I’m 69, he’s 72 — is it too late for us to live together?

DEAR BEL, TWO years ago, I met a lovely man and last year we took the decision that we would live together — me moving into his house. I am 69, he is 72. I live in private rented property, with state pension, pension credit and all the benefits that come with it; he has a private pension and owns his own house.

He told me this week he has changed his will for when I am living with him.

Previously, his house would be sold on his death and the proceeds split between his four children, but now (should anything happen to him) I will be allowed to remain in it for up to 18 months, so that I can look for somewhere else to live while the house is being sold.

We live 50 miles apart and meet at weekends, alternating visits to the other’s house. I have made friends in his village, joined the local WI, he’s found me an allotment, and all looked rosy for us until this week.

If I move in with him, I think I might as well just make myself homeless. The house rents in his village are at least £200 per month more than the rent of mine. I get housing allowance and only pay one fifth of my rent and pay no council tax.

All of the costs needed for moving (deposit, first month’s rent, removal costs etc) would make it too expensive for me to even think about. I have explained all this to him and suggested that there’s no point in seeing each other if this is going to happen.

I have four cats and they stay indoors overnight while I go to his house. They would add to the problem of finding property to rent.

When I explained my thoughts, my partner has suggested that he should have a word with his children, but I don’t want to be the cause of a possible family split.

To be honest, I think I would much rather he had changed his will so that I could live in the house until I could no longer manage on my own (or die), with neither me nor my family having claims on the house. What do you think? STEPHANIE

You frame your letter very reasonably, yet in the end you seem to be offering your partner a choice: either he looks at his will again (changing it more obviously to your practical advantage) — or you not only refuse to live with him, you think there is no point in continuing the relationship.

Although I understand your dilemma — and the reasoning behind it — I don’t believe these are the only options.

This week, it was interesting to read that the actress Sheila Hancock believes we should leave our adult children nothing at all, but make a will in favour of charity, as she has done. I disagree — because I see no reason why my children and grandchildren should not benefit from my hard-working career, and I thoroughly resent the idea of inheritance tax, after a lifetime of high taxation.

So to me it’s entirely fitting that your man’s four children (and their families) deserve to benefit from his property after his death — and that they might resent a new lady who deprived them of that (perhaps much-needed) windfall.

Such feelings would not show them to be unpleasant grasping people, just human beings with normal aspirations and feelings of what is right. Suppose they have children in urgent need of help with education or property? It would be natural for them to think they had a greater right to a share of the property sooner rather than much later.

At the same time, as you explain, the situation might be very tough on you. Therefore, I find myself wondering why it would be so bad to

continue as you are for a while, having lovely weekends — rather than allow this inheritance business to spoil a good relationship.

Are you quite prepared to give up what you know and where you are well-placed and contented — and become a part of his life?

If so, then surely that sincere wish should triumph over all your detailed calculations about the future? None of us can know what is in store — meaning you could well die before your partner. In which case all this worry would be meaningless.

My own choice would be to retain my independence and carry on with the current routine. But if you love each other enough to wish to share a bed and a roof seven days a week, then why could you not be saving all the rent you currently pay for the future?

In other words, you do move in with him (bringing those cats, of course) on the understanding that he ‘keeps’ you and you save. Or might it be possible to sublet where you are living now — bearing in mind that both of you will (I pray) enjoy a good, long time together in his area, and therefore you may not wish to move back?

It would be my hope that you forge a marvellous relationship with your partner’s family and become a part of their lives, too. If that happens, then if the sad day comes when he dies before you, I cannot but think they would do everything possible to help you move on to a life without their father, keeping you in theirs. Yet such an ideal outcome would only happen if his four children saw how genuinely happy you had made their dad in his old age.

I fear such long-term contentment is not generated by too many calculations about rent and expenses or inheritance. Yes, we must all be practical and aware of what is and is not in our best interest — but not at the expense of present happiness.