Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to split DS1's money with DS2?

137 replies

AbelMancwitch · 18/08/2016 13:30

I've been mulling this over for nearly 10 years, so I thought it was probably time to get some outside perspective on this!

My grandad died 10 years ago when my DS1 was a few months old, and left DS1 £1000. I put this in an account for him for when he is older and have continued to save his birthday money in there (until he got old enough to want to spend it! This is an account that he doesn't know about and I'll be keeping this money back for him until he's an adult rather than letting him fritter it all on polos and tat now)

Two years later DS2 came along. Same thing, I've saved any money he's come into, but obviously what with one thing and another he has about £1200 less than DS1. This is partly because my "family" favoured DS1 over DS2, and didn't treat them fairly. (I am now NC with them, partly because of their behaviour to DS2.)

Perhaps because of this I have a heightened awareness of what I perceive to be unfairness, and I can't help feeling that DS2 has financially dipped out. I'm wondering whether I should split the £1k between both boys to try to even things out a bit? I imagine if I'd had children 2 years earlier, my grandad would have left money to both of them. However, if the money was left just to DS1, is it wrong to give half of it to DS2?

I literally can't get my head around what is the fairest thing to do. It also doesn't seem fair to try to boost DS2's money by saving for him, because if we save for one, we need to save for both, and then it will never even out anyway. I don't know if this is just one of those times where DS2 will learn that sometimes life isn't fair due to circumstance, or whether in 10 years time this will cause grief if DS2 feels like he is being treated differently - sibling rivalry is already a big deal. Sad

See, I'm tying myself in knots. There's no urgent need to resolve this, as they won't get it for another 10 years or so, but I'd like to make a conclusive decision, rather than spend then next 10 years swinging from one side to the other on it. (I'm a Libran, can you tell?) Wink

So Mumsnet, what do you think?

OP posts:
stonecircle · 18/08/2016 23:45

DH's grandma left £2k to our eldest two dc's. They were only 1 and 3 at the time so don't know about it. Dc3 came along after her death.

The 2k was worth about 4K last time I looked. I can honestly say it never occurred to me not to split the money 3 ways when the time comes. I'm certain that's what great grandma would have wanted. Why wouldn't she?

NeedsAsockamnesty · 19/08/2016 00:02

I know I'm talking larger sums of money but I now own my mothers and my sisters house because of something very like this.

If it was given to a person that is not you then it is not yours to give away. It belongs to the person it was given to and your job is to look after it until they can and not misuse it.

Icequeen01 · 19/08/2016 00:13

I don't think you can legally touch your DS1's money. My DS received a large 5 figure sum of money from my DF when he died. Because I was estranged from my DF he didn't leave any specific instructions in his will regarding my DH and I being Trustees (my son was 14 when he received his inheritance). The solicitors didn't feel it would be fair for them to be trustees as their yearly fees would negate any interest he accrued so they decided they would appoint us as Trustees. However, the money had to be put in my son's name with us shown as Trustees. We cannot touch his money as it is exactly that, his money. When he is 18 he will get access and we have to cross our fingers that all our advice about using it as a deposit on a house etc will have sunk in and he won the fritter it all away on x-box games!

sykadelic · 19/08/2016 00:14

I actually think that trying to "even it out" shows favouritism towards DS2.

DS1 was alive to inherit from Granddad. DS1 and DS2 will be alive to inherit from anyone who passes from this point on. What if you then have DS3? What if DS3 is born next year, surprise baby. Are you suddenly going to have to deposit the same amount into an account so he has the same right now?

My parents were always fair. We were given what we were given from others, birthdays etc, and the EXACT SAME AMOUNT was deposited by our parents weekly. It was also given to us at the same age (18 y/o), not at the same time.

Interest rates vary. So, if you give your DS1 his first, what if by the time DS2 is due to get his, his interest means his is higher? Then what? You take from him and give to DS1 to even it out? It's not fair.

Save all their own individual money, their individual interest, individual amounts, and stop treating them differently. Just because DS1 got an inheritance doesn't mean he should be penalized by having it halved or cheated by you personally giving your other son more money. YOU should be giving them exactly the same amount each time you deposit money into their accounts.

Again, to reiterate, you are being unfair to DS1 and appear to be overcompensating (or wanting to overcompensate) to DS2. It is what it is. As long as you can honestly say you gave them whatever money had been earmarked for them by other people, and when giving your own funds, depositing money for them, at the same time, in the same amount, then you're doing the right thing.

Sixweekstowait · 19/08/2016 00:22

I really don't buy into all this ' if it's in the will ' stuff. Talking generally ( not this specific case) deeds of variation are quite common and it could be said go absolutely against the expressed wishes in the will - they are usually done to lessen future inheritance tax. Secondly, some people write wills with the express motive of settling scores and provoking upset because they are just horrible people. But overall, lots of people just write stupid wills that don't think through very obvious scenarios such as the birth of future children. I hope the will in this case didn't mention the specific child - that will solve OPs problem

dowhatnow · 19/08/2016 00:43

My children will have exactly the same amount of money to help them start their adult life. I couldn't rest easy knowing that this would be any different. Why would you not be fair?

Their own savings, birthday/christmas money from about 10 years old onwards, they have complete control of. Money before that has been held by us and used in their best interests. I think it is in their best interests to be treated the same and have the same amount of money, regardless of that moneys origins.

hazeimcgee · 19/08/2016 00:54

Split. It isn't legally entailed in a will so legally there's no issue. Uylu know your grandad well enough to know he wouldn't have favouree ine over the other. I'd not worry about the interesr accrued too much and just put 500 in DS2

LightTripper · 19/08/2016 06:45

If PP are right that there is no legal issue then I would also just split it!

Mittensonastring · 19/08/2016 08:25

I wouldn't spilt it but when the time came I would point out that the 1k is there because only DS1 existed at the time.

DinosaursRoar · 19/08/2016 09:06

Another question OP - as well as your ds1, did you inherit anything from your grandad? If so, I would say you should be the one to compensate ds2 for not inheriting, if you have spend your inheritance, then if you can save for ds2 and not ds1 it would be the same effectively.

ThoraGruntwhistle · 19/08/2016 09:12

You already know that your grandad would have left money to however many children you had at the time, so split the money he left and put £500 each into their accounts. Any interest of birthday money belongs to each child separately.

Smidge001 · 19/08/2016 09:17

Split it. No question. Your grandfather would have left something to both your children if they'd both been around.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page