Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

It's another inheritance one...

233 replies

Meudantte · 19/04/2026 18:17

Mary is in her 80s. Her DH died 15 years ago.

Two children
Jane in her 60s with two grown up children.
Sarah who died a decade ago in her 50s. Left a widower and two grown up children.

Before Sarah's death Mary's will basically divided the estate 50/50 between 2 daughters with a small amount for each grandchild eg £5-10k

Since Sarah's death, Mary has made changes. 50% will now go to Jane, the remaining 50% will be divided equally between the grandchildren. Sarah's husband will also like get something too.

Sarah's children have somehow found out about this (not sure how) and aren't happy. They feel like they're not being treated fairly as the original 50% for Sarah is no longer coming to that part of the family, but a smaller share, while Jane still gets 50%.

Jane will be using her share as an extra pension as she's not got a great one. Sarah would have likely done the same so these sums were never going to be passed directly to grandchildren but obviously they would benefit indirectly.

Obviously Mary can do what she likes with her money but this is causing friction and interested in perspectives. Inheritance seems to always cause feuds.

OP posts:
Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:43

Tigerswin · 19/04/2026 19:42

My MIL has told me that her and FIL’s wills are set up that only their own children will inherit. If any of their children pre-decease them, the other children’s share will increase. She says it is her job to look after her children not her grandchildren.

That's a bit harsh not to leave GC anything at all in that circumstance.

OP posts:
DomesticArchaeologist · 19/04/2026 19:42

Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:41

Exactly. People should read whole thread before commenting. Also the fact that one of Sarah's children barely in touch with Mary and makes little effort vs Jane who does everything for her. This is why wills exist so people can decide what they do with their own money not just have it determined by a standard

Show quote history

Why are you asking for opinions only to get cross when someone disagrees with you?

Tigerswin · 19/04/2026 19:42

My MIL has told me that her and FIL’s wills are set up that only their own children will inherit. If any of their children pre-decease them, the other children’s share will increase. She says it is her job to look after her children not her grandchildren.

Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:41

Northermcharn · 19/04/2026 19:39

They're not losing 'her share'. Her share was never theirs. Her share, was hers. And now she's dead so the mother (GM) has left more to her remaining child, to look after her in Her older age, whilst giving the GC decent sized equal shares.. Perfectly reasonable.

Show quote history

Exactly. People should read whole thread before commenting. Also the fact that one of Sarah's children barely in touch with Mary and makes little effort vs Jane who does everything for her. This is why wills exist so people can decide what they do with their own money not just have it determined by a standard

OP posts:
Northermcharn · 19/04/2026 19:39

tiptoethrutulips · 19/04/2026 19:36

So Sarah's children not only lost their mother while they were still fairly young, but now they're also losing her share of their grandparents' inheritance on her side.

Pretty shit, frankly.

They're not losing 'her share'. Her share was never theirs. Her share, was hers. And now she's dead so the mother (GM) has left more to her remaining child, to look after her in Her older age, whilst giving the GC decent sized equal shares.. Perfectly reasonable.

Uberaddict · 19/04/2026 19:38

I was in this exact situation although I was the grandchild who had lost a parent just before my grandparents died. My remaining grandparent changed their will to look after surviving children - one who wasnt very well but also vile. My dead parents ‘third’ was given to my remaining uncles so they directly benefitted from my parents untimely death. All grandchildren got a token amount but my cousins still had both their parents who then passed that money on to them. They also got use of a flat in a seaside location which my dead parents ‘share ‘ bought them. I am on good terms with them still and have never raised it but it was highly upsetting

JudgeJ · 19/04/2026 19:38

Dimms · 19/04/2026 18:24

Arguing over an inheritance when the person isn’t even dead is so grubby.

It's not possible to make changes when the person's died though! Jane's children seem to be getting more than Sarah's children, they're ultimately getting Jane's share and half of Sarah's share which is grossly unfair. Someone needs to talk to Mary and ask her why she is disadvantaging the children who have lost their mother, it's almost like she's punishing them. I wonder if this was Jane's influence on her mother?

tiptoethrutulips · 19/04/2026 19:36

So Sarah's children not only lost their mother while they were still fairly young, but now they're also losing her share of their grandparents' inheritance on her side.

Pretty shit, frankly.

Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:34

Anyahyacinth · 19/04/2026 19:31

Is Jane doing a lot of caring for her Mum...that would make a difference I think. I'd want to give thanks for that in my will. I think it's usual for GC to get a lesser amount but unusual for that amount to be unequal. Is there more contact with some and not others ?

Jane does everything for Mary. Checks in almost daily, weekly invites round for dinner, mini breaks together, all Christmas and Easter. Sarah's children - one keeps in touch more regularly, the other much less so and rarely do meals/ Christmas together

OP posts:
childoftkty · 19/04/2026 19:32

Comedycook · 19/04/2026 18:24

My mother died before my grandmother. My grandmothers will saw her estate split between her three children equally. As my mother was dead, her share was divided between me and my sister. I lost track of who's who in your op ..but I believe what happened in my situation was the correct thing to do

Same. My DH died after his dad and before his mum. The original will shared it equally between DH and his siblings. When his mum died his brother and sister got 1/3 each and DH 1/3 was shared between our kids.

100% the correct decision in my opinion and I would do exactly the same in that position

Anyahyacinth · 19/04/2026 19:31

Is Jane doing a lot of caring for her Mum...that would make a difference I think. I'd want to give thanks for that in my will. I think it's usual for GC to get a lesser amount but unusual for that amount to be unequal. Is there more contact with some and not others ?

Throwntothewolves · 19/04/2026 19:30

Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:19

The husband isn't great with money. If he got his hands on a larger share I'm not sure the grandchildren would ever benefit from it. He'll get something though

Show quote history

Probably best to keep his share to a minimum then. Maybe he and the grandchildren should all get £5-£10k and the rest go to Jane for her financial security in retirement.

Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:30

ajandjjmum · 19/04/2026 19:27

I think not discussing is the biggest mistake - at lease your reasoning can be explained.

I have actually changed my mind in the process of reading this thread. At first I thought Sarah's half should go directly to her DC, but infact, it is very likely that Jane's DC won't see anything of their mother's half.

Maybe a fair way would be for Jane receive the 50% so that she gets a better retirement, her children get 10% each as there is no guarantee they will receive any inheritance from their mother, and Sarah's DC receive 15% each.

Maybe?

Yes given Jane's half will be a pension top up, I don't think they will see much of it Jane's is likely to live to 80s/ 90s

OP posts:
ThisIsTheAge · 19/04/2026 19:28

In my family my DGM had 3 children and 12 grandchildren. When her DD died, her third was split between her 4DC plus their own share. I thought that was fair.

ajandjjmum · 19/04/2026 19:27

I think not discussing is the biggest mistake - at lease your reasoning can be explained.

I have actually changed my mind in the process of reading this thread. At first I thought Sarah's half should go directly to her DC, but infact, it is very likely that Jane's DC won't see anything of their mother's half.

Maybe a fair way would be for Jane receive the 50% so that she gets a better retirement, her children get 10% each as there is no guarantee they will receive any inheritance from their mother, and Sarah's DC receive 15% each.

Maybe?

Badgerandfox227 · 19/04/2026 19:26

Surely Jane’s children will also benefit from Jane’s estate when she passes on, but potentially Sarah’s children won’t. For fairness I’d have continued with the original split in the Will. I imagine Sarah would be very upset with how things have turned out now that she’s not here to look after her own children, who now will be navigating their young adult lives without their mother.

Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:25

Miranda65 · 19/04/2026 19:22

This is just another example of why people should never discuss their Will with anyone (except their solicitor). It just brings out vile behaviour from the relatives.

If I were Mary, I'd be changing my Will and leaving the whole lot to the donkey sanctuary (other charities are available).

I think she's tempted to be honest. Money brings out worst in everyone.

This is fourth family feud I've seen over inheritance. It's been the same every time an older relative dies, someone not happy and kicks off

OP posts:
Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:23

Error404FucksNotFound · 19/04/2026 19:21

Or they could always just be grateful they are potentially getting anything and remember the person they're possibly going to be benefitting from isnt even dead yet.

Yes exactly. And considering they got £12k already off Mary's sister not long ago, who they weren't even close to...

OP posts:
Miranda65 · 19/04/2026 19:22

This is just another example of why people should never discuss their Will with anyone (except their solicitor). It just brings out vile behaviour from the relatives.

If I were Mary, I'd be changing my Will and leaving the whole lot to the donkey sanctuary (other charities are available).

Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:21

HermioneWeasley · 19/04/2026 19:16

I was in the 50/50 to the grandchildren camp until you explained Mary’s logic

she’s thought about it wants her money to help her remaining living child. That’s perfectly valid. Her logic that GCs have had a good start and have a long time to save for retirement is also valid. She wants to die knowing her daughter is taken care of. The GCs need to back off and not make her twilight years difficult.

Mary is a very practical person. In her eyes Jane has a greater need and is her only child so that's where largest share goes.

OP posts:
Error404FucksNotFound · 19/04/2026 19:21

Or they could always just be grateful they are potentially getting anything and remember the person they're possibly going to be benefitting from isnt even dead yet.

Advocodo · 19/04/2026 19:20

Meudantte · 19/04/2026 18:40

For context, Mary is most concerned with the welfare of her sole living child who is faced with a meagre retirement so she felt this was best approach for that reason.

All grandchildren already on housing ladder, no student loans so they are not in bad place financially.

I get what people are saying about what's fair on paper but these things are never that clear cut.

The usual way to do it is to leave the 50% to Sarah’s children.

DomesticArchaeologist · 19/04/2026 19:20

Comedycook · 19/04/2026 18:24

My mother died before my grandmother. My grandmothers will saw her estate split between her three children equally. As my mother was dead, her share was divided between me and my sister. I lost track of who's who in your op ..but I believe what happened in my situation was the correct thing to do

That’s how my father’s will was arranged and my mother’s is the same. I will sadly probably predecease her and she made it clear that any estate would be divided equally between my sibling/their descendants and me/my descendants.

Of course it’s nobody else’s business but it does seem the fairest way to do it. Losing your mother is bad enough as it is.

SpiceGirlsNeedAComeBack · 19/04/2026 19:19

Mary is correct. Sarah could of ended spending the lot and her dc ended up with nothing anyway! Sarahs dc are being greedy.

Original poster
Meudantte · 19/04/2026 19:19

Throwntothewolves · 19/04/2026 19:15

Perhaps Sarah's share could be split three ways between her husband and two children. That wouldn't really be fair on Jane's children though.
Another idea would be to split it 6 ways, with each child, Jane and Sarah's husband each getting a share.
Or stick to the original plan, but Sarah's husband gets her share and each grandchild gets a few thousand each. They could hardly say that wasn't fair as that was the original plan. If Sarah's husband chooses to give the money to their children, that's up to him.

Alternatively Mary could just decide the money grabbers among them are getting nothing and leave their share to charity.

The husband isn't great with money. If he got his hands on a larger share I'm not sure the grandchildren would ever benefit from it. He'll get something though

OP posts: