Inheritance - has something shifted?

That would be quite unusual as it normally follows the blood line, unless it was explicitly stated otherwise in the will. So if the son or daughter died and had no children it would it would go any siblings and not to a spouse. Much inline with rules of dying intestate.

My mum is leaving everything to me and my sister. What we give her grandkids off our inheritance is up to us. None of the money will be left to my brother in law and I'm single but if I was married my husband wouldn't be left anything. I think that's normal.

I think we as women fall into the caretaking role but if u are fed up with it tell your husband to step up.

Inheritance normally goes to blood relatives ( or nuclear family). I wouldn't expect to inherit from anyone unless I am their closest blood relatives so other than my parents, siblings or aunt/ uncles with no kids if their own.

I was once told, only slightly tongue in cheek, that lawyers love trusts because they are nearly always possible to challenge, don’t cover every eventuality or become out of date as tax changes. All of this means work and fees for them.

I'm divorced and on my second marriage. First husband was emotionally horribly abusive and absolutely rinsed me financially. Never in my wildest nightmares did I think I would be in that position. And ex MIL, who loved me and treated me as a daughter, cut me off and never spoke to me again after the day I moved out and filed for divorce.

I have a son now and honestly, no matter what happens, whoever he marries will not be my daughter. If things go sour between them, I'd be concerned for my son, not her.

People get divorced a lot more often than they did in the 80s. Your in laws are wise. It's not a slight on you.

When setting up a trust, solicitors/lawyers/experts advise 'blood relatives' only, it is nothing to do with the relationship they have with you, they will have been told/advised to do this, and if they said 'no' would have been talked out of setting up a trust, amazed they weren't talked out of it regardless!

My in laws have given their LPA to a cousin who lives in another country that dh has never met. If you want to dissect it, it's got to be that's what they choose with all their facilities about them. Maybe my in laws don't trust their kids? Surely it comes down to that. They trust someone else more. Surprisingly we actually feel relieved any one has been set up at all. Whatever choices made on the LPA are not our business so that's that. The sooner we accept it, the faster we can park it. Yes there's a nervousness because the relative does not understand the nhs or socail care, but someone has thought this through. We have 0.00000 say. That's final. Which can be comforting. Just got to have faith they aren't stupid and it will be fine.

You won't and can't choose their home. It comes down to that. So let go of that stress. I hate this saying but "it's no longer your problem". Your relived from duty I guess? But appreciate LPA and will is different but still maybe it's all down to that trust

@NepoInlaw The love of money is the root of all evil. And people get cruel when others die.
20 odd years ago, my beloved grandparents died. The will was in favour of the grandchildren: four of us plus one who was no blood relation to them (cousins' half sibling).
Mum and her SIL were executors (Mum's DB died aged 26).
SIL and her children fought every single thing about it. Tried to bankrupt my parents, ran up huge legal bills against the estate. Worse than that:

• offered to help clear the house as DM was struggling. Their agenda was to collect anything of value. Did not help clear the house of anything apart from the "prime pieces". They had a list.
• took all the photo albums. DM asked them to mark with sticky notes the pictures to copy. They destroyed them and kept a ton of photos which were the only pictures DM had of her brother. Gave them back in tatters.
• "Banked" on their inheritance and then screamed and shouted that it wasn't what they were expecting. DGPs left £125k, to them that was a fortune. It did not stretch to the new house in Sussex, the dream wedding etc. Quite where they thought my very working class GPs were going to be worth millions I don't know (admittedly Grandad was a big fan of Arhtur Daley and Del Boy and gave off that vibe)

That sort of scenario would be quite unusual as it would normally have gone to any children of the son, or back to be shared amongst the other 4 children.

My parents left everything to my sister and I. I didn’t expect anything else. As my husband and I are happily married it will be spent on our family. We will leave everything to our two sons - what they then do with it is up to them. I wouldn’t consider anything else to be honest. I assume if they are happily married with their own children it will be used for their family. It’s not saying other people are not important just that I would expect it is used in a manner that works best in each person’s circumstances. Happily married, single or divorced, the money is split evenly amongst the children and more than likely used very differently in each scenario.

Invoice dh for any running around you have done for HIS family.

My DGM, a widow of many years, left her estate to her 5 children. One of her son’s had died before her so his share went to his widow. I thought that was the norm.

next time you are required to do something just say ‘ooh I think that’s a job for a blood relative’ and just keep repeating it every time you’re asked.
if your DH gets a third share will he view it as yours and his or his?

I would be hurt because it's not the money it's not being included or thought of for something small.

My ex's mother fully expected me to service birthdays, Christmas etc. No I helped once and it was a nightmare and he never helped me.

From now on your DH can do it all.

You’ll benefit through your husband, once he inherits it’s half yours anyway. My in-laws wills are bloodline but there is a clause to say that should my husband pre-decease his parents that money will pass to me rather than our children who will have to wait and inherit from their parents rather than their grandparents. I wouldn’t take it personally but as the saying goes, blood is thicker than water.

You’re seeing this as a snub but they likely didn’t see it that way. It might have just been what they thought was most natural. It also protects in case of divorce as they probably wouldn’t want money going to someone who’d left their child and gone with some one else.

I really don’t see an issue with this kind of set up unless there’s been some promise. It’s still a payment to family in a fair way. My mum however was like you and thought it was bad that my granddad’s will went to my father and if he was dead it’d go to his children.

No, not without the agreement of the other trustees. The money belongs to the trust not to the DH and the trust gets to decide when and how it is spent.

It's not a new thing. My deceased elderly FIL said many years ago that he wouldn't leave anything to his DIL as she wasn't 'family' - she'd been married to his son for nearly 50 years at this point and took care of him like a daughter!

Recently an elderly lady I know said she wasn't leaving anything to her son's stepchild as she's 'not blood relation', even though brought up as such. Cue big family fallout.

My in-laws original will was written in a way to prevent DILs and SILs from inheriting. They were worried that their child would die and the widow would inherit instead and then remarry and some random person would end up benefitting. I did see their point.

(They have now rewritten their will so only one of their children inherits...)

Sorry to say this, but nothing you do for anyone should lead you to expect to inherit anything. When my father passed away he left me his half of my parents home when my mother passed away 10 years later she left her half to my 4 children and left the solicitor as her executor, not what I expected but it taught me a lesson. Frustratingly, 3 years later we are still awaiting the probate!

My Mil's will is split between her 4 children , if any of her ( adult ) children die the will is then split equally between the remaining .
I have been her dil for nearly 30 years and do more for her than any of her children put together .
I've never felt ( nor expected ) to be included .

It’s entirely normal to leave inheritance to your own children and not to your children’s partners. If you have any grandchildren, it is entirely normal to leave bequests to them as well.

The only thing I’d expect to see left specifically to a non-blood relative, which could also be a friend, is a specific object that might have sentimental value or significance to that person.

Your whole undertone smacks of entitlement.

That doesn’t exclude that they would give you something at all.

I feel the real issue is the perceived slight. They may not die for a decade at least, and with care homes and the like, there may not be much left. But this feels like being treated as a semi-detached member of the family and they owe you an explanation for that, not the choice of who they leave money to. .

What I hope to God never happens to me is that I weaponise my will like so many of the older generation I know seem to. Every time we visit my parents they've changed their will to reflect their latest emotional fads and which grandchild is in or out of fashion. Anyway, as classic always-on-holiday Boomers, I'm just assuming they've gone for equity release anyway :)