Parents giving my partner and I £50 000 deposit... how do I safeguard this money?

getmore4less

MumOf2 wrote: »

I've drawn up a will setting up a discretionary Trust in perpetuity. When I die, my estate is divided equally between the children but is kept in Trust for 70 years after my death (the maximum allowed).
.

Finding suitable trustees is a nightmare for these sorts of trusts.

MumOf2

Yes, finding suitable trustees has been difficult, but I think I've done the best I can! If (when) either or both pass on, solicitors will be appointed.

MumOf2

Mojisola

MumOf2 wrote: »

I've drawn up a will setting up a discretionary Trust in perpetuity. When I die, my estate is divided equally between the children but is kept in Trust for 70 years after my death (the maximum allowed).

The children can have income and capital ONLY at the discretion of the trustees - their wreckless father's influence is minimised and he cannot benefit from any of it. Likewise, any partner of the children cannot have access to the capital should a relationship fail. The capital is protected, and the children are protected.

MumOf2 wrote: »

Yes, finding suitable trustees has been difficult, but I think I've done the best I can! If (when) either or both pass on, solicitors will be appointed.

I think I'd rather give the money to my children and let them make their own decisions about spending it than give it to solicitors!

Kynthia

shop-to-drop wrote: »

I think it's sad that it seems that many women these days want the protection of being married and will do anything to get it apart from get married. Marriage seems to be only for when they have enough money to have a huge showy party and several children to show off as bridesmaids or paige boys. Or when one party has a terminal illness whichever comes sooner.

What assumptions you are making. How do you know whether the women you are talking about are the ones not prepared to get married. I find it's the men who now take years to propose, possibly due to the fact that living together and having children before getting married is socially acceptable. Therefore many women are forced into protecting themselves financially when unmarried as more often that not they are the ones left worse off in a split, especially if caring for children means that they weren't directly contributing to the mortgage or even on the property deeds. So many people trot out this nonsense that a mortgage or a child is a bigger commitment than marriage as if that means the marriage is unnecessary. However without the protection that marriage brings, both of the couple should be aware of what alternative protection they might need.

olly300

shop-to-drop wrote: »

I think it's sad that it seems that many women these days want the protection of being married and will do anything to get it apart from get married.

You know some guys won't ask?

You have to plant it in their heads with a few other people, and then a year or so later they actually ask.

A couple of my male friends took 3 bl**dy years.

Though the guys who will ask you have to remember to keep your mouth firmly shut for up to a year.

shop-to-drop wrote: »

Marriage seems to be only for when they have enough money to have a huge showy party and several children to show off as bridesmaids or paige boys. Or when one party has a terminal illness whichever comes sooner.

You know it takes some guys until they have children with someone to realise that they want to marry the mother of their children?

Point I'm making it's not necessarily the woman who doesn't want to get married.

neverdespairgirl

lessonlearned wrote: »

You can easily do your own Wills, and Powers of Attorney. However, you do need to get them right. If not you make matters worse. This is especially important when you are not married. Issues of guardianship etc do have to be taken into account. This is why I suggest a consultation with a solicitor.

The old saying comes to mind, about the "home-made will being the toast of the Chancery Bar".

Strapped

Yorkie1 wrote: »

With reference to the bits in bold, and for information for anyone else reading this thread.

Strapped, you've got this the wrong way round. Joint tenants means each owns [STRIKE]half[/STRIKE] [edit: all], and [STRIKE]the half [/STRIKE] [edit: it all therefore passes solely] to the other automatically on death.

Tenants in common is (generally) for unequal shares, and they don't automatically pass to the other owner(s) on death but must be dealt with in the will.

Oops, sorry, my mistake! (And another reason to get qualified advice, not from random people on t'internet )

lessonlearned

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

The old saying comes to mind, about the "home-made will being the toast of the Chancery Bar".

I agree entirely. It is false economy.

However there are sadly some people who refuse to understand this and are convinced they can do better than the professionals.

I was merely pointing out to Tancred that for people who point blank refuse to pay for professional advice there is a DIY option.

I would not recommend it myself for exactly the reason behind your little joke.

It costs more money to sort out a badly written will then it saves on the cost of having one done properly in the first place.

You might just get away with a simple diy will if you are married and there are no "family complications". However when people are not married the situation is more complex. Similarly in second or subsequent marriages where there may be step children etc. In such cases I believe professional advice is critical.

I have just done Wills and POA's for both property and health for my OH and I. Not quite sure of the final figures yet, because my OH is in a nursing home and our Solicitor will have to do a home visit to finalise everthing.

However, as far as I'm concerned it will be worth every penny.

Similarly I am currently gifting my sons some money to buy their own property (pretty much like olympicsmummy) and again we will be doing wills, deeds of trust etc.

As well as paying for good quality legal advice I am also happy to pay my broker a fee for best financial advice.

Best advice from first class professionals doesn't come cheap but it does pay dividends.

As I said in an earlier post the rich hang onto their money by paying for best advice. Some people prefer to squander their money on non essentials and try to cut corners by going the DIY route.

If I had to chose between a foreign holiday this year and paying for some good quality legal advice then I would forego the holiday and pay for the advice. The holiday is a non essential - the good quality legal advice is crucial.

As it it because I have always taken this approach to my affairs I can now afford both.

Dan-Dan

Thanks for your posts LL , they come as invaluable advice to some of us , even if unintended

Dunroamin

Kynthia wrote: »

What assumptions you are making. How do you know whether the women you are talking about are the ones not prepared to get married. I find it's the men who now take years to propose, possibly due to the fact that living together and having children before getting married is socially acceptable. Therefore many women are forced into protecting themselves financially when unmarried as more often that not they are the ones left worse off in a split, especially if caring for children means that they weren't directly contributing to the mortgage or even on the property deeds. So many people trot out this nonsense that a mortgage or a child is a bigger commitment than marriage as if that means the marriage is unnecessary. However without the protection that marriage brings, both of the couple should be aware of what alternative protection they might need.

More fool the women for having children with men who don't care enough about them to want to marry them!