Disinheritance/second marriage will complications

puddingisagoldfish

If two people remarry and both have children from their previous relationship (and they not intending having more children) what is the implication on inheritance?
One person has a wholly owned property worth about 360,000 and one child.
The other has a mortgage of about 150,000 and two children.
If they marry my understanding is that the other spouse will inherit all unless a will is written. But if a will (and/or prenup) is written then is there an ideal situation that will ensure that the spouse who lives on can remain in the home but all children will not feel that they want their ‘share’ of the inheritance monies?
My own dad lives on his old home but feels pressure (implied or real) to move and free up money for his late wifes children.
I hope that’s enough information and thank you for any suggestions or advice

mgdavid

I'm confused so it's probably not enough information.
Is your dad one of the 'two people'?
Who has died, his 1st wife or 2nd wife?
Did two people marry but keep their own separate properties?
Is there a will?
Is there a pre-nup?
Are you a possible beneficiary?

RAS

Are you in England, Waless, Scotland. The law is different.

madbadrob

Pre Nups mean nothing after death.

With intestacy if your dad married this lady then on his passing she would gain all of the first 250k and the rest of his estate would be split 50% immediately to his biological child and the other 50% held in trust with the wife being able to have the interest that money earned. The step child would get nothing however on the wifes death he/she would take her whole estate.

Scotland in terms of this are very similar.

I would therefore have him write a will leaving his estate to who he wants to leave it to.

ROb

puddingisagoldfish

So sorry!
No my dad is just an example of how things can turn out, which I would look to avoid.
We are in England.
I am thinking of remarrying, and will need to write a will and have read that sometimes, even when people think the various children have been taken care of that problems can arise leading to disinheritance.
The feeling that one spouse would need to sell up to provide the money for the child/ren of the deceased I'm sure is common and I wondered if there was something I had not thought of re this and making the will watertight for all the children

duchy

I'm probably in a similar situation
I'm remarrying and both I and my fiance have adult children.
The way we intend to handle it is that we will buy one joint property - the surviving partner inherits and when they die the property will be inherited equally by all of our children. No need for anyone to sell up -and if some of the children have to wait and not inherit until both of us are dead instead of just "their" parent -we see nothing wrong in that (which I think is what you are getting at)

Obvious holes are without trusts I suppose the surviving partner could sell up and spend the lot or remarry (again) but neither are issues that particularly concern me personally.

RAS

duchy wrote: »

I'm probably in a similar situation
I'm remarrying and both I and my fiance have adult children.
The way we intend to handle it is that we will buy one joint property - the surviving partner inherits and when they die the property will be inherited equally by all of our children. No need for anyone to sell up -and if some of the children have to wait and not inherit until both of us are dead instead of just "their" parent -we see nothing wrong in that (which I think is what you are getting at)

Obvious holes are without trusts I suppose the surviving partner could sell up and spend the lot or remarry (again) but neither are issues that particularly concern me personally.

I am not sure this works but our will writers could tell us?

If the surviving parent is the sole tenant after the first death then they can make their own will and leave everything to who ever they wish.

Certainly when one parent died and their second spouse was the sole tenant, they decided to exclude the children of the first marriage from their will and leave it all to someone else; despite what they had said verbally in their lifetime.

If the property is a joint tenancy (rather than tenants in common), I do not see how this could be prevented?

puddingisagoldfish

Thank you RAS yes, I think you've just voiced what I was struggling to explain!

madbadrob

RAS wrote: »

I am not sure this works but our will writers could tell us?

If the surviving parent is the sole tenant after the first death then they can make their own will and leave everything to who ever they wish.

Certainly when one parent died and their second spouse was the sole tenant, they decided to exclude the children of the first marriage from their will and leave it all to someone else; despite what they had said verbally in their lifetime.

If the property is a joint tenancy (rather than tenants in common), I do not see how this could be prevented?

Actually no. If you make mutual wills and state in both wills that neither of you will change the will after the first death then the second will is a contract that cannot be broken. Google this and you will find numerous cases that have gone to court and not once have I seen a mutual will not ratified by the courts.

Rob

RAS

OK

So mutual wills work even if the property is a joint tenancy?

I think from other things said here that mirror will are another matter?

madbadrob

RAS wrote: »

OK

So mutual wills work even if the property is a joint tenancy?

I think from other things said here that mirror will are another matter?

Ras yes because the mutual wills are exactly like mirror wills the only difference is they are named mutual wills or contain the line that the couple shall not change the contents of either will without the express permission of the other. This forms a contract that once one person dies cannot be changed. The only case I have found where changes have been accepted were where one beneficiary had died after the death of the first mutual will holder so the second removed that person from the will and added 2 others. This was contested by the first party and the judge upheld the changed will because the original beneficiaries still living were not losing out.

Therefore a mutual will that says on my death all passes to my partner and on that persons death shall be shared out in x y z proportions cannot be changed.

Rob