Does forthcoming inheritance factor into divorce settlement?

martin2345uk

A friend of mine is in the below situation so just wondering how this works..!

Person A and person B are married but on the rocks, divorce looks inevitable at some point. 

Person A is inheriting half their mother’s house. 

If the divorce occurs before that will is actually executed, is that inheritance still considered by the court in a financial settlement? Or only if they’ve actually physically received the money/asset by the time of the divorce?

TBagpuss

If mother has died, so they are entitled to the house, then it will need to be declared and will be relveant, even if it takes a while for probate to be obtained so the person hasn't actually got immediate acess to it. 

 IF however mother is in good health then it wouldn't be relevant (and of course mother is in no way obligated to provide any information about what is in her will) - she could live for years, need all the money herself for living expenses / care costs, could fall out with A and change their will... there's no guarantee A will ever get the money / share of the house

Even if she dies so the inheritance becomes part of A's assets, inheritances,are generally seen differently from joint assets or assets built up during the marraige, provied that they haven't been mixed in with the joint assets (so inherited money that's used to clear / reduce a mortgage on the family home - usually seen as having been mixed so is just part of the general assets - inhreitnacerecive after the split or kept wholly separate from joint assets, much less likely to be treated as a matrimonial asset and shared.

They are not protected, but a court will generally see it as fair that they are not split, provided that the parties needs can be met from the matrimonail assets without them. The person who recievd th assets may however find that it is seen as reducing their needs, so if they would otherwise have argued (due to lower income etc) that they should have more than half the assets on the basis of having greater need, that argument is weaker as their additional neds can be met from their inheritance. 

martin2345uk

Very interesting thanks. Yes, mother sadly passed away last year. Probate is taking a long time….!

TBagpuss

Yes, in that case, because A has a right to the asset they are part of their finacial assetsd and have to be dsiclosed and form part of any discussions , but won't automatically be split. 

martin2345uk

But it has to be declared and considered even before it’s actually been received, correct?

Retireby40

Have they got kids?

Personally I'd be embarrassed trying to get half of a partners inheritance given I didn't contribute to it. 

I know it's more complicated but always thought that assets like inheritance should be left out of settlements. Just money grabbing.

Imagine person As mother worked all her life to pay that house with the idea it's left to her children only for someone else to decide they want a piece of it even though they have no intention to be with that person any longer. Just doesn't sit right with me. But I know the law doesn't take morals into it.

Gavin83

Retireby40 said:

Personally I'd be embarrassed trying to get half of a partners inheritance given I didn't contribute to it. 

To be fair neither did the hypothetical partner.

Divorce is rarely fair. That’s life. I don’t see why an inheritance should be ignored but say a house someone brought into the marriage shouldn’t be.

Retireby40

Gavin83 said:

Retireby40 said:

Personally I'd be embarrassed trying to get half of a partners inheritance given I didn't contribute to it. 

To be fair neither did the hypothetical partner.

Divorce is rarely fair. That’s life. I don’t see why an inheritance should be ignored but say a house someone brought into the marriage shouldn’t be.

Yeah but it came from a parent. Completely different. Plus how do you know person A didn't contribute to work around the house or didn't help with housekeep growing up? You don't.

I believe what you bring in before or anything were both parties haven't contributed or had an influence shouldn't be halved. 

Imagine I own a 300k house outright, get married, divorced and the other half who brought 0 to the table walks of with 150k. You think that's OK? What actually gives the person a right to part of something they didn't contribute too? A piece of paper?

74jax

Retireby40 said:

Gavin83 said:

Retireby40 said:

Personally I'd be embarrassed trying to get half of a partners inheritance given I didn't contribute to it. 

To be fair neither did the hypothetical partner.

Divorce is rarely fair. That’s life. I don’t see why an inheritance should be ignored but say a house someone brought into the marriage shouldn’t be.

Yeah but it came from a parent. Completely different. Plus how do you know person A didn't contribute to work around the house or didn't help with housekeep growing up? You don't.

I believe what you bring in before or anything were both parties haven't contributed or had an influence shouldn't be halved. 

Imagine I own a 300k house outright, get married, divorced and the other half who brought 0 to the table walks of with 150k. You think that's OK? What actually gives the person a right to part of something they didn't contribute too? A piece of paper?

Or, like my friend who split with her husband.... Her mam died, left the house to her. Her now-ex had practically built the house for his in-law, visited every day to drop off milk and a paper on his way to work, extended the house, made such a beautiful garden landscape.  His wife (the daughter - my friend) didn't get on with her mother.

The bit in bold is exactly right. The marriage contract. Every single contract should be read, understood and then signed. If you don't agree to the terms don't sign. This is MSE and so contracts are discussed at length on various boards, but so many on Marriages Board ask about the Marriage Contract as thought it isn't a Contract. Every Contract can have its release clauses, you just need to negotiate them. 

Retireby40

74jax said:

Retireby40 said:

Gavin83 said:

Retireby40 said:

Personally I'd be embarrassed trying to get half of a partners inheritance given I didn't contribute to it. 

To be fair neither did the hypothetical partner.

Divorce is rarely fair. That’s life. I don’t see why an inheritance should be ignored but say a house someone brought into the marriage shouldn’t be.

Yeah but it came from a parent. Completely different. Plus how do you know person A didn't contribute to work around the house or didn't help with housekeep growing up? You don't.

I believe what you bring in before or anything were both parties haven't contributed or had an influence shouldn't be halved. 

Imagine I own a 300k house outright, get married, divorced and the other half who brought 0 to the table walks of with 150k. You think that's OK? What actually gives the person a right to part of something they didn't contribute too? A piece of paper?

Or, like my friend who split with her husband.... Her mam died, left the house to her. Her now-ex had practically built the house for his in-law, visited every day to drop off milk and a paper on his way to work, extended the house, made such a beautiful garden landscape.  His wife (the daughter - my friend) didn't get on with her mother.

The bit in bold is exactly right. The marriage contract. Every single contract should be read, understood and then signed. If you don't agree to the terms don't sign. This is MSE and so contracts are discussed at length on various boards, but so many on Marriages Board ask about the Marriage Contract as thought it isn't a Contract. Every Contract can have its release clauses, you just need to negotiate them. 

And did your friends other half get half of the house?

I know all the if you don't agree the terms don't sign etc. I'm simply expressing an opinion. Which is allowed the last time I checked.

74jax

Retireby40 said:

74jax said:

Retireby40 said:

Gavin83 said:

Retireby40 said:

Personally I'd be embarrassed trying to get half of a partners inheritance given I didn't contribute to it. 

To be fair neither did the hypothetical partner.

Divorce is rarely fair. That’s life. I don’t see why an inheritance should be ignored but say a house someone brought into the marriage shouldn’t be.

Yeah but it came from a parent. Completely different. Plus how do you know person A didn't contribute to work around the house or didn't help with housekeep growing up? You don't.

I believe what you bring in before or anything were both parties haven't contributed or had an influence shouldn't be halved. 

Imagine I own a 300k house outright, get married, divorced and the other half who brought 0 to the table walks of with 150k. You think that's OK? What actually gives the person a right to part of something they didn't contribute too? A piece of paper?

Or, like my friend who split with her husband.... Her mam died, left the house to her. Her now-ex had practically built the house for his in-law, visited every day to drop off milk and a paper on his way to work, extended the house, made such a beautiful garden landscape.  His wife (the daughter - my friend) didn't get on with her mother.

The bit in bold is exactly right. The marriage contract. Every single contract should be read, understood and then signed. If you don't agree to the terms don't sign. This is MSE and so contracts are discussed at length on various boards, but so many on Marriages Board ask about the Marriage Contract as thought it isn't a Contract. Every Contract can have its release clauses, you just need to negotiate them. 

And did your friends other half get half of the house?

I know all the if you don't agree the terms don't sign etc. I'm simply expressing an opinion. Which is allowed the last time I checked.

Its still in probate / with solicitors. The mam sadly died just recently.... The separation is still on going too. They both have a lot on with a death and divorce, it's hit him particularly hard as he saw his MIL almost every day. 

I'm agreeing with you (the bit in bold) your opinion and mine are the same -  I'm agreeing yes the bit of paper states what happens. And then added the bit about contracts ending being a negotiation.  You know this, but others reading might not (covering all bases).