MIL gifting money to DC

Such awful ageism

Hi op,

In these circumstances, I would very quickly establish with the eldests that you will « rectify » any unfairness as much as you can yourself.

You can’t control how much she gives to them neither to how many of them but you can surely « protect » the ones that had the misfirtune of being too young when the gifting happened.

Good luck 🌺

Sorry not fair but old people have screwed thinking there is nothing you can do but those gifted could think of the others

I’ve decided not to give my niece a significant 21st present in case I drop dead before the others turn 21.

What if my brother has more kids after I die - should I make a contingency in my will for that?

Perhaps you can save up the 25k x3 and then no one is left out?

On a side note!
If my DG was giving my two oldest that amount I be forever grateful even if no other children got at all.

The other 3 are too young to use that money wisely.
Maybe she needs her savings below a threshold to avoid the tax man which is why she's sorting the eldest ones.
What other grand children are there around that age?

If you are in a position to do so, leave your 3 youngest children 25K each before dividing the inheritance you are leaving between all the 5 to equalise this.

OP I think you're being very very unfair on your eldest two and on your very generous MIL. This is just a factor in having a large number of kids, I'm afraid - it will always cause issues like this. People don't want to take all 5 on a day out, or invite all 5 on a holiday or have all 5 as bridesmaids etc. It's just too many at once.

GM is between a rock and a hard place. She won't have £25k to give all 5 when she's alive. £10k won't be enough for the eldest to have a house deposit now, when she needs it. You seem to want to disadvantage your eldest two because you chose to have more and more kids as they got older? That's entirely your choice and not their fault!

I don't see why you feel justified in keeping your eldest off the housing ladder now, just to "protect" your younger ones from some imaginary discrimination in future! They don't even need to know about it if you ask your eldest to keep it to themselves and there is absolutely nothing to suggest that GM won't do the same for the others in due course. Yes of course the money could be eaten up by care fees etc, but the intention is there and that's just life, I'm afraid! My younger brother had a much better upbringing than I did because my parents were older and richer when they had him. Should I go back to my parents now and demand my share of the bigger house he grew up in and the fancier holidays he went on?! Don't be ridiculous!

begruding your child £40 for a singular driving lesson when the others are not old enough to drive is ridiculous. that isn't fairness that is penalising one for being the elder.

I'm sure when/if the youngest gets money for a driving lesson you won't be expecting them to share it with their adult sibling.

I’ve seen on here previously that some people give all their children gifts on each child’s birthday, and continue this throughout adulthood. Utterly ridiculous but shows how this sense of everything having to be exactly the same all the time may develop.

You must be incredibly privileged if you know "lots" of parents and grandparents who give their grandkids TWENTY FIVE GRAND at 18 or 21!
That is really, really, not the norm.

£500 or a £1k to a grandchild for graduating uni could be either a lovely treat for a nice item of jewellery or holiday or pay the first month's rent on a flat. Fine, no expectation to give it to all grandchildren, ideally if granny is still alive to give it to other gc who graduate that would be lovely but its not going to hugely affect them if they don't, and lots of families might be able to scrape up £500 themselves to make it "fair" if they wanted.

£25k for a deposit on a house is literally life changing, as in if a younger sibling doesn't get it they could be at a financial detriment to their sibling for the rest of their lives - one gets on the housing ladder, one doesn't, one can afford to pay off their student loan, the other pays £40k in interest on top of the original debt over the course of their working life. Most parents wouldn't easily have £75k spare to even it out.

This scenario is not the same as granny giving dgc £50 for passing their gcses, ffs!

Agree its crazy. Older one passes exams - gives them some money - distributes same amount to younger ones. Younger ones then pass their exams - gives them some money - distributes same to the older ones. Nuts. Where does it end.

Not sure if I’m missing something or this is another bizarre thread I can’t get my head around.

Lots of parents and grandparents give their kids significant presents or money at 18 or 21. They don’t give younger siblings the equivalent out of fairness or just in case they drop dead.

Madness.

That was my original point

You’re right everything over 23K does have to be used for care. That’s exactly the point that I was making. Two children have had money each and the remaining three would need a further £75,000 for them each to have an equal share, so there would be insufficient funds left; if the vast majority of the money down to the threshold has been used for care. You also have to bear in mind the potential worry about the money that has already been gifted. Could it be considered deprivation of assets?

The limit for paying for care is 23k something.
Anything over that they can use.

My goodness should not say old death should say old dear,how do I delete?!?

Did she give it to them recently or when they hit a certain age (like 21)? Frankly there's such a gap there 25 to 18) the 18 shouldn't be resentful really.
To be honest she should really put the remaining £75k in a trust for the younger three. If she has stipulated (and you don't know whether she has or hasn't) £25k each and she lives another ten years the £25k is going to be worth a lot less by then.
But it's up to her. Presumably your husband will inherit something when the time comes? If it turns out she didn't specify it in her will he could use some of that to gift to the younger kids?

Eh? How was I nagging her?!

Like most of these things the back story can be important and unless you know every single detail then it is hard to be judgemental.

Say the MIL has two children, the OPs husband and another sibling, and will split her will between them.

If the MIL gifts the grandchildren money before the will, then the sibling gets less, whereas if the OP makes up the money to the grandchildren out of her husbands share after the will then effectively the two branches of the family get a more equal share. In the current scenario one branch of the family has already secured 25k more than the other one if that isn't accounted for, as the MIL now has 50K less to leave in the will that would have been evenly divided between the siblings.

How fair you think this all is depends on how you think inheritances should be split between your direct desendants.

The older ones are in a completely different life stage to the younger ones right now, though. Who knows, as the others grow up she may gift something to them, too. If she doesn't, she doesn't. It's up to her at the end of the day, it's her money.

If it was me, though, I think I would have had to put money in trust for the younger ones to make it fair - so long as she could actually afford to do this, of course.

Your 9 year old might not get anything for 15 years or something, by which time £25k will be the equivalent of £16K in today’s money meaning they’ll get significantly less that the older ones. That does seem unfair.

If care is required it's very possible all her assets will be used up.

What makes you think they will provide care for free so as to leave assets for family?

but possibly not the 75k needed to keep things fair so I’d be uncomfortable too if these were my children.