to think that dependant children have rights over and above those of bereaved adults

[Northernlurker]

I have been reading this article and whilst I agree that the MOD doesn't appear to give guidance re the rights of dependants and they should, I am taken aback by the stubborn attitude of both mothers in the case towards their grandchildrens' rights. Surely any reasonable person would agree that a baby, left without a father to help support them at all, has a far greater entitlement to benefit from an estate and a child's mother has a far greater need to house herself and her child than the mother of a grown up child needs to benefit from the estate?
I think blaming the MOD is a bit of a red herring really.

I totally agree the children should be provided for. A house & £5000 in an account for the child is laughable when you consider the cost of bringing up a child.

But 20 year old Young men are naive & he probably had no idea at the time.

As a mother I would give every last penny to provide for my children. If it when they have children im sure I would feel the same.

What a mess, this is why good wills and legal advice are important once kids are involved.

As the mother of four boys I would want any grandchildren to be provided for should anything happen to my son's, money won't bring them back but I would want their children if there were any to be provided for.

YANBU, I thought the same when I read this a few minutes ago.

I know grief sometimes does un-funny things to people but you'd think someone close would gently point out to the mothers that their grandchildren would have been their sons' responsibility in a way that they would not have been.

And yes the MoD should make sure soldiers have considered everything thoroughly before making a will.

A huge mess for sure- but I'm really taken aback that these mothers appear to begrudge the inheritance going to their own poor grandchildren who are now fatherless.

One of them apparently bought a car, a house and motor home with the money she got, knowing full well her son had a child?! If that were me I would not need to be 'dragged' to court, I would be contacting the mother myself and making sure she got the money, regardless of what was in the will- I would like to think my son would want his child cared for no matter what.

And they are now both not in contact with the grandchildren- their own flesh and blood...how sad.

I wonder if part of the problem is some of the money being labelled 'compensation'. As bereaved mothers, these ladies doubtless feel the government should compensate them for their loss. The fact is though that the money will only go so far and dependant children must come first.

I find it strange that what I assume was life assurance was paid to the estate in the first place. I would expect the MOD to have set these things up under discretionary trust, making it exempt from income tax, but also giving the duty of choosing the beneficiaries to a trustee. On this basis a trustee would have a duty to consider who the next of kin was and establishing any dependents. In these cases money would nearly always go to the children.

It's shocking that they seem so stubborn and set on the money being theirs and what their sons would have wanted.

The grandchildren are their own flesh and blood and a link to their deceased child.

Money does funny things to people.

"the MoD should make sure soldiers have considered everything thoroughly before making a will"

It is hard to see how the MoD could know that a soldiers girlfriend was pregnant at the time they made the wills.

The Life Insurance looks to have been extra purchased by the soldier and probably nothing to do with the MoD, the compensation is paid to the estate and the executor should settle all the legalities before dispersing the money.

Money does funny things to people.

Losing your barely adult son to a bomb in a far away country probably does "funny" things to people too.

From what I've seen people really care about doing what the deceased wanted.

These very young men seem to have intended their mothers to have most of the money.

They weren't really Dads yet when they made these decisions. Their mothers weren't Grannies.

It's all so unbearably painful - so much loss and pain.

I think the MOD probably does need to do more work to explain to their young people what it will really mean if they die.

The young lad wanting his mum to buy his girlfriend a house and put £5K in an account for a baby he had never met is just heartbreaking - the decisions of someone barely more than a child, with no clue of reality :(

Does anyone have a link to the story, please?

The link is in the OP.

Bathtime - yes I agree but the fact is that these men had fathered children and those children have needs which everybody should agree come first. Even if the fathers themselves had not perceived that.

Wow, if any of my sons had children and thought it was acceptable to behave that way financially towards their child I would think I had done such a shockingly piss poor job of parenting that I apsolutly would not be contributing towards an article basically about attempting to collude with shafting my grandchildren. I would not be thinking oh poor me having to give them money.

I would be hoping nobody ever found out and doing all I could to rectify the matter

I'm sorry but all soldiers (even the young green ones) know that if you are not married your girlfriend and any children get nothing if not named in will. That's why u usually see a spate of marriages when a regiment ect is deployed so their gf and children are looked after.

It's explained to them will they are writing these wills in prep for deployment. Probably most of them unfortunately trust their mums to sort it

It is disgusting that these grandmothers are not giving a thought for their grandchildren.

There also is a great distrust in forces when gf happen to get pregnant by accident - that they have tried to trap the guy, they want free house ect.

It must be so hard to lose a young son in war, I refuse to judge these women too harshly. However, sadly they've sacrificed a relationship with their grandchildren, their one last link to their dead children, and I guess that's the price they will pay for all of this. In years to come, I can only imagine that will be their biggest regret, not the money.

cdtaylornats of course the MoD wouldn't know if a soldier's gf was pregnant, but they should have the experience to ask the question and to lay on the line how much it costs to bring up a child and the difficulties faced by lone - not to mention young - parents in the jobs market.

i would never ever judge a mother who has lost their very young child.

Samcro these aren't very young children, they are adults with adult responsibilities towards their own children, which for reasons of probably poor advice mixed with naïveté, they have failed to fulfil.

I agree with that.
they should have got good and proper advice.
as all wills should be adhered too.

But a will which would leave dependant children penniless whilst an adult benefits is never going to be upheld in law.

I am truly sorry for their losses. That must be unspeakable. But it doesn't explain, excuse or justify the ruthlessness towards the last remaining link to their lost sons, in their grandchildren. Just can't get my head around the idea that if one of my children died, and all I had left was a grandchild, I'd want the insurance paid out to me for a motor home, and not to the grandchild so their mother could house, feed and educate them adequately.

I agree that blaming the MOD is a red herring.

And of course dependants can (and should) apply to have a will varied.

The MOD paid out (correctly) to the nominated beneficiaries (it doesn't need to be in trust, these are tax free government payments). The executors and the families then need to sort it out, just as those left behind after any death need to sort it out.

And point of detail: "they want free house ect" - service accommodation isn't free, and you can only get quarters if you are married/CP, or as a single parent.

I'm the mother of a son of 25. If he were killed I would be utterly devastated.

But, I'm not financially dependant on him and money wouldn't bring him back. The idea that I should benefit from insurance money on his death to the exclusion of a fatherless child is obscene.