the nasty, nasty comments about you and by implication your daughter (suggesting a three year old has no claim on her own father's assets!)

The crucial point is the house was not wholly-owned by your ex's first wife, but by both of them. Therefore your daughter should really be in line to inherit some of it, even if not 50%.

YABU.

Runawaywife - no (according to 7), her Ex and his wife had the house, with a mortgage together, the mortgage got paid off with insurance/endowment when she died. This is why I think it should be a 75/25 split between the kids. IF she owned it outright before the relationship with 7's EX then it should go solely to his son, yes.

Newteacher - why 'at the end of the day' is it his wifes house? They bought it together, paid the mortgage together etc until an endowment paid it off on her death. The Ex has put as much into it as she did.

Silverfrog - it's really sad the elder two have been brought up like this. Perhaphs as they grow up they will realise that what their Mother & GP's are spouting isn't right. To be honest, I think you should go ahead and do your wills the way you think is right, they have no right to know what is in your wills so they wont know until your DH has died - it really can't sour their relationship then and hopefully by then they will see what you have done is fair. If not, they have been looked after financially and now DD1 needs to be looked after the most.

Quattrocentro - why do you say that the EX had not put anything into it - they (seemingly) owned the house together - it was paid off by a mortgage endowment which they presumably had together also.

Ivykaty - I have been saying that for pages now, yet the majority of posters disagree - I don't understand why?

MissCromwell, it's nice to know a few people agree.

VTB - dying intestate is so irresponsible and makes life so difficult for the people left behind doesn't it. I don't understand why people do it tbh, especially people with blended families. It's not difficult and it's not expensive. I think if there had been a will in place it should have allowed the daughter to live in the house for as long as she wished - if/when it was sold a small share to go to the other children - perhaphs 15% each - that's assuming this is the only decent sized asset, if there was other money they could get that straight away and leave the house solely to the 3rd child - the one that actually cared for & about them.

Runaway Wife i think the husband & wife bought the house, had a mortgage. when she died, the insurance paid out & he ended up with sole ownership. it is not in trust to the son.

it was, for however long/short, family home of the op, the dh, his son and their dd.

he now has a will which gives everything to his son. not a penny goes to his daughter - both children are his biological offspring. op wants her daughter to be 'recognised' by him & given half should he die.

so should he die, the dd loses her father & the financial support he gives her. as the mum is unemployed & renting, this could make quite some difference to their lives.

tbh, the dh could give it all to a cats home, or whatever he wants. however other people feel about it, it's HIS home now, no-one else's, so he has control. however, should he die, his dd (or someone on her behalf) could contest the will if it leaves her without support & she's still young.

I really wish I hadn't posted in the first place. Am stunned at the vitriol and hatred this post has provoked, can only imagine that the main protagonists have very sad lives and use the internet as an outlet for their bitterness. Thank you to those who have at least read the OP correctly and tried to give a fair hearing, ChippingIn and Kickassangel. I have been accused of 'vileness', 'jealousy', 'grasping' and, I do believe, in one of Swisscheese's more obscure posts, either intention to murder ex, or an invitation to kill myself. Nice. Oh, and littlemoominmamma, you really are clueless, do yourself a favour and actually check your facts before going off on a hate-filled diatribe. For those I have neglected to name check, either for being reasonable or loathsome, I apologise, I am still reeling from the nastiness of this thread. Oh, and I do have a job, littlemoominmamma, and provide solely for my DD, and am currently studying in order to have an even better job, so really, sorry this is crude, but your ignorance and spite has provoked it, fuck you. Just to clarify, the house became ex's upon his wife's death. The endowment was set up before his DS was born, i.e. there was no will specifying the house should go to his DS. I am not attempting to take anything from DD's brother, and certainly wouldn't dream of coercing him into handing anything to DD (as one poster intimated). They are both children ffs, and all I am doing is trying to ensure that they are treated equally and fairly by their father. I focused on the house as it really is ex's sole asset, but clearly the discussion needs to be extended to talking about policies etc. I actually don't give a flying fuck about the house, if ex says 'I'm leaving the house to DS but am setting up a trust fund for DD', I would be over-the-bloody-moon. Currently, I have no assets. I lost my job through redundancy and subsequently my home, but am studying in order to retrain and hopefully will be in a better position financially in a few years. That's it really, if any of you hateful harridans feel the need to post more of your vitriol, feel free, hope it makes you feel better about yourselves.

7 - I am also very stunned at the vitriol and the amount of nasty YABU posts - I would have expected a lot more constructive posts - even if they felt YWBU - but sometimes it depends what day and time you post something on here! If you posted the same thing again in a week, you'd get a different set of responses!! Don't take it personally.

I think you are doing really well. It's really unfortunate you didn't have income protection on your mortgage, but not everyone does and it's easy to be wise after the event. You know you are doing your best to provide for (you and) your DD & that is what matters!!

Why isn't your Ex providing for his DD? (If he's a SAHD with his DS then that's understandable I guess).

sevenkeys, I agree that vitriol is never nice, but most people are not going to change their opinions however much you clarify. Morally, the house should one day belong to your dd's father's eldest son.
Actually, having witnessed unfairness in my own family, I am cheered that the vast majority of people agree that this is fair.

Tbh I think the main issue is that the OP is totally overthinking this. Unless the father is expecially old or in failing health (i.e. there's a reason why he might die soon)it's probably not even worth worrying about.

Let's say he's 40 now. By the time he dies the daughter will be at least in her late thirties- probably older, totally capable of supporting herself, and the house may well have been remortgaged to pay for care.

With the way pensions/life expectancy are going, I dont think any of us should assume we'll be inheriting, and frankly I think that's better. I've told my parents to make sure they die penniless. I dont want their money. I'd rather they enjoyed the retirement they've worked for all their lives. They've given me enough just by being good parents. Surely it's up to me to provide for myself.

YABU.

But the house was not in any way paid for by you, it was before he met you before he had a child with you, so I still feel that as it was monies from the death of the boys mother that paid the lions shear of the house then it is to be left to the boy.

I do agree that your Ex needs to make provisions for his DD also, however the house is not part of that deal.

YANBU - I agree with Chippinh