WasOtherWoman Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 Wondering how any other Second Marriage Folks handle the will situation? Our wills have always stated that, I guess like most married people's, that if I die, everything goes to my husband and if he does everything goes to me. When we are both gone, it will pass on to my husbands grown children (who I love). We recently needed to make a change to one of our trusts with a new attorney since our family attorney had recently died. He was absolutely HORRIFIED at the way our will was structured and pointed out to my husband that if we left our will that way that I would be able to cut his children out if he dies first. I was like "um.. sitting right here..." I was rather offended by this, I think. Do other people structure their will in some other way?
pink_sugar Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) My husband's mom left everything to her husband. My husband (her son)didn't get anything...not even sentimental nick knacks like photos or jewelry. I doubt they even had anything in their will that if anything happens to his stepfather, that my H would get anything. I honestly think parents should dictate that a certain percentage of their life insurance policy goes to their adult children...while the spouse gets the estate and a percentage of the life insurance. Sometimes wills aren't always followed, especially if you have a douche for a stepparent. The way it sounds as you stated, my husband's stepfather could easily cut him out of the will since his mother passed away before him...assuming he was even in the will to begin with, which is doubtful. (It sounds like you are one of the select few that would be a good stepparent and pass things on to your stepchildren when you both are deceased.) Edited June 12, 2014 by pink_sugar
d0nnivain Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The lawyer was only pointing out something that was painfully obvious to the lawyer but probably unknown to law people. Also lawyers deal with people at their worst & always have to guard against the downside. They are not accustomed to people who actually keep their word; when things are running smoothly no one needs a lawyer. Anyway, talk to the lawyer about a good way to hand things. Certain things may be able to be given to the children outright. Another option may be to give the surviving spouse a life estate in any real estate and then have the kids as the ultimate heirs. You both should also probably look into elder care / Medicaid planning while you are revising everything. 1
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 12, 2014 Author Posted June 12, 2014 Thanks for the responses, I guess the lawyer is probably trained to expect the worst of people. It just felt kind of strange hearing that. Does sound that folks can be kind of awful, I guess. Obviously we were well aware of the implication of our will, we wrote it that way and will keep it that way. Everyone waits until we are both gone to inherit. I guess he was just being a lawyer...and I was being too sensitive. My husband laughed and said to the lawyer, "if those kids piss off X to the point where she disinherits them, they will have no one to blame but themselves." Ha.. I guess I missed the evil stepmother training day in school. 4
central Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 Second marriage for us. Whoever dies first, most of their assets go into a trust for the lifetime benefit of the other (or until they remarry), some goes directly and immediately to any children or grandchildren, and once the second spouse dies any remainder in the turst goes to the first-to-die-spouse's children/grandchildren. The key is to set up a trust with clear terms of use and lines of control, with as few restrictions as possible on the surviving spouse to use the assets as needed, but (in our case) not for the benefit of the survivor's children, etc. 2
d0nnivain Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 Sadly what often happens is when the biological parent dies, the kids don't come around & take care of the living spouse because that person is not the other bio-parent. Based on your screen name, it wouldn't shock me that if your husband goes 1st that his kids abandon you. If you can laud their future inheritance over their heads that may keep them around. Then again I have the pessimism of a lawyer & sincerely hope your family is made up of nicer people.
pink_sugar Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The lawyer was only pointing out something that was painfully obvious to the lawyer but probably unknown to law people. Also lawyers deal with people at their worst & always have to guard against the downside. They are not accustomed to people who actually keep their word; when things are running smoothly no one needs a lawyer. Anyway, talk to the lawyer about a good way to hand things. Certain things may be able to be given to the children outright. Another option may be to give the surviving spouse a life estate in any real estate and then have the kids as the ultimate heirs. You both should also probably look into elder care / Medicaid planning while you are revising everything. This^^^^^. People do get screwed over and though you probably wouldn't do such a thing, it does happen and lawyers do their best to ensure the will's wishes are followed and carefully planned to avoid problems down the road.
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 Sadly what often happens is when the biological parent dies, the kids don't come around & take care of the living spouse because that person is not the other bio-parent. Based on your screen name, it wouldn't shock me that if your husband goes 1st that his kids abandon you. If you can laud their future inheritance over their heads that may keep them around. Then again I have the pessimism of a lawyer & sincerely hope your family is made up of nicer people. Yikes, I absolutely suppose that could happen. I would like to think not... I have been in their lives for over 15 years, since they were young adults. We definitely have relationships that go beyond just the fact that I am married to their father. I hear what you are saying about my screen name, but that does not at all play into our relationships fortunately. My husband and his ex's marriage was over long before I came along. His ex and I have forged a very nice friendship and she has long since remarried also. But, never say never, right? Never even really considered the above, but, I guess, as my husband said, if I did disinherit them it is because they deserved it. Still, I don't think I would ever have agreed with an arrangement in which either he or I had any sort of restrictions placed upon what we could do with our money once the other is gone.
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 Second marriage for us. Whoever dies first, most of their assets go into a trust for the lifetime benefit of the other (or until they remarry), some goes directly and immediately to any children or grandchildren, and once the second spouse dies any remainder in the turst goes to the first-to-die-spouse's children/grandchildren. The key is to set up a trust with clear terms of use and lines of control, with as few restrictions as possible on the surviving spouse to use the assets as needed, but (in our case) not for the benefit of the survivor's children, etc. Interesting, thanks for the above. It never even occurred to us to structure our wills and trusts any differently than we did, with each of us being the only beneficiary for the other, and then the kids after we go. Sad that people need to do that sort of thing.
d0nnivain Posted June 13, 2014 Posted June 13, 2014 Still, I don't think I would ever have agreed with an arrangement in which either he or I had any sort of restrictions placed upon what we could do with our money once the other is gone. There are ways to structure it so you are free to do whatever with the money while you are alive but when you die how you can distribute anything you inherited from the other is limited. I'm making this up but lets say you own a $300,000 house together with a $150,000 mortgage. Plus you each have $50,000 in the bank. One of you dies & life insurance pays off the remaining mortgage. The survivor now has a house free & clear plus $100,000. Over the survivors life time that person spends the $100,000 liquid cash but never touches the house which appreciates to $350,000. When the suvivor dies, that person can give $175,000 however but the other money goes to the other person's kids, if that is how you chose to structure it. If while the person had been alive, they needed to dip into the house equity they would have been free to do so. It all depends on how stuff gets worded.
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 That makes sense. LOL, these kids have my healthcare power of attorney... let's hope they don't kill me prematurely
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 (edited) There are ways to structure it so you are free to do whatever with the money while you are alive but when you die how you can distribute anything you inherited from the other is limited. Actually though, when I think about it, I don't think I'd like that either. I would not limit what he could do with the money once I die and I would not want him to limit me either. He could just as easily cut out the family members that I will be leaving amounts to. If he does, i will assume there was good reason. edited: all in all, great info though, appreciate the thoughts! I am happy with the way we are structured, I think. I just never realized people went to such extremes. Edited June 13, 2014 by WasOtherWoman
central Posted June 13, 2014 Posted June 13, 2014 Interesting, thanks for the above. It never even occurred to us to structure our wills and trusts any differently than we did, with each of us being the only beneficiary for the other, and then the kids after we go. Sad that people need to do that sort of thing. Perhaps it is sad, but it's better to live in reality than delusion. Even disputes over small amounts of money can lead to amazingly bad behavior, so save your families the potential pain and dysfunction by making your wishes and preferences indisputably clear in your wills and trusts. It will save them from future problems and conflict, and remove the temptation to do what's expedient rather than ethical. 1
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 Perhaps it is sad, but it's better to live in reality than delusion. Even disputes over small amounts of money can lead to amazingly bad behavior, so save your families the potential pain and dysfunction by making your wishes and preferences indisputably clear in your wills and trusts. It will save them from future problems and conflict, and remove the temptation to do what's expedient rather than ethical. Absolutely agree with this I've seen it in my cousin's family. The way they acted was absolutely disgraceful. I'm quite sure their parents would've been ashamed of them. In particular case our wishes are that whoever survives makes the best decision for our money. Is completely up to my husband what he chooses to do with our money once I'm gone. I would certainly hope that he would leave the the majority to the kids but he is also of mindset that no one is entitled to our money except for us. Certainly we have set things up so that no one can dispute things once one or both of us are gone. That could never be tolerated.
pink_sugar Posted June 13, 2014 Posted June 13, 2014 This thread actually makes me wonder if my husband's mother had any sort of agreement about the estate going to my husband if anything happens to his stepfather. (His stepfather has no children of his own). I would hope so, but it sounds like the stepfather could probably change this so his family (brother's, sister's, nieces, nephews) get everything.
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 This thread actually makes me wonder if my husband's mother had any sort of agreement about the estate going to my husband if anything happens to his stepfather. (His stepfather has no children of his own). I would hope so, but it sounds like the stepfather could probably change this so his family (brother's, sister's, nieces, nephews) get everything. So if your husband's mother was set on him inheriting (it certainly seems like the right course of action since his stepfather has no children) she probably could have taken steps to make sure that is what happened? Is she still living? If so it is not too late to make changes right?
pink_sugar Posted June 13, 2014 Posted June 13, 2014 So if your husband's mother was set on him inheriting (it certainly seems like the right course of action since his stepfather has no children) she probably could have taken steps to make sure that is what happened? Is she still living? If so it is not too late to make changes right? She died last year. She was sick for 3.5 years. They never talked to us about their arrangements, so we have no clue. They were pretty financially irresponsible....3.5 years to plan and Stepfather borrowed against his retirement to pay for the funeral (even thought his wife's relatives offered to help cover the cost). As far as we know, she still doesn't have a headstone over a year later.....
Author WasOtherWoman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Posted June 13, 2014 She died last year. She was sick for 3.5 years. They never talked to us about their arrangements, so we have no clue. They were pretty financially irresponsible....3.5 years to plan and Stepfather borrowed against his retirement to pay for the funeral (even thought his wife's relatives offered to help cover the cost). As far as we know, she still doesn't have a headstone over a year later..... I am sorry, that is awful. I have to say though, I have NO tolerance for grownup folks who are financially irresponsible. Doesn't sound like there's really anything left anyway.... 1
MuscleCarFan Posted June 14, 2014 Posted June 14, 2014 I am sorry, that is awful. I have to say though, I have NO tolerance for grownup folks who are financially irresponsible. Doesn't sound like there's really anything left anyway.... Yep. I pretty much got screwed over.
Mascara Posted June 14, 2014 Posted June 14, 2014 I have no idea what arrangements my mother and step father have made, except that once they both go the estate is divided equally between all us children. But I hope it all goes to him if my mother dies first. I wouldn't have it any other way, he's her husband. I adore him though, and vice versa, so I suppose it depends on the family dynamic. As far as he's concerned, I'm his daughter and it will become mine and my step-siblings equally when they're both gone. 1
carhill Posted June 14, 2014 Posted June 14, 2014 From my own experience as trustee, one area to task the lawyer on would be incapacity of one or more of the trustees in the inter vivos trust, as well as structuring the concurrent full or springing power of attorney for finance to convey the powers desired. One area which caused me to go in front of a judge was a simple one; I did not have the power to gift and that became critical during my stay as care manager. The judge had to replace the existing trustee (the surviving spouse) with the liquidating trustee (me) to allow me to control assets in a way the existing power of attorney would not. In essence, I had so spend about 5 grand to fix a couple sentences on a piece of paper which cost my mother the notary fees in the past. She simply didn't know some of the complexities and her lawyer missed them when later reviewing the trust, will and POA's. I wouldn't call such a 'mistake', but rather not covering all bases. Such happens. Good luck!
velvette Posted June 14, 2014 Posted June 14, 2014 Wondering how any other Second Marriage Folks handle the will situation? Our wills have always stated that, I guess like most married people's, that if I die, everything goes to my husband and if he does everything goes to me. When we are both gone, it will pass on to my husbands grown children (who I love). I was rather offended by this, I think. Do other people structure their will in some other way? Our wills are structured differently. Our home and the account containing money that would pay it off if we chose to goes to the surviving spouse. Our other assets are divided equally between surviving spouse and his children and/or my family members. The reason we did it that way is that neither of us expect ever to need these assets as we have guaranteed income as well as both having generous survivor benefits on each others pensions as well as having long term health care needs covered. While we are both alive, we can each dole out money as we see fit to his kids or my parents/siblings. We give all of these family members a good bit of money now. I don't want to be in the position of saying yeah or neigh to his kids needs/requests as I don't always agree with them. I also, don't want the responsibility of managing/investing what my H leaves that would eventually go to his kids. A lot of the money we have that's attributable to my H income we have because the kids all earned free rides to college we thought we would have to pay for. If not for that, they would already have it so, I have no problem with them having it if my H goes first. I also don't want to depend on my H if he's the last one standing to give my family members money or them to be in a position to have to ask him for it. While I trust he would help them if he knew they needed help, I don't trust him to be as diligent as I am about ascertaining their needs if they aren't obvious. Not to mention if he became incapacitated then his kids would be in charge of helping my family members. I just don't see that as a good situation to set up. This also precludes any possible third spouse from significantly altering or unduly influencing the surviving spouse to change our original intentions. If people live long enough screwy things can happen to wills. Seen it and watched the ensuing court battle in my own extended family. I think the main thing is that we are confident neither one of us needs the others assets to continue living the way we live now, so there's no reason for the surviving spouse to hang onto them.
SolG Posted June 14, 2014 Posted June 14, 2014 My mother inherited my father's estate when he died. She has subsequently remarried. And frankly neither I nor my brother could care less what she does with her will :-/ Completely her prerogative to do as she wishes. However, my brother did buy the family home from my mother before she remarried. We may have a different opinion if that was still in the mix! But everything else... it's just money and stuff. And we've got enough of our own of that. Best case scenario in my books is that she sells up and spends the lot before she dies having a fantastic time. However, if she doesn't it's completely fine by me if her husband gets it all... and he then spends it before he dies having a fantastic time. Also don't really care if he gives it to his kids and we 'miss out'.
Recommended Posts