Leave House to brother or DCs

[HouseDilema]

I've name changed for this as I don't want to be identified, post may be a little vague because of that.

DH and I own 2 properties, one is a very nice House in a lovely area just outside of London, the other is a cottage by the beach that we rent out throughout the year.

I have a brother, who's 15 years my junior and who has ASD and DCs ranging from 15-25.

Until recently DH and I had our Will set up so that DB would inherit the cottage and DCs the family home to sell off and split, however we've now changed our minds for a number of reasons, including the governments current attitude towards the disabled.

We want to give DB our family home for the rest of his life, he's currently in his 30s with the mental age of an early teen, he can't live alone and he'll need care for the rest of his life. To fund the help that he will need, we have decided to keep the cottage for him as well so that he'll always have a income.

The new Will states that now we shall be leaving DB both properties and once he passes, the DCs can inherit both.

DH and I thought the best approach was to tell everyone and make our position very clear. It didn't go down very well, especially not with our eldest who's only 10 years younger then DB.

I don't think I am being unreasonable but I can see that their attitude really hurt DH. I understand the current housing climate but they are not the ones with the greater need.

I think the op is not looking at it from her dc's pov . She is asking for her dc and potentially her dgc to look after her db whilst receiving no recompense.

I think it looks like a previous thread where the op is married to a farmer who lives in a house on the farm which is owned by his parents and getting paid nothing but he will inherit it all when they die.

But why should DCs automatically get anything? And I can see no expectation that DCs will care for their uncle. Indeed the idea is to give him an income so he can pay for carers.

Why should they get nothing. As it stands if op and her dh die tomorrow the ops db will end up in the family home alone whilst his 15 year old niece / nephew will end up in care.

If you bring up your dc in a certain lifestyle then whip it all away and give everything to a relative who will because of his circumstances it wouldn't do him any favours as the op would be leaving her db in a more vulnerable position than if she left him nothing or just enough for a small flat.
Why would a single person need a big house. It is almost like putting a price on his head. There are some very unscrupulous people out here.

Why didn't the ops parents set up a plan for there child.

OP has already said if they die when DCs are children, they will get financial help. Although they might still end up in care. Money makes no difference to that.

So from the children's point of view it is ok for a child to go onto care or get a little financial help to buy a small flat but not ok for db who would get more assistance if he isn't getting huge houses given to him.

Sorry, I haven't managed to get through the whole thread either, but I feel a need to jump in, because I am not only in vaguely similar situation (both sibling and child with SN) but also recently rewrote our will to reflect this.

First of all, I'd suggest that those of you attacking OP for being "cruel" to her own DC go do something useful like write your own wills. Intestacy laws in this country will surprise you by not doing what you want, even if there are no SN people around you. Plus, you really should appoint guardians if you have under-age children. And I'm sort of shocked by how many of you think OP should feel no need to help DB; do none of you love your siblings, or understand the complexities of guilt and responsibility that build over decades in families with vulnerable members?

Anyway, on the practical points, OP, here is what we have learned from multiple will-writings over the years, much of which you probably know:

1. Don't write a will now trying to anticipate all situations that could ever develop 40 years from now. Write a will that reflects current needs, eg of under-age dependants AND DB, and plan to rewrite that will every time the picture changes, for eg when your DC or eldest DC reach adulthood, if you have another child, if one spouse dies, perhaps when DC have DC or otherwise run into trouble, etc. This has the further advantage that the will becomes harder to challenge in court if it was written in view of actual circumstances.

1. Don't leave assets, eg a house, in ways that mean they can't be sold. They may well not be suitable for DB or DC to live in, they may have more cash value in some years than others, etc etc. Leave houses so that they can be sold and the money itself inherited.

1. Here in England we have something called a Disabled Person's Trust. It serves three useful goals: it will protect any inheritance of DB or similar from other people who try to take advantage; it will protect his rights to benefits; and it will potentially cut inheritance tax. Go look on the MENCAP website and give them a call: in London they run seminars on this, around the country they have lists of solicitors with experience in this specific area. You will have to appoint at least one trustee, who can be MENCAP, or a solicitors firm, or a relative.

1. Don't forget that after the writing of the will, you should make any Life Insurance pay out directly to the trust as designated benificiary. Also tell other potential gift-givers like family members know about the existence of the DPT so that they, too, pay into the trust.

1. With the will and the trust, you can write Letters of Intent, either one for each document or just one going with the trust, where you explain what you are trying to achieve. This isn't legally binding, but if there is a legal challenge, courts will take it into account. And you can use it to remind other loved ones that the money doesn't mean you don't love them.

1. But do not underestimate how much even adults do tend to associate inheritance with love. I had a dear aunt die some years ago who left all her money to some cousins and none to me. Even though we had talked about it, and I felt clearly that I neither needed it nor felt entitled, and that she wanted to leave it that way so it could be used to restore a property that they were definitely going to inherit, it STILL annoys me how THEY assume their inheriting meant she loved them more than me. Even though I KNOW that's not true.

1. Also, assuming you don't fall under a bus tomorrow, don't assume there will be any money left by the time you and DH die. Realistically, we generally work, what, 40-45 years. From that, if we live to 90 and retire at 65, we have to fund not only our current lives and those of our DC and SN relatives, but also at least 25 years of our OWN retirement, including what (I speak from experience of ILs and DF) will probably be many years of expensive illness and inflation.

Anyway, good on you, OP, for thinking about all this now. As I said to the rest of you, go write your own wills. I'm always amazed how many people, even with DCs, don't bother.

Is FAD a sock puppet?

I reckon so.

CHJR - if you go to the top of the page, and click on the little v next to Talk, you can select customise from the drop down menu, and hghlight all the OP's posts in each thread - it makes it easier to spot the OP's updates on a long thread like this.

My spidey senses gave a bit of a socky tingle, when I looked up FAD's posting history, I'm afraid.

You sound like an incredibly selfless person and your db sounds lucky to have you.
To appease both sides could you not request the (I assume) large family house be split between the dc and db so db can buy something that suits his needs and the children can use the inheritance to help them get a foot on the ladder? Would your db really have a need for a family home (I don't mean that in a nasty way) or would something smaller meet his needs better?

Are your parents alive? If so, are they able to make any provision for your brother?

I can see why you feel the need to provide for your brother but also why a 25 year old from the south east would currently feel their own life chances are being limited.

OOO SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius thank you thank you. I've been longing for a way to do that.

Sorry Francis I knew it was a bit condescending (to OP as well) but not everyone does know this stuff. And I really did just go through it all in May.

I do Agree that wills should cater for what you want to happen if you die tomorrow, and the next couple of years, not the 'twenty years down the line' scenario. Problem is, it is quite expensive to keep remaking them - but that's life, so to speak. Anyway op has made clear that provision has been made for 15 yr old,.

As an aside, prompted by cj's post, intestacy rules get a bad press but roughly speaking in some situations they are not a bad approximation of what you would want to happen. Having said that, everyone should make a will! But as a rough way of trying to come to an equitable solution where someone has not made a will, they are a good attempt! It does partly depend on whether property is jointly owned with a dpartner though.

Anyway, the key issue here for me would be that there are no guarantees inlife, and nothing to say dc will remain able to support themselves after dparents die. So i wouldn't be leaving them out myself, but obviously it is entirely up to op and dh. I'm not sure what the 'fine to leave nothing to the dc ' school's answer is to that point though.

I have a will as most of us do and I know intestacy law. I also know that it is not as simple as leaving money to a disabled relative as that can mean they do not then receive state benefits so there is definitely a case for not leaving money to them by the way - take specialist advice not just from a solicitor but someone who understands the benefits system.

It is probably likely however that msot of us will die at 78 - 88 and the brother will die before or when the poster does so the probability is that that generation will die together and then the children inherit.

Intersetingly Gina Miller (financial services lady) in the Money section of today's Sunday Times says her biggest financial priority is providing for her disabled child (from her first marriage) who is now in her late 20s after she is gone.

SDTG and others - FAD says in their first post here that they're a long-time lurker who registered in order to comment on this thread. So I guess that explains the lack of posting history.

Well, they can say that, but we have no proof, do we?

You can make as many wills as you like but if you have someone living in the house with you when you die then your children wont be able to sell untill that person moves out or dies.

Dmil's father passed away leaving everything to Dmil and her brother. Their df had at the point of his death at the age of 95 (he was very sprightly and had worked as a builder only retiring at the age of 90.) was living with his gf and her dc. She was in her 40s.
She refused to move out and the court said she could stay for the rest of her life. Dmil was in her 70s at the time. 20 years later the gf is still in the house.

All it takes is for Db to have someone move in and the ops children and dgc will never see any inheritance.

What I don't understand is why the op think her db needs a family house. When their is no one around go help him. And giving him everything means he will not have any support

Why does giving him less mean he will have more support?

The situation I'm in is that my DB is disabled, my mam has left the family home to both of us but i can't access my share until DB passes. He'll never work so this is his only way of having a home. Even if I get into financial difficulty after mam has passes I still can't access my share of my inheritance, and that's just how it is, he'd never be able to rent or buy a home so this is the only security he'll ever have. My children will inherit I probably won't but that's life mam could have opted to leave everything to charity.
The OP is doing the best she can, and i'm sorry but the amount of times i've read on here people being that an inheritance isn't a right and just because the money is there it's greedy to expect to get it.

Why does giving him less mean he will have more support?

My understanding is that some of the help available is means-tested. If he has assets of a high enough value - like two houses - he'll be ineligible.

I can see your thinking, but if you are in England and things stay as they are now, your brother having income from the cottage would just mean he had to pay more towards any care he is deemed to need by social services and would also affect some benefits. Also, does he have mental capacity to be a landlord if he were to keep renting out the cottage? If not, who would actually manage this on his behalf?

Mandi the difference is that your mother left you both the property. And that's right as you're both her children. She didn't arrange to let your uncle occupy the house. The state provides well for the people I know who need supported living.