Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

In laws request change mortgage/postnup.

195 replies

ThisGutsy · 17/09/2025 10:26

My husband is due to receive inheritance, because of this, his mother has requested to change our mortgage from joint tenants to tenants in common, which would include a post nup! We’ve been together for 20 years & married for half of that so to me it seems weird to request this at this point of our marriage? Just wondering what others feelings are on this matter or have advice moving forward. I’m not keen on the idea.

OP posts:
TonTonMacoute · 17/09/2025 17:03

ThreePears · 17/09/2025 16:14

Well the answer's easy really. He says to her 'Okay' and then does nothing about it. When she asks if it has been done, he says yes.

Why she thinks she has a say in this matter is beyond me, so just humour her.

It easier than that.

He tells his DM 'No'.

Gymnopedie · 17/09/2025 17:44

I'm horrified he didn't immediately shut his mother down.

I'd be telling him that if after 20 years of marriage he distrusts you enough to think you might be out to fleece him, the marriage is over. And it will be at some point, not because of the money but because his treatment of you will rankle so badly your resentment will (reasonably, imho) grow.

BrickBiscuit · 17/09/2025 20:06

holrosea · 17/09/2025 14:39

Hi OP,

Absolutely not suggesting that you might or should divorce over this, but from a quick glance at the Rights of Women guide to finances in a divorce, there is no distinction made for inheritance in matrimonial property:

"Matrimonial property is any money, property or assets owned individually by you or your spouse or which you own jointly." Then it goes on to list how this might be a house, savings, pension, etc..

What I mean to say is that his mum sounds a little misguided in that there is no way to protect "his money" in a marriage, because by marrying you he agreed to make everything legally and financially joint and shared. As PP have pointed out, pre- and post-nups are not legally binding in the UK and the only thing that could really influence the split of equity in a property is a deed of trust.

I can understand why him proposing it has ruffled your feathers. I am a cynic and love a confrontation so I'd have all sorts of questions lined up:

  • does he not see you as a team?
  • does he think that he should get a financial benefit over and above you and/or his kids?
  • by proposing TIC, does he plan on splitting? Protecting "his half"?
  • Does he no longer plan on leaving you "his half" upon his death?

Someone less snarky than I may want to look at Relate for guides to talking about money. I think you need to sit him down and tell him why this has upset you rather than letting it fester.

Just briefly, in the UK an inheritance is not marital property automatically. It depends how it's handled. It is NOT like any other asset in this respect.

1457bloom · 17/09/2025 20:35

The mil should leave everything to the grandchildren if there are any.

Rosscameasdoody · 17/09/2025 20:57

user760 · 17/09/2025 16:35

I suspect MIL is probably just better informed about tax planning. Holding as tenants in common is no different to holding as joint tenants in terms of fairness assuming it's a 50:50 split.

It’s very different. Joint tenants means the share of the house passes automatically to the surviving spouse. If tenants in common it can be willed to whoever they want. It doesn’t provide any more protection from care fees than joint tenants, to a spouse still resident in the property after the partner goes into care.

Regardless of tenancy, the property cannot be sold for fees while the spouse is in residence - it’s exempt. If the partner in care dies, their share passes to the surviving partner and then the whole of the property is liable for fees if they subsequently go into care. The only people who benefit from tenants in common are those to whom the share of the house is willed, so the surviving partner would burn through funding sooner and would be at the mercy of social services once the funding pot had run out.

Rosscameasdoody · 17/09/2025 20:59

BrickBiscuit · 17/09/2025 20:06

Just briefly, in the UK an inheritance is not marital property automatically. It depends how it's handled. It is NOT like any other asset in this respect.

Edited

Yep. If the inheriting partner keeps it in a separate account in sole name and no part of it is used for joint benefit, it’s not deemed a marital asset on divorce.

vitalityvix · 17/09/2025 21:13

The fact your DH mentioned it suggests it’s something he might be interested in, though I’m not really sure why. He can sever the joint tenancy unilaterally though - he doesn’t need your permission to change it to tenants in common, though he would of course need to notify you.

Spendysis · 17/09/2025 22:24

I don’t get what it has to do with your mil it’s not her estate it’s dh nans with the inheritance going directly to your dh for him to decide what to do with it

to echo pp the love of money is the root of all evil or certainly is in my family me and my dsis are nc due to her love of helping herself to elderly dm money and dn and her step mum dbil second wife are nc after he died and dn demanded her inheritance then when the wills stated she got it when sm passed away. Sm has probably changed her will now so dn will get nothing thankfully dn has a rich future mil herself who paid off their mortgage and her partner is about to receive a huge inheritance from his grandad

WalkingtheWire · 17/09/2025 22:31

user760 · 17/09/2025 16:35

I suspect MIL is probably just better informed about tax planning. Holding as tenants in common is no different to holding as joint tenants in terms of fairness assuming it's a 50:50 split.

The difference being if DH dies his 50% does not automatically go to his wife (OP). Instead it will be left in DHs will to who he chooses.

WalkingtheWire · 17/09/2025 22:34

Apologies of this has already been said, but it’s not the mortgage that is affected by joint tenants/tenants in common, it’s the actual property itself I.e. the legal title to the house. The mortgage is just the loan agreement with the bank or building society (or any other type of lender).

MyElatedUmberFinch · 18/09/2025 08:15

Has DH’s Nan left the money to your DH in her will, I f so does it say anything about changing the deeds etc?

Lovingbooks · 18/09/2025 10:08

MyElatedUmberFinch · 18/09/2025 08:15

Has DH’s Nan left the money to your DH in her will, I f so does it say anything about changing the deeds etc?

If it did it wouldn’t be legal. The deeds are for joint property DH and OP already own with a mortgage so nothing to do with the inheritance. Inheritance goes to DH from grandma. MIL has no say on how this is spent. That’s the point MIL is meddling. DH should have shut down the conversation with MIL immediately.

MyElatedUmberFinch · 18/09/2025 10:29

Lovingbooks · 18/09/2025 10:08

If it did it wouldn’t be legal. The deeds are for joint property DH and OP already own with a mortgage so nothing to do with the inheritance. Inheritance goes to DH from grandma. MIL has no say on how this is spent. That’s the point MIL is meddling. DH should have shut down the conversation with MIL immediately.

Edited

Oh yes good point.

user760 · 18/09/2025 11:52

WalkingtheWire · 17/09/2025 22:31

The difference being if DH dies his 50% does not automatically go to his wife (OP). Instead it will be left in DHs will to who he chooses.

But this is why it's helpful. Its means the DH's share in the property can pass to the DC

Soontobe60 · 18/09/2025 12:22

Actually I understand what she’s suggesting.
Say you have a house worth £300k with a £200k mortgage. So you have £100k equity. If Dh dies as JT you’d get the whole £100k. If he uses his inheritance to pay off the mortgage then dies you’d get it all as JT, you could remarry and your new DH end up with half the house.
this happened to my DSiS and her DHs new wife now owns half the house paid from my DSiSs life insurance. Her children got nothing.

Rainydayinlondon · 18/09/2025 13:13

Soontobe60 · 18/09/2025 12:22

Actually I understand what she’s suggesting.
Say you have a house worth £300k with a £200k mortgage. So you have £100k equity. If Dh dies as JT you’d get the whole £100k. If he uses his inheritance to pay off the mortgage then dies you’d get it all as JT, you could remarry and your new DH end up with half the house.
this happened to my DSiS and her DHs new wife now owns half the house paid from my DSiSs life insurance. Her children got nothing.

I think @Soontobe60has hit the nail on the head. It’s sadly very common as people get “love struck “ in a second marriage and lose sight of moral scruples.

It’s even worse if it’s the other way around and it’s W’s inheritance and she then predeceases H, as H could then go on to have more children and on his death, W’s biological children get none of the “family” money.

KatSlayMoon · 18/09/2025 13:26

Soontobe60 · 18/09/2025 12:22

Actually I understand what she’s suggesting.
Say you have a house worth £300k with a £200k mortgage. So you have £100k equity. If Dh dies as JT you’d get the whole £100k. If he uses his inheritance to pay off the mortgage then dies you’d get it all as JT, you could remarry and your new DH end up with half the house.
this happened to my DSiS and her DHs new wife now owns half the house paid from my DSiSs life insurance. Her children got nothing.

But again, that is up to the married couple to decide. His mother is getting involved when it’s not her money and not her marriage so is absolutely none of her business. Why do people think it’s okay to plonk themselves in between somebody else’s relationship?

Rainydayinlondon · 18/09/2025 17:19

Maybe MIL is aggrieved that it bypassed her.
She cannot dictate, but she’s entitled yo her opinion re family money.

Dearg · 19/09/2025 16:13

Rainydayinlondon · 18/09/2025 17:19

Maybe MIL is aggrieved that it bypassed her.
She cannot dictate, but she’s entitled yo her opinion re family money.

I disagree. She should not voice her opinion unless asked. It is not family money as it has not been left to her.

NoisyLittleOtter · 19/09/2025 16:25

Dearg · 19/09/2025 16:13

I disagree. She should not voice her opinion unless asked. It is not family money as it has not been left to her.

Exactly. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if the issue is essentially none of her business there’s no reason for her to voice it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page