If you’re child free, who are you planning to leave everything to?

[TeapotCollection]

We’re early 50s and think we should write our Wills. We’ve got family but, to put it bluntly, no one who we want to have everything we’re working hard for. There probably won’t be a lot of cash because we’re going to spend it 😃 but very likely to be a property worth at least 200k (todays prices). We did think about selling our property to one those equity release companies but I was strongly advised against this on here

If we divide it between charities will the cost of processing the Will be horrendous?

Another thing is that we know certain family members will be expecting us to split everything between our nieces and nephews. Tough shit?

Going away for a couple of nights in a few hours so apologies in advance for being quiet over the weekend

It’s intent more than a specific timeframe. You are thinking of inheritance tax, which tapers off over 7 years.

but if OP sold her home and gifted proceeds to charity, where would she live?

In a rental? She's hardly going to be at the side of the road after selling a house.

Sure, but then, what’s the point in selling? She’ll need to keep back much of the capital to pay rent for a decade or two.

Plus possibility of landlords selling up, can’t adapt the rental with grab handles etc if walking gets harder.

Equity release is an option if you don't care about having anything left when you die and don't mind who benefits from your house.

I wouldn't be overly concerned long term, the chances that neither of you need care are remote! For a current will I would split, by the time you hit late 60's if you still have your health and need money to enjoy life do consider equity release, anything left will be spent on care no doubt

But I would suggest have a set amount for funeral costs put aside for now and consider a plan (with proper safeguards) once you get older so your relatives don't incur costs

I have gotten married and had children now so my will is null and void, but previously everything was left to my DB and his kids, DB was owner of my life insurance policy to cut out any red tape. I’m glad it’s no longer the case as I now realise the relationship was very one sided.

If I was doing it all again (pre children) I’d probably leave everything to a local community food bank run by volunteers who set it up during covid to initially help families on their estate who lost their jobs. They have been amazing the last few years delivering hot food to housebound residents offering hot food hubs, donating food and essentials to struggling families. I was made homeless as a child and have never forgotten how it felt, my parents were always to “proud” to accept hand outs, something as an adult I think is ridiculous. I have a lot of respect for the women who have set this up and know any money left to them would be used for it’s intended purpose.

Well I give a shit who my great grandparents were.

Legacy etc is important to me. One of the reasons to have DCs is to have someone to leave your worldly goods too.

You may, but they’re dead, so they don’t care one way or the other.

It’s important to you, fine, but that doesn’t mean it has to be at all relevant for anyone else. Not all of us care in the slightest about leaving our worldly good according to bloodline. It isn’t required 🤷🏻‍♀️

Please don't not write a will and die intestate. One of DH's cousins did this. H was the closest relation as a 1st cousin. He arranged an administrator and it was a nightmare. There turned out to be 24 heirs. Mainly 2nd and 3rd cousins. One 3rd cousin decided he should have been given more than his legally allotted amount and took DH to court. He lost of course but it cost us thousands defending the case. He was supposed to pay DH for all legal costs but he doesn't work, rents his flat and lives on benefits so no money. He now has a CCJ but doesn't care. Meanwhile DH spent more than his share of the inheritance defending a spurious court case and we're £10k out of pocket. Plus 5+ years of unbelievable stress.

Not all of us have a choice, some of us can’t have DC!

One of the reasons to have DCs is to have someone to leave your worldly goods too

this is up there as one of the most ridiculous things I’ve read on mumsnet, and that’s saying a lot.

Anyone who thinks ‘having someone to leave your worldly goods to’ is a good reason to have a child is someone whose judgement is so poor that they probably shouldn’t be having children.

‘Why did you have kids, mum?’

’Because I just couldn’t bear the thought of the Royal Doulton going to Dog’s Trust’

I've always been fascinated by Tudor wills, I leave my linen and plate to Mistress Theatre...
I have a very nice brushed cotton duvet cover along with one from Designers Guild that I'm very fond of.
As far as plate is concerned there's some late 90s Denby along with some 2020 Royal Doulton. The garden tools are what you want - Sneebor, will definitely outlast me.

So will her nibblings.

My older DB & SIL are childless. I couldn't care less who they leave their money to. DSILs dad is still going strong at 94 and my DPs both lived to late 80's so it could be a very long way off before they leave anything at all. It may well go to animal charities. But if DB dies before DSIL it might all go to her family. So absolutely no expectations that it will pass down this side of the family. I hope they just spend it all and enjoy it - unlike my parents who spent very little of what savings they had.

I don't understand this general undercurrent of animosity towards larger charities. Small local animal rescues are marvellous but we're not going to discover a cure for cancer, for example, without throwing large sums of cash at it.

Legacy etc is important to me. One of the reasons to have DCs is to have someone to leave your worldly goods too.

I really struggle to get my head around this way of thinking. I mean, I will almost certainly leave the bulk of my estate to my dd, but that certainly wasn't ever a reason for having her in the first place! Indeed, I can think of much easier ways to pass on my possessions than birthing and raising a human being!

If legacy is important to you, then all the more reason to leave some of your estate to charity, I'd have thought. Any money that my elderly relatives are kind enough to pass on to me will get subsumed into my general living expenses, cost of supporting dd through uni, maybe some home improvements, maybe a nice holiday or whatever. Extremely welcome and very much appreciated, but not necessarily any lasting impact.

Giving to a charity could make an incredible difference to people who desperately need it. I'm not saying that anyone should or shouldn't do this, but if legacy is important to you, surely that's your best option, provided that you choose the charity carefully?!

Id do equity release and splurge the money and buy a motorhome and travel or travel or just live life and enjoy. Or have a lovely nursing home if the time comes.

There's a general lack of understanding about how the charity sector operates and is funded in the UK. Very few charities are primarily supported by individual donors. Most get most of their money from corporate/ foundation donors, government commissioning of services and/or earned income- charging for services.

I can understand why individual donors want more visibility and "directness" with a donation - i.e. give a tenner to the donkey sanctuary and Freddie gets fed for a week, vs. throw it into a very big bucket of unrestricted donations for the larger charity, which may well go on admin costs.

Where I disagree is that the admin costs are unnecessary. I do have an issue with some fund-raising events run by larger charities that generate a very slim margin (10% in some cases). However, large charities have to spend money on central services like HR, IT, finance, or they can't operate. These employees tend to be less connected to the fact they work in a charity and therefore have to be paid market rate or close to. I do struggle to understand why people don't understand the necessity of these roles.

Where I struggle with small charities (esp animal charities) is that v few solve a problem (systemic change) rather than alleviate it constantly and to me, giving money to keep a 10 year old dog with behavioural issues that is v unlikely to be rehoused alive for its natural life is much more of a waste of money than large charity admin costs for an organisation that is able to successfully lobby for legislative change. But charity is personal and as much about the donor as the recipient.

Your poor children. Having to empty a dead relatives house of their worldly goods with the expectation you would keep everything as a shine to them is flicking horrible.

Agreed. There is a common assumption that "admin costs" are necessarily bad and that charities shouldn't incur them, but it is impossible for most charities to operate professionally without incurring such costs. And larger charities will inevitably have higher admin costs because of the greater breadth and complexity of what they do, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're inefficient.

Sadly, I think a lot of people think that the people working for charities should do it for free. I can only assume that those people have had very little experience of trying to manage volunteers!

Eachother
My brother
Best friends kids

I don’t have a problem with funding larger charities operating costs, but I do have a problem with the way they go about things in such a cut-throat manner when included in badly drafted wills. I remember one case when an older woman had been left a specific amount by her parents (the value of their house) with “the rest to go to” whatever charity it was. The Will was drafted in 1980 and the house had significantly increased in value. If I remember correctly the charity got over a million quid and the daughter was left her original amount, which, due to inflation was now only a pittance.