Money Moral Dilemma: Should my sister-in-law give up her house after her husband's death?

mattpaint

If she cannot manage to keep the property in a good state of repair then I hope she won't be expecting the children to pay for it. Their father has made his wishes clear so they need to deal with it.

Gelligrug

I think the husband who has died should have had a meeting with wife and chilren to expain his will soon after he had made it. The chidren should not end up with nothing and I mean end.

Pollycat

Gelligrug wrote: »

I think the husband who has died should have had a meeting with wife and chilren to expain his will soon after he had made it. The chidren should not end up with nothing and I mean end.

Maybe they did have a meeting and maybe the sons understood the terms of the will perfectly well.
Maybe they think that now their Father is out of the way, they can coerce (or maybe even intimidate) their stepmother into moving to get their hands on the money earlier than their Father intended.
The children will end up with what their Father intended them to end up with.

Mojisola

Gelligrug wrote: »

I think the husband who has died should have had a meeting with wife and chilren to expain his will soon after he had made it. The chidren should not end up with nothing and I mean end.

They aren't - they will inherit the house, just not yet.

Their father could have transferred the ownership of the house into joint ownership with his second wife which could have left his children with nothing.

The way he has organised his affairs shows he planned to be fair to his wife and his children.

shropshirelady

jeanthelibraryqueen wrote: »

Please go with your SIL to a different solicitor with a copy of her husband's will! If she has lived in the house for twenty years, then it is her marital home. It is unusual for a spouse to leave the whole of the marital home to other relatives - usually a spouse can leave their half of the marital home to other relatives, giving the surviving spouse a life interest or right of abode. It may be that she is entitled to a half share in the house in her own right, and should challenge the will. Did he leave her anything else, eg other property, shares, investments?
I am dealing with a relative's estate, and he left his half of the marital home to his relatives, but his widow has a lifetime right of abode in the house. She can do what she wants with her half of the house in her will.
Good luck! It is horrid to have to deal with this sort of thing when you are grieving for a loved one. Good for you for helping her.

Just what I was thinking. Why leave nothing at all to the wife who has lived there for 20 years. I'd think she should get a 50% share to do with as she wishes.

Santamaria

I think your SIL should stay in the house if that's what she wants. Her late husband took a conscious decision to allow her to live out the rest of her life in the marital home and his wishes should be respected by his children. Their current behaviour is disrespectful to their late father and downright cruel to their grieving step mother.

JayD

She is living there at the behest of he late husband. That was his wish and the children should respect it. I am appalled that pressure should be applied - if indeed it is. But they may just be suggesting something that they feel could be beneficial to all involved and this comes across as pressure.


Either way, I think that she should live in the house as long as she wishes to do so.

JaneandBeth

The thread says they will inherit but only after her death. She should tell them sharply that if she gets any more hints, requests or pressure she will alter her will and leave it to the local cats' home! Unless of course she was a tenant-in-common with her husband, instead of joint tenants, in which case they could inherit his half but she would still be free to do what she wanted with her own half.
Being in a similar position, with a large house and three step-sons, I am very grateful that they are decent, considerate men, who have urged me to do what I want with the house, and not rush into selling just for their sakes. After 40 years here, moving would be a massive step and I hope your subject lady thinks hard before giving in to the selfish brats.

Sayschezza

Pollycat wrote: »

It may be that the husband has left her a life interest in the house (not sure if that's the correct term) whereby she can live there until her death when the greedy !!!!!!s inherit.
I think it's fairly common in cases of second marriages where the original house owner wants to provide for a second spouse but keep the house in the family for children of the first spouse.

That's exactly what I have done for the same reason. If oh goes first no problem. If I go first he gets to live in the house until he dies or moves voluntarily. My kids are well aware of this and because they love him they accept it as right and proper.

Tabbytabitha

louisajoyce wrote: »

No, my husband and I have a property trust in our wills that means the house will always go to the children we share between us after our deaths - not to any future children of a new relationship should we split. We are also "tenants in common" (each owning 50% of the house), rather than "shared owners" (each owning 100%) so we can only ever get out and keep (and inheritance "away") 50% of any property value. They'll get the money eventually, they just have to wait.

I always think it's such a shame when young people are possibly struggling and could have their burden eased from money they will get eventually. I am intending to give my children all that I can whilst I am alive to help them build better lives, they won't need to wait until I am dead, and that includes downsizing when the time is right to give them their "inheritance" before I go.

Well let's hope they look after you if you become frail and need care or that you have enough capital do provide for yourself as well as them!