Step children and inheritance

[A1056056]

Hi all
Just wondering if any one can offer any advice. Me and my partner have spilt up over the way we decide to split our inheritance between our children.
We have no children together. I have two and he has one from previous relationships. There is no plan to have any children together.
After lots of back and forth last year he decided to move in to my house. Then the word inheritance came up, something that had never crossed my mind! I knew we would need a pre-nup but never really thought about anything else.
We both have a mortgage on each of our houses.
My OH stated that if we kept both houses, moved in to mine and rented his house our assets would be combined. Therefore in regards to inheritance as he has one child his 50% would be given to his child and my 50% would be split 25% each to my children.

The issue that I cannot get my head around is the fact that as it stands now (we both have life insurance to cover the cost of our mortgage if we died)
My children would get half of my property which is £117500 each and OH's son, would get the full amount of his which is £135000.
Coming together the amount is £370000 (I will work it out as if we are keeping both houses)
Under OH's way of thinking his son would get 50% of the property estate and each of my children would get 25% each:
OH's son now gets £185000= 50%
My child now gets £92500= 25%
My child now gets £92500= 25%

OH's point of view is that he is taking on half of my liability now and vice versa with me and his house and therefore he owns 50% which to him means his son should get his full 50% and as I have two children my 50% would be divided therefore getting 25% each.

Our children are still relatively young all still at the later years in primary school so we would becoming together and taking on each other's children, although his son only comes every other weekend and my children go to their dads every other weekend. So I guess I assumed we would be a new family unit and each child an individual in our lifetime and after we have gone. My thoughts are the money should be split 3 ways as we are taking things on together as a family and that's how it should end too! My other half is soooo adamant that he is right that he can no longer be with me as he says 'isn't it enough that I'm taken on your children, putting a roof over their heads, paying for food etc' and then he says I expect him to give my children some of his child's inheritance! This is really painful to hear as I really do not want to take any of his child's money I just feel my way seems more fair for everyone but he says my way is only fair for me and my own!
We have both spoken to financial advisors, however this has been separate (our relationship hasn't really been in the right state to go together) and the one I spoke to agreed with me and said that is how most combined families do it. My OH's financial advisor said he was right and you work for your blood and pass on to your blood.
My oh did state that if he had a lot more money then maybe he would split things more towards my way but as he doesn't he has a duty of care to provide for his son!

A trust fund has also been discussed to ensure that neither of us would be in the position of after one of us died all the joint assessments would be sold straight away and that the surviving spouse would be able to live in the family home and that a certain amount would go in to a trust fund for whichever child's parent that died first.

Everyone we speak to has their own opinion and we are getting know where!
I am really starting to doubt my way is right as my oh is so adamant that he is right and that he can't be with someone that thinks it's right to tell someone what they should do with their own money! I am really concerned that I'm wrong and that if we never get back together and I meet someone else and they think the same as my oh I will have massive regrets.
I would like to know people's thoughts and if i am having the wrong outlook on how I have worked out the figures and percentages as it does not sit right with working out the amounts as 50% and 25%/25% but if this way is financially fair for everyone then I would love to know.
That is all we want, for it to be financially fair for everyone. The problem is deeming whose way is fair for everyone and that is where the conflict between us is happening.
Thank you for reading! Hopefully there is people in our situation that can help!

To the people agreeing with this guy. How can you be with someone if you aren't willing to treat their kids the same as yours!

It's absolutely ridiculous

I think he is fine with the ring fencing of our equity, built up individually. His issue is the fact that I have got a damn cheek to expect to split the inheritance 3 ways as I have two children and he has 1. This is the part that we cannot get over. He is adamant he is right with the 50/25/25 split as it's his 50% and he can do as he pleases! Help!!!!! Lol

we would need a pre-nup but never really thought about anything else.

Prenups are not a thing in UK as far as I know . thank god they are where I live

As a woman with children you ALWAYS need to think at least 10 years down the line, if not 20. Keep yourself in work.

Even for your own pension.

Because shit happens.

Ok so assuming equity is ring-fenced (and I wouldn't budge at all on that) I'd only agree to the 50/25/25 split if finances were split so you each pay a percentage toward a joint costs comparable to your income.

I'd be thinking twice about being with him at all anyway due to his ultimatums and pretending like he's doing you a favour by combining incomes when he's the one that'll do best out of it. He sounds like a bit of a bellend tbh.

Are both houses mortgage free? Or will he be paying part of the mortgage on your house? What will happen to the rental income from his house? What will happen to the extra £400 per month he earns? Does his DS live with you or does he pay maintenance? You can't work out a "fair" split without considering those factors.

Imo it's far too complex to work out that your house is worth more, but he pays part of the mortgage and a greater share of bills, but he has rental income from his house and you don't, and he pays maintenance but you don't, but your two kids get more money spent at Christmas than his one child... blah blah. Plus one or both of you may require care later in life and the care homes might take your houses anyway!

I see two solutions:

1: You combine assets and give up worrying about who owns or pays for what, and split Your Assets three ways between Your Children.

2: You keep your assets and finances separate, each pay 50% of bills and each leave your assets to your own children.

However... what is obvious is that he hasn't accepted your children as part of his family. Your children are Yours and his son is His. That's a bigger issue than who inherits what. And if you combine finances and he outlives you, as others have said, there's nothing to stop him leaving everything to his son. In your situation I'd keep everything separate because it seems easier given that he doesn't want to treat all three of your children equally.

Apologies if someone has already said this, but his way basically shows that he will not view your kids as his.

Apologies if someone has already said this, but his way basically shows that he will not view your kids as his

Umm, but they aren't his. That does t mean he shouldn't treat them properly but they aren't 'his' kids unless he adopts them.

Nothing wrong with wanting only your biological child to inherit from you. As much as I care about SD my assets will go to my biological son only(and DH). SD has her own two parents who think about her.
My DH gets it and agrees his DD is not my financial responsibility

I've seen situations where step children are treated like second class citizens by a parent whilst the biological parent condoned the situation. All I was trying to say was that I'd be concerned of that here given his attitude. A thousand apologies to you @BelieveAnything

How can you be with someone if you aren't willing to treat their kids the same as yours!

@CoupleOfPushBacks - because most stepchildren have two parents of their own and likewise most of the time your biological children have two parents of their own. Put it this way, say you have a DC together and your DP has one from a previous relationship, why should their first DC inherit from three "parents" whilst your joint DC only inherits from two?

@curly I think that’s why many relationships who also have a child plus step children do 50/50. A’s then at least the imbalance of inheritance is slightly redressed, a commmunal child will inherit twice iyswim.

@ineedabagformyhippo

I think he is totally right, sorry. If you died today your DC would get half of your estate each, why should they also get some of his estate? Assuming you half roughly equal assets...what you're saying is because you have 2 children and he only has 1 your family should get two thirds of all the assets?? How is that fair? I'm not surprised it's a deal breaker for him

You need to re-read the OP. Her children are the ones that get the sticky end of the lollipop, not his. His child would benefit from the fact that her house is worth a lot more than his.

I have a friend in a situation somewhat similar. She has three children, he has one. All adult. She has a lot of property, and it's being left to her own children. He has one house, which is being left to his child. She would never have agreed to a 50/50 split, why should she? The OP's situation is the same.

Change the number of children slightly, and the inequity becomes clearer.

Say he has one child, and the OP has four.
They pool everything.
Their joint assets of £370,000 get split 50/50
His child gets £185,000
Each of her children gets £46,250 or thereabouts.

When my father died, my stepmother simply made a new will, disregarding what they had agreed while he was alive, and favouring her children.
I'm a widow with children and will never remarry because, if I die first, I have learned you cannot trust your partner to honour your wishes and look after your children. You might think they'd never do it but they do and there's not a thing you can do about it from the grave!
OP- your OH already sounds like his own child would be his top priority.

He is right that he can do what he pleases.

You need to ask yourself how you'd feel if the situation were reversed.

But his remarks are really off and I wouldn't move in with him over those.

Also the fact he can do what he pleases doesn't mean he is "right". There is no right in this situation, just as there is no right about how money is split in a marriage. Each way has its merits, or not.

This would be my ideal situation, my partner moves in to my house (only because it is bigger and better for us as a family) he calls it his home but I own it and he keeps his and rents it out, we would have it drafted up that we don't have a claim on each other's house.
Each of our children have their own biological parents house as inheritance, this in effect means they are in the same position as they are now, with us not living together. The rent from his house would pay the mortgage on his house and he would pay a certain amount in to my household income (like rent but not as if he is renting as I would want it to be his home and him feel like that)
I feel this is the best solution to start off with and then maybe have a rethink how ever many years down the line.
He is very against this idea as he says I get my own way of being in my house and that he would feel like he is renting off me and he would be liable for capital gains on his house ( I'm not sure of the full ins and outs of capital gains)
I feel this is the only solution, he disagrees and says his option of 50/25/25 is the only way and one day I will realise he was right and he says you know where I am when you realise he was right and I was wrong!

But if you ring fence now and work with percentages going forward then you’re not splitting into three or two - you’re just keeping what is your own.

My DM has remarried and this is their set up - the values of the assets they each bought to the marriage have been assessed and their ownership in their joint property is set out according to these initial percentages. Their respective kids will inherit in those percentages.

one day I will realise he was right and he says you know where I am when you realise he was right and I was wrong!

Oh let him jog on. He's very unreasonable and controlling, at least he's shown what he is. What I have goes to my children, no other bugger will get it.

If you had bought a house together I think it would be 50/50 with both so 50/25/25 is fair.

The issue here is you have separate properties - his gets more when you combined it yours less.

Personally keep it separate your property goes to your two his to his - that is the fairest way in this situation

I would just keep him as a boyfriend tbh..keep your money separate as well

I don't know a single person in your situation who has an arrangement like he's suggesting, nobody would agree to that.

Blimey, he sounds a peach

Stick to your guns op, he's shown some nasty traits. Better to know now and run instead of a few years down the line.

The problem with his suggestion... and I'm not sure why he doesnt understand it...is that your children will inherit less as a result of the marriage.

His son will end up £50k better off as a result of this
and your DC will each be £25k worse off. You're effectively giving his son £50k of your DCs inheritance.

This union should not disadvantage anyone... but his way of thinking only benefits his son.

A 3 way split will disadvantage his son by £11,667 and give your DC an advantage of £5,833 each.

Of course the value of property increases (usually) so the figures could end up being different in the end. Whoever has the higher value property loses out by pooling with a person with the cheaper property.

Putting a percentage on the split of joint assets will ultimately mean either yours or his child/ren are better or worse off than if you'd not pooled.

He's going on about capital gains tax, but he could move back in before selling and avoid that I think.

If he moved into your house...he could keep contributions to bill payments and food etc...and you pay the mortgage so it's not like he's renting from you.

Put the property you own in joint names with your son. The property he owns in joint names with his son. Choose one to rent out and another to live in, and then organise cash assets seperately. A solicitor will advise you the best option.