Marriage when the woman has assets.

[Cocokitty]

I see it time and time again on here that women with assets shouldn't marry, particularly when she has children from previous relationships as it is "stealing from their inheritance" if things go wrong.

So I'm a woman. I have an asset. I have a lovely partner of some years with whom I'd like to marry. I am totally unconcerned about whether he gets "half of the house", although that is unlikely, but let's just say maybe he did. It's just money. It doesn't mean enough to me to make me think I shouldn't be married if I want to be.

My children will inherit, sure. He won't ever take it all. It isn't money I have "earned". It's luck - buying a home that increased in value eventually (was in neg equity for 10 years first though!). Mortgage was always interest only because back then that is what I could afford. I'm in a better position now with him even though he has no assets, pension or savings and has only just begun to earn in the last few years thanks to years as a student. Together we will be able to earn more (I can work more hours than as a single parent as he helps with childcare) and have lower childcare costs, we can buy a bigger house which could potentially have higher equity.

Yes I could lose some. I might have to sell. I'll always be able to buy though, I live in an area of low house prices. I earn enough to pay my mortgage.

I've been married before, whilst still having the same asset. The divorce didn't cost me a penny. The house remained mine as it was before. I bought it alone and have always been the sole owner.

Not all marriages that do end in divorce "take you to the cleaners".

i just wanted to offer a different perspective as this forum can be incredibly heavy on the "don't get married" advice to women who have an any assets. Money isn't everything to all people. Not everyone feels the same way when it comes to their money.

Is it? I would advisea man in thay situatiom exactly the same. How is it a double standard?

Men should also think very, very carefully about marrying again if they have children. It's usually a terrible idea.

Yep, absolutely no guarantee. And chances are it'll go to his wife. And she could then pass that along to a living relative which would cost you that in court fees... But, you don't expect the money anyways so that's great. And you don't expect to leave your kids anything fancially either. So that's also cool

You're partner sounds like he couldn't host a piss up in a brewery, so when he bumbles his way into another 'mummy' looking after him. I'm sure a percentage of your house value will help him donate to all those needy polar bears.

i won’t get married again until my children are adults, out of college, and financially independent … and even then I probably wouldn’t. Their dad will almost certainly remarry as he is in a long term relationship, and so their inheritance from him will almost certainly be reduced if he leaves a spouse with whom he co-owns a house. So I feel it’s incumbent on me to ensure my wealth/assets go in their entirety to the children. I have a different view to you @Cocokitty as I do feel it’s my duty to ensure my children are my beneficiaries, but especially as they are young and I could become sick or die before they are independent.

Look, different people have different view points with respect to assets and wills when there are previous children involved. Your view point is as valid as anyone else provided you accept the risks, and from your OP, you do.

I have a healthy amount of assets mostly because I'm 62, I invested when housing was affordable and inheritance. I would not get married again if I divorced or lost my husband but if I did, the first thing would be keeping finances completely separate followed by contacting a lawyer to draw up a Prenuptial Binding Financial Agreement that will be reviewed every 2-3 years (what in Australia is called Post nuptial Binding Financial Agreements).

In Spain, where I come from, things are much easier. Majority of marriages are done under separation of assets, unless parties want the opposite, so in case of divorce everyone keeps their own.

No one should assume that they are going to inherit anything. Care home fees can quite quickly eat all assets including the house. I never expected to inherit much when my mum died so made my own financial plans, worked hard and saved carefully.

Yes, my children might inherit something but it’s my money while I am alive and I intend to use it to make my own life more comfortable as I get older. I do help my children out now with decent money gifts at Christmas and birthdays or if they have unexpected expenses but I always make sure I have enough for my needs.

Personally, I would want my 2 DC to benefit from my hard work, and not potentially going to a random.

I am currently a single parent, to 2 DC under 7, one of whom has additional needs. I've never been married (EXDP commitment phobic, then turned emotionally abusive so I left him), and I would love to be married to a wonderful man one day, if I'm lucky enough to meet one. The issue that would give me reason to pause, is my assets on death.

I didn't come from any money at all, my parents both emigrated to the UK in their late teens/early twenties to train as nurses. Through a combination of assets inside and outside my estate, I expect to leave over £1m for my DC to share between them when I die.

No matter how nice a man this potential new DH is, I would want my DC to have more in their lives, if I was no longer around. I already have a will which leaves the vast majority to them, but understand this would become null and void upon marriage. I haven't heard of any valid way for married spouses to ensure another party inherits an asset such as a house or pension, instead of the other spouse on death, so I'm resigned to the fact that I'll probably never be able to get married and any future DP will have to accept that.

I don't understand why anyone would risk their assets not going to their DC, particularly as it can so easily be avoided.

I think since you are expecting to inherit a large amount from your father your situation is fairly unique.

I live in an area with cheap housing. I have been able to start building investments in the last few years.

It’s not so much inheritance that Bothers me, though it does both me a bit. But dp earns less than me and has a much lower earning potential. If we marry and the. Divorce in late 50s, early 60s he could get more than 50%. Including a chunk of my pensions. By that point I may be able to buy somewhere smaller, given my kids will be adults but at this stage that’s not a guarantee.

My retirement would be heavily impacted. My plan to retire before I am 60 would be heavily impacted. I may inherit from my dad, but nowhere in the region you would be. Not enough to more than cover what would go to do if we divorced.

I pay for my pension, I pay my mortgage and bought my house alone, I am managing my money so that I can build investments for my future. I have no inclination to enter a legal agreement where that is risked. Or for someone else to walk away with a huge chunk that I can’t replace. Dp is an adult with his own money and can build his own assets. We won’t be sharing children, neither career will be impacted by children. For me, there’s absolutely no need to financially tie myself to him.

It’s not only money. It’s my future. I don’t think marriage is particularly romantic. It’s a legal contract that has been heavily marketed to be a romantic act, to the point many people forget it’s main point is that it’s a legal contract. I don’t think romantic love is everything or the ultimate goal. I think the obsession a lot of people have with love and how many people walk into situations that ultimately damage them (and their kids) because ‘I was so in love I didn’t see it’ is quite damaging.

I think both men and women, should always seek legal and financial advice before getting married.

I think if you are well informed and you want to get married, do it. The choice to get married isn’t superior. The choice to not get married isn’t superior. You have to do what works for you. If getting married is important to you and you know you have enough for a divorce to not impact you or don’t mind if it does impact you, then go ahead.

When it comes to inheritance though, your kids won’t be able to get a council house on their teens and work their way up to home ownership at 23. Though, I am shocked with a millionaire father you needed to do that. However, it’s different for you since even if you divorce, given an inheritance of millions is coming your way, you will be able to help your child/ren out anyway. Even if you divorce and manage for that divorce to barely impact your finances.

Most people want to be able ro help their kids out. You will still have the ability to help your kids. Which many people don’t have the ability to do until they die. So again, your situation isn’t the norm.

id a partner not allowed to claim even if the couple live together ?

Are you saying then that any woman with money and children would be doing the wrong thing to ever live with any man again ?

just read that civil partners can claim in uk . So basically those sayinb it’s wrong are saying that women can never again have a live in relationship 😂

how ridiculous to assume grown
women
can’t make their own decisions about their own lives and their own money

I wonder what those kids would say if the mother told them ‘ I’ll disinherit you if you ever live with a man as he may get half my money ???

Civil partner is not the same as in live in Partners.

‘put their future at risk ‘

it may come as a surprise to some nowadays but as an adult you ( not your mother is responsible for your future ) an adult child is not owed anything and the money is NOT theirs

How incredibly disrespectful of an adult child to try and tell a parent how they want her to live because they feel the money is somehow ‘theirs ‘ and ‘ their future’

would you be prepared to live by the same rules ? How about if you were divorced and your mother said don’t ever live with or marry another man in some silly fairytale and risk my grandchildren getting hurt if the relationship doesn’t work out…

that would be absurd and a complete disrespect of your autonomy as an adult so why is it ok for a child to do that to a parent ?

i see , what is the difference there please . Here , De facto partners can claim

What do you mean by de facto partner? In Australia de fa to has some status. It doesn’t in England and Wales.

In England (and I believe wales) a live in partner doesn’t have an automatic claim on their partners assets. In certain cases, where they can prove, they have substantially paid towards to property a claim can be brought. But it’s not automatic and it’s expensive to do it. Not sure about Scotland.

A civil partnership is a legal document that legally recognises the relationship and ties both people together, legally.

a live in partner wouldn’t have an automatic claim on their partners pension, as an example. In a civil partnership or marriage, if it was to beak down the pension would be part of the joint assets.

There’s obviously lots of nuance and grey areas, but that what’s legal advice is for.

Yes lots of nuances but sounds like a live in partners ( although not automatically entitled ) can proceed to make a claim?

I think the main issue is that some people making the claim that the woman has to make lifestyle decisions based around the risk to the ‘ children’s money ‘

it’s not the children’s money or the children’s future. No one is ‘ owed ‘ anything and depending where one’s lives and what the laws are it could mean that even a live in partner could make a claim

OPs view is valid and certainly the biggest gift she could give her kids are skills to make their own way in the world and earn their own money.

BUT life is fickle and by marrying she does risk the inheritance (if any left) going to her widower’s new wife and her relatives. It is possible that by this time her child may have a change in fortune (eg business gone wrong or illness) - which might mean they badly need this cash. She has to then trust that her will will be effective and the inheritance not swallowed up by legal costs. We all have different risk appetites.

OP - would your decision re: marriage change if you were in a position where your child was currently v young or had a disability that might affect earning potential? Ie - the impact might be greater on the child if they did lose out on inheritance.

I don’t understand the law enough

is there really a law that says a
spouse is guaranteed to get 50% ?

from what i see in life and on here that doesn’t seem to happen

I’d get some legal advice and be happy 😊

live in partners, in some limited circumstances, could make claim. But it’s completely different to an automatic sharing of assets, where 50:50 is the starting point. If there was a claim, it wouldn’t be on pensions and investments and unlikely to be 50% of the property unless they can prove they contributed to that amount. In which case of course they should have a claim because they have paid into it. However, an adult child who paid huge amounts towards their parents home, could also in theory have a claim.

I don’t particularly have an opinion on not doing something because of the risk of children’s inheritance. I totally get what you are saying.

However, on the other side, I don’t see how it’s attractive to risk your own financial future for the benefit of another adult. And if your kids are young, you could be also risking their security. But it’s very situation dependent.

I am only just earning good money. If I married dp when I met him and we were divorcing. I wouldn’t have the capital to buy him out. I would, in time, probably be ok. But it would mean my mortgage would go up massively as I would have to remortgage to give him a portion of the house, if I could keep the house at all. I would lose, some of my own pension and investments. My costs would go up to the point it was difficult to continue supporting dd (and in a few years ds) at uni. It would impact Ds (who is still a child) as I would have much less disposable income. So it’s not even about inheritance it’s about right now.

It would impact my children now. They aren’t joint children. So no, I wouldn’t risk the plans I have for me and the support I want to give my children to marry someone.

If we married and divorced when I was older and nearing retirement, it could entirely ruin my retirement plans.

On balance, it’s not worth the risk. I don’t see why I would make decisions on my future on what benefits Dp most. It’s not his money. It’s not my children’s money. But it’s not his either. If I had to pick who I would rather have a huge chunk of my money and assets, it would be the kids.

I think people should always seek legal and financial advice (before moving in or getting married) and make the decision that’s best for them. But I do think their children should be considered, in most situations.

It’s 50% as a starting point. But loads of things can influence is. Asset total, earnings, who will be having the kids most, ability to house the kids etc

In the UK if you are married without a will then all assets up to £270k go to the husband. Anything over that is then split between 50% to the husband and the remainder shared amongst surviving children.

So marry and make a will.

If you divorce then the value of your assets and length of ownership can be taken into account at divorce if pre marital stipulations make this clear. The same as inheritance or financial gifts pre marriage. A pre nup isn't entirely enforceable but it sets out expectations and will help in that event.

No matter what - marriage adds to your financial risk as equally as it can mitigate. He doesn't sound very responsible (yet) and in your shoes I'd be waiting till he's more independently secure before you marry.

You are borderline parenting him at the moment - which this doesn't make for a healthy rewarding relationship long term.

It isn't money I have "earned". It's luck - buying a home that increased in value eventually (was in neg equity for 10 years first though!

I suspect this, along with coming from a wealthy family influences your view, just as it does for us all. Someone who has worked hard for themselves and their children to have some financial stability now and in the future would probably view it as a lot more foolish to marry- but ultimately its up to you isn't it.

Yes I think if a woman ( it man for that matter ) makes that decision then that’s totally valid
what I take issue with is the posters saying it’s risking it for
‘ a fairytale’ or risking ‘the child’s money/future’ , as if the child is not responsible for their own future
( assuming here we are talking about adult children as OPs is )

it is incredibly selfish for grown adults to expect their parents to live their lives in a way that ensures some inheritance to them

Im referring to those cases where the parent does want to remarry and had adult children

Different of course if we are talking
about young children or those with disabilities . Or of course causes where a parent chooses not to remarry

No, these aren't red flags. It's just the reality of life being complex.

MN can be extraordinarily judgmental about people whose path through life doesn't follow a sensible set path that leads to healthy savings, a high-earning job and home ownership by a certain age. And completely uncomprehending of the many, many ways in which life can happen to someone and prevent that.

It's also not clear whether you're referring to OP or her partner but either way it's just rude when that wasn't the point of the thread. Tbh OP's sensible decision-making and ability to see her partner's character rather than his biography is coming across much better than all the judgmental types who have only ever made sensible decisions in their comfortable lives.

You are a wise woman.

some of the replies on this thread are crazy.

OP go ahead and do what you want. It’s your money it’s your life - it might all go on care home fees so what is the point in making decisions to save an asset for your kids to inherit - when they might be well into retirement by the time you die.

Also on mumsnet all second spouses are evil and will steal from the mouths of their stepchildren - in reality people are people and very few are all good or all bad. I’m a second spouse my partner is asset rich. I have step children. I have made sure that my will protects my step children’s interests and allows me to leave my own much lower vale asset to them and their step cousins. That’s what most decent people would do.