Can My Father's Partner Take His House?
We'd love to hear more of your questions about money and the economy. You can send through written questions, like these ones, but - even better - you can drop us a voice memo to our email questions@rnz.co.nz.
What happens if my father owns a house, but now has a partner for several years who moved in to the house and has put the power in her name to prove she's lived there for a certain time. If my father dies before her with no will, will she get the house or us kids?
Justine Wood is a specialist trustee at Public Trust and helped me answer your question.
Basically, when someone dies without a will, it's referred to as "dying intestate". That means specific legislation comes into play that determines who will get which bits of the person's estate.
That means the partner may well be entitled to a share of the house.
"Based on the family circumstances you've outlined, the partner may be entitled to receive the personal chattels, such as vehicles, furniture and jewellery, the first $155,000 of the estate and a third share of the remainder of the estate," she said.
"This will depend on the couple meeting the legal criteria of having a de facto relationship at the time. The remaining two thirds of anything left would be distributed equally between his children.
"Administering an estate when there is no will can be costly and take longer to sort out. Having a will helps your family understand what you'd like done with your estate after your gone - and it makes the process of managing your passing less stressful on loved ones."
The Administration Act defines de facto relationship in line with the Property (Relationships) Act.
This said a de facto relationship is a couple who are at least 18, living together as a couple and not married or in a civil union.
Things that might be taken into account are the duration of the relationship, the nature and extent of common residence, whether there is a sexual relationship, the degree of financial interdependence and dependence, ownership of property, the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life, the care and support of children, performance of household duties and the reputation and public aspects of the relationship.
It would make sense for your father to draw up a will. Even with a will, his partner may have rights under the Property (Relationships) Act - they may need to sign a contracting out agreement if he wants to ensure that the property is left to you.
Are there any disadvantages in keeping KiwiSaver funds there in KiwiSaver after retirement age? Is it best to fill the forms now and take some, if not all?
There really is no disadvantage to leaving your money in KiwiSaver once you're retired, if that's what makes the most sense for you at the moment.
It would be a good idea to get some advice on the funds your money is invested in, though.
Depending on how much you've got in your KiwiSaver, it might make sense to divide it up and invest it in a few different funds.
You might have some in a conservative or even cash fund that you can tap into if you need it in the near term, for unexpected bills or things like that, some in a balanced fund for the medium term and then some money in a growth fund for the longer term.
The growth fund will probably bump around a bit but should deliver better returns overall, which might help make your money last longer through your retirement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
8 hours ago
- Scoop
Can My Father's Partner Take His House?
Got questions? RNZ is launching a new podcast, No Stupid Questions with Susan Edmunds, next month. We'd love to hear more of your questions about money and the economy. You can send through written questions, like these ones, but - even better - you can drop us a voice memo to our email questions@ What happens if my father owns a house, but now has a partner for several years who moved in to the house and has put the power in her name to prove she's lived there for a certain time. If my father dies before her with no will, will she get the house or us kids? Justine Wood is a specialist trustee at Public Trust and helped me answer your question. Basically, when someone dies without a will, it's referred to as "dying intestate". That means specific legislation comes into play that determines who will get which bits of the person's estate. That means the partner may well be entitled to a share of the house. "Based on the family circumstances you've outlined, the partner may be entitled to receive the personal chattels, such as vehicles, furniture and jewellery, the first $155,000 of the estate and a third share of the remainder of the estate," she said. "This will depend on the couple meeting the legal criteria of having a de facto relationship at the time. The remaining two thirds of anything left would be distributed equally between his children. "Administering an estate when there is no will can be costly and take longer to sort out. Having a will helps your family understand what you'd like done with your estate after your gone - and it makes the process of managing your passing less stressful on loved ones." The Administration Act defines de facto relationship in line with the Property (Relationships) Act. This said a de facto relationship is a couple who are at least 18, living together as a couple and not married or in a civil union. Things that might be taken into account are the duration of the relationship, the nature and extent of common residence, whether there is a sexual relationship, the degree of financial interdependence and dependence, ownership of property, the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life, the care and support of children, performance of household duties and the reputation and public aspects of the relationship. It would make sense for your father to draw up a will. Even with a will, his partner may have rights under the Property (Relationships) Act - they may need to sign a contracting out agreement if he wants to ensure that the property is left to you. Are there any disadvantages in keeping KiwiSaver funds there in KiwiSaver after retirement age? Is it best to fill the forms now and take some, if not all? There really is no disadvantage to leaving your money in KiwiSaver once you're retired, if that's what makes the most sense for you at the moment. It would be a good idea to get some advice on the funds your money is invested in, though. Depending on how much you've got in your KiwiSaver, it might make sense to divide it up and invest it in a few different funds. You might have some in a conservative or even cash fund that you can tap into if you need it in the near term, for unexpected bills or things like that, some in a balanced fund for the medium term and then some money in a growth fund for the longer term. The growth fund will probably bump around a bit but should deliver better returns overall, which might help make your money last longer through your retirement.
NZ Herald
2 days ago
- NZ Herald
Old fire sprinklers in Parliament pose risk, PSA demands urgent action
Parliamentary Service said it was managing a project to replace all fire protection sprinkler pipework throughout Parliament House. 'The pipework is old and has a risk of failure and leaks,' said chief executive Rafael Gonzalez-Montero in his first statement to RNZ. 'It's a long-term project spanning several years but we are already seeing improvements in the system after completing some key areas.' The Public Service Association (PSA) union was surprised at this and called for an urgent meeting, saying it had been kept largely in the dark. Parliament is no stranger to fires, the Great Fire of 1907 being the largest. A night watchman 'thought he heard rain on the roof, but when he went to check, he found a substantial blaze had broken out', one history said, with other fires inside in 1992 and 2015 (and on the lawns during the occupation of 2022). PSA national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons responded to Gonzalez-Montero that its delegates were only told of 'general problems' with the fire system and about general maintenance. 'The serious risk of failure uncovered in this report has not been adequately focused on,' she said in a statement. 'Safety-related asset management should be properly planned for – it is not acceptable to put workers, MPs and visitors at risk during a fire to skimp on the maintenance budget.' When Gonzalez-Montero was asked by RNZ about this, he responded that no person was at any risk. 'We are performing this work in stages and have been for almost two years now with many large portions of the building completed,' he said in a second, later statement. 'During this time, the building's fire protection system remains fully operational and compliant. Any drop in performance, or sensors going offline, would trigger warnings to our facilities team.' The building had a BWoF. The overhaul work was fully funded, he said. However, the Treasury report in early 2025 said, 'Budget funding sought'. Subsequently, Gonzalez-Montero said that Parliamentary Service had until recently been funding the sprinkler upgrade from baseline funding. 'This was recently transferred to a new appropriation to ringfence it.' This then meant the Treasury report captured it. The proposed fix also covered strengthened ground floor windows to improve intruder resistance. 'It is not acceptable for the solution to take years, this work is urgent,' said Fitzsimons. 'There is no room for any risk of failure when it comes to fire safety.' At a meeting with Parliamentary Service, it was agreed this would be discussed in the health and safety forum at Parliament, she said. – RNZ
RNZ News
2 days ago
- RNZ News
Parliament's sprinklers at risk of failing, Treasury report says
A Treasury report says Parliament's sprinklers at risk of failing. Photo: RNZ / Demelza Leslie Old fire sprinklers throughout Parliament are at risk of failing. A Treasury report from a few months ago reveals the problem, and Parliamentary Service confirmed it - before then insisting the system is fully operational. Officials early this year approved planning for a medium-risk fix-it project, though this still needed funding. "The existing fire sprinkler system ( required for a BWoF [Building Warrant of Fitness]) and the heating infrastructure system both of which are operated across existing Parliamentary buildings, are end of life and at risk of failure." Parliamentary Service said it was managing a project to replace all fire protection sprinkler pipework throughout Parliament House. "The pipework is old and has a risk of failure and leaks," said chief executive Rafael Gonzalez-Montero in his first statement to RNZ. "It's a long-term project spanning several years but we are already seeing improvements in the system after completing some key areas." The Public Service Association (PSA) union was surprised at this, and called for an urgent meeting saying it had been kept largely in the dark. Parliament is no stranger to fires, the Great Fire of 1907 being the largest. A night watchman "thought he heard rain on the roof, but when he went to check, he found a substantial blaze had broken out", one history said, with other fires inside in 1992 and 2015 (and on the lawns during the occupation of 2022 ). PSA national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons responded to Gonzalez-Montero that their delegates were only told of "general problems" with the fire system and about general maintenance. "The serious risk of failure uncovered in this report has not been adequately focussed on," she said in a statement. "Safety-related asset management should be properly planned for - it is not acceptable to put workers, MPs and visitors at risk during a fire to skimp on the maintenance budget." When Gonzalez-Montero was asked by RNZ about this, he responded that no person was at any risk. "We are performing this work in stages and have been for almost two years now with many large portions of the building completed," he said in a second, later statement. "During this time, the building's fire protection system remains fully operational and compliant. Any drop in performance, or sensors going offline, would trigger warnings to our Facilities team." The building had a BWOF. The overhaul work was fully funded, he added. The Treasury report in early 2025 said, "Budget funding sought". Subsequently, Gonzalez-Montero said that Parliamentary Service had until recently been funding the sprinkler upgrade from baseline funding. "This was recently transferred to a new appropriation to ringfence it." This then meant the Treasury report captured it. The proposed fix also covered strengthened ground floor windows to improve intruder resistance. "It is not acceptable for the solution to take years, this work is urgent," said Fitzsimons. "There is no room for any risk of failure when it comes to fire safety." At a meeting with Parliamentary Service, it was agreed this would be discussed in the health and safety forum at Parliament, she said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
