whether to add fiancé to deeds of house

[hilbil21]

Another thread has prompted me to post and just wondering what you guys think is for the best.

My mum passed away last year and I have inherited her house on which the mortgage is fully paid off.

My fiancé, 11 month old son and myself have moved in and fiancé is paying to decorate etc and also pays all bills as I don't work.

Am I being fair not having him on the deeds??

[blindsider]

*two kids each none together.

[blindsider]

I married entirely for love, both DW and I have two kids mine are older and have left home.

We met on line and got married very quickly. My wife owns two houses and a proportion of her friends wanted her to get a prenup signed, I explained to my wife that I was more than happy to sign her prenup as far from protecting her, it was actually protecting me - we don't have a prenup.

The only slight inequality is that should she die she has left everything to me so it is free of IHT to pass directly onto her children. If I die obviously I want to provide for her in her old age so I have left everything to her and asked she gives approx 1/4 immediately of it to my kids so they can buy a house each. Potentially my kids are going to miss out, but I love and trust her to include them in her will so they get a decent share of whatever is left.

[alltouchedout]

Most people marry for love but it's daft not to think of everything else that marriage means. We all see the advice on mn regularly to sahps- protect yourself with marriage, the house etc is then a marital asset. I married because I live and am committed to my dh but ALSO because of the legal implications. Without the legal implications we may as well not have been officially married- the love and commitment exist anyway.

[Offred]

Marriage is pretty medieval...

It's a proper scandal how few people understand what marriage really means and fall into it thinking it's 'the next step' or about love and romance.

[blindsider]

Offred

Marriage has absolutely fuck all to do with love and everything to do with property.

How deliciously medievel...

[peggyundercrackers]

blonde if you were in Scotland and you own your own home mortgage free BEFORE someone moved in then the cohabitee doesn't have a claim on it - the law protects the house owner.

[winchester1]

Property is why we don't plan to marry, at least not without some serious prenups in place (I'm not in the UK,they are legal here provided they aren't unfair.)

[Offred]

Marriage has absolutely fuck all to do with love and everything to do with property.

[blindsider]

Offred

That's the simplest and least expensive question wherever you live.

Good to see true love is alive and well.

[Blondeshavemorefun]

i own my own home and mortgage free and then dp now df moved in 4years ago

he doesnt pay rent but we split the bills and he does stuff round the house


but before he moved in i had a cohabitation agreement drawn up, cost over £1k but basically says that df if we split up cant claim for any of the house, ever,

he signed it happily, also stating in a clause that he signed it taking legal advice, but ignored the advice happily as my solicester said he needed to do that, as his solicester said he was crazy to sign away 1/2 a home-df reply, its not mine


originally my will said my home to be split 50/50 with 2 close friends, changed it couple of years ago to df now getting the home - im going to be dead so wont care

only thing that would change is if i ever got preg (we are trying so hard and 3 private ifv failed) :( and my house/our home, would go 100% to our child, but df would live there till he died

this is as he has 3 kids from previous relationships and if i did have a child, then house needs to go to my/our child and not his iyswim after im dead and house would have gone to df then split into 4

hope that makes sense

so no dont put him on the deeds

[choceclair123]

I don't think it's unfair. He's living rent free and paying bills but half of those bills are his anyway. I would make sure you protect your inheritance if I were you. You would be so devastated if (God Forbid) anything went wrong and you ended up losing half of your parents home just because you were feeling a little torn / in a generous mood! You just never know... I don't know how you are financially but if you're in a position to, maybe you could think about buying another small property as an investment... or could be something to think about in the future.

[Hissy]

Of course there is every point in talking to a solicitor!!

Know the situation, then make the decision that suits.

[Offred]

Worth speaking to a solicitor I would say.

[Offred]

The provision Peggy mentions appears to affect cohabitees.

[Offred]

That's the simplest and least expensive question wherever you live.

[hilbil21]

So basically if we get married in Scotland he has a claim to quite a lot if we were ever to split? No point really in going to a solicitor I don't think! Previous posters are right, it's more a question of whether to get married or not! X

[peggyundercrackers]

sorry I should elaborate - if he leaves with nothing he can take you to court to say he has been economically disadvantaged because he paid money towards the house - food bills, decoration, furniture, fittings etc. etc. and can prove he has given you money then he will be awarded an amount - this is only part of family law in Scotland and I think it came in 2006? but cant be exactly sure of the dates.

I know this is the case because I have been helping a friend with her case and it was settled 2 weeks ago - she got about 12% of the value of the property after living there for 5 years. the property had not gone up in value in the last 5 years at all.

[peggyundercrackers]

because you are in Scotland he could make a claim under family law section 28 - if he can show you have an economical advantage because what he paid the court will make him an award and you will need to pay it back - been there done it got the T-shirt.

[Offred]

In Scotland prenups are legally binding but there is no such thing as an 'iron clad' prenup.

I still think you would be much much better if you didn't marry TBH.

[blindsider]

That would not be an unreasonable compromise. I imagine he wouldn't want any more than that most men IME don't want more than they have contributed.

It is quite interesting now that it isn't unusual for people to go into marriage already with considerable assets how jealously they are guarded when historically 'fleecing' the ex was seen as perfectly acceptable.

[hilbil21]

Yes we are in Scotland. A friend suggested getting something protecting the value when we marry but giving him 50%o of any further increase in value X

[Keeptrudging]

He's benefitting from it by not having rent/mortgage. That's money he's not spending which he could use to buy his own property and rent it out. In the event of them marrying they could both protect their own properties and would both have that security.

[RandyMagnum]

I wouldn't marry someone if they came out with not wanting me to be on the deeds of the house after marriage and having a child together, especially more so if I was the one paying to decorate the house, and paying the bills on it.

He didn't work for it, but neither did you.

So he's good enough for paying the bills, and decorating, but not good enough to share your possessions with, what's the point in getting married then, red flag from me.

[MrEBear]

Oil industry - are you in Scotland?

Until the point of marriage it is 100% yours
Say after you marry it goes up by 10%
He would be able to claim half the 10%.

Once you marry you need his permission to sell it (I assume that works both ways, my husband couldn't make me homeless by sell the marital home.) even although I had no claim on it.

But no I wouldn't add a name to the title deeds. Unless he was paying you for his share

[MistressDeeCee]

OH's father remarried exactly a year after the death of their mother, who he'd been married to for 40 years. He became ill 5 years after new marriage and his wife effectively isolated his sons & daughters.. he's sleeping you can't see him, that kind of thing. A lot of animosity all round I but anyway, he passed away last July. Left the property to his wife and specified 50% of property funds to be equally divided between his 3 children and 8 grandchildren. It didnt work out equally at all as wife still lives in the house, has her family from abroad living in there now, and it was discovered house had been remortgaged twice anyway + lots of home improvements done. I didnt get into the full ins & outs of it all but his children got sweet f.a. as there was nothing to inherit financially really and they do not own a share of the house.

Even if theyd wanted to challenge their stepmother (I think sister queried this) what could they have done anyway? She was their father's wife.

I really can't see how someone can protect their inherited property in some of the ways explained on MN? If you marry and live in the marital home then your partner is entitled to a share, even if not on the deeds. Im thinking of the other thread too - I can't fathom all the different explanations. Its as if some know the law but think their calculations and stipulations and what they decide is "fair" can somehow change the law to suit. It doesnt work like that at all so makes no sense to me.

Im reading skyes comment - that is the reality of it

Im 12 years until mortgage free, been with OH a few years but Ive no intention of marrying. I've no input or concern into what he leaves for his children, likewise same with me. Our relationship works well and we don't talk or wrangle about property. I own - he does not.

When I die I will leave my property to my DDs and nobody on earth is going to be able to come along and say well, you have a man now so that means you must make sure he is entitled to a share of the home you've worked hard to pay for over the years, and make sure you and DDs have a roof over your head. Or tell me that Im unfair. Id rather be unfair than a fool.

If a man idn't like my stance Id understand, but it wouldn't change a thing. Im a mum - my children come 1st and thats that.

I can't see how OP can protect her inheritance in the event anything goes wrong, I think its a risk you take in life and love