To think this inheritance split is not fair?

[Big8]

Ok, firstly I know I should be grateful to be getting anything from my grandparents. And I am. But I'm just wondering what the general consensus is on this...

Grandparents have 2 offspring.

Have set aside £x for grandchildren.

There are five grandchildren.

My father has 4. His sister has 1.

Now rather than the £x being split into 5 equal portions for us all

Half of £x goes to Aunts child.
Half goes to my dad's children to be divided between 4.

So say it's £1000

Cousin gets £500.

We get £125 each.

What do you think of that?

I haven't read the whole thread so this may have already been mentioned but if the will was made a while ago they may not have known how many grandchildren there would be at the time of death (you can't keep changing it every time a child is born) and so this was the fairest way otherwise there may have been a child who was left nothing

YABU

I think it's completely fair and the normal way of doing it. I would do the same and my parents are doing the same. BTW I have more DC than my siblings so it's my DC that get less. My parents are treating all families the same.

Actually, I do think it is fair.

I would have liked another DC, but instead chose to concentrate our time/effort and resources on just 2. This was a conscious decision and means that our DCs have been privately educated, funded through Uni and we will (most likely) be able to hep them substantially when they come to buy a home. We would have struggled to do this for 3 - so we made a sacrifice so they they could benefit IYSWIM?

Your Dfather chose to have many DCs, therefore his resources (in this instance the half of x) will be split between those DCs and therefore each DC (you and your siblings) will get less.

I see why you're peeved, but this is the downside of having many DCs.

It does seem odd though if this money was deliberately annexed for grandchildren, separate to the 'children' pot.

It would make sense if there wasn't a separate ringfenced pot for the children and the inheritance money was split 50/50 between the two children and in turn, that money (or a portion of it) was divided between the children's children. However, it seems that there is a separate pot for the children and for that not to be divided equally between 5 individuals, seems a bit off.

its unfair! but that's life isn't it really.

It's the fairest way for me!

This is exactly how I intend to do my will. No judgement or unfairness towards any of my own children, they all get the same.

Why should one family gets more because they have decided or they can have more children, or any children at all.

I know families where the money was divided between grand-kids. That did not go down too well either with the cousins who felt they had been penalised and received less because their uncle decided to have a big family.

Whatever you do, someone will be resentful. Divided by children and not grand-children is the fairest way I think.

I also think it's much more common for money to be divided between immediate children rather than grandchildren. In my case my relatively well of grandfather was extremely unfair - his 2 children who had no kids of their own got the biggest shares of the inheritance and my mum was effectively an after thought and was left a tiny amount. Grandchildren weren't mentioned so it was up to my mum is she wanted to give me some of hers (which she very kindly did). But it meant that my cousins got absolutely nothing because their dad (our grandfather's youngest son) died when they were 8 and 11

Wills and family

My grandfather's will spilt his children into two who never spoke to each other again.

My father spilt his money into percentages and so me and my 4 siblings got different amounts and my DB got the house even though he owned 4 other houses outright. My 1 D Sis lived in a council house and the other 3 of us had mortgages. No one fell out as this was what my father wanted even though it didn't make sense.

My DH's DF's will has never been put to probate and it is too late as he died in 1985. Don't know what happened to his money, lots of family strife anyway and DH doesn't speak to any of them.

We hope we have sorted out lastest will correctly as we have one adult child who cannot live on his own and wouldn't know what to do with a house and so it is going to the other adult child who has no children but so my DS can live in it for his lifetime. The problem comes when they both die as to what happens then to the house.

Er, it is fair. It is divided equally between their two children. That the two children went on to have one and four children respectively doesn't alter this.

This.

It's a case they were being fair to their two children.

Is all the money going to the grandchildren and not the children? If do, it's absolutely fair.
Or is it that, say, £2,000 is going to each of their two children, and then £500/£125 to each of the grandchildren as a gift? If so, well no, that's not really fair but just be grateful you've had anything.

Er, no it isn't! Read the op: "Have set aside x for grandchildren"

The grandchildren pot is not being divided equally between the grandchildren.

Wtf is fair about that? I am genuinely confused

I also agree that it's perfectly fair. They have divided the money equally between their children. The number of grandchildren is a red herring.

Have set aside x for grandchildren

but divided per child, so it makes total sense to me.

I would give £1000 to each of my child
then £1000 for the grandchildren - Each child getting £500 to be divided equally between their own kids.

So really, it means giving £1500 to each of your children. Can't be any fairer?

What would have happened if your aunt didn't have children would you expect all of it? I agree an amount has been fairly split between the two families. I would let it lie though in the grand scheme of it 500-125 isn't a lot to lose sleep over. My poor db inherited a house from his long term friend in his will but it hadn't been legal his family who he was NC got the property instead. In cases like that I feel sorry for someone as it's clearly the deceased wishes were not respected but you got to accept your GP wishes.

I guess they are thinking "we are leaving half (of the grandchildrens pot) to X's grandchildren, and half to Y's". It does allow for the number of grandchildren to increase without having to rewrite the will.

This whole thing comes down to whether it was a pot explicitly reserved for grandchildren or if it was the essential each of the GPs share that was essentially passed straight down. Option 1 = weird and unfair split, option 2 = really just the standard way of doing things, just the wording that's odd.

I think inheritances are thorny because it feels like a message from the deceased - one that can't be responded to or ever fully explained after their death. And if that message feels like 'you are less important' that can be upsetting.

I agree with this completely. And the MN mantra of "you are a greedy entitled pig if you even question an inheritance" is something that no one in real life really feels.

Whether this is fair or not depends on whether the children are getting an inheritance too.

So if the grandparents decided to skip a generation and leave everything to the grandchildren and nothing to their children, then I can see why they would effectively split it in two.

If the grandparents are leaving most of their property divided evenly between their two children and then have set aside a sum of money for grandchildren then I do think it is unfair that one grandchild gets half of that and the others have to split their half. It should be the same sum of money for all - if it is just a legacy and not a division of the entire estate.

If the inheritance goes direct to GC (rather than to the parents who can choose to give to their DC) then obviously it's not fair. People saying it is are kidding themselves.

YOU may have chosen (as I have) to have only one child so you can provide more for them (or for other reasons) but the children themselves have no say in how many siblings they have so why should one with more DBs or DSs get less money?

If they are all your DGC and you love them all equally it shouldn't make any different who their parents are.

On the other hand I wouldn't necessarily be "fair" in inheritance if I was a grandparent. I'd be more likely to give more money to a grandchild who I knew wouldn't get financial help from their parents (e.g. deposit for house). Some people also give more to a relative that's been particularly helpful and supportive to them in their old age.

If there are no other factors though I would agree it's not fair but then as you say you're not entitled to anything so nothing you can do about it and it's best forgotten.

technically it is correct way to allocate as each child is apportioned 50% and then children share so it is FAIR it is not however EQUAL

Surely the will could allow for growth in the quantity of grandchildren anyway? If it just said 'amount X to be divided equally between the grandchildren / surviving children of Milly, Molly & Mandy'. Do you have to name them?

My GPS would say yanbu as they left an equal share to each child and then split the rest equally between grandchildren even though my dad has more DC than his siblings. I think that is the fairest way too.

I'm surprised so many people do this. I wouldn't split my money (not that I'm likely to have much!) per "family unit" but per individual person. To me, it seems strange to think one grandchild would get less simply because they were born into a family with an extra sibling or two. If the money has been given in a separate pot e.g it's written like "John gets £5000 and Jane gets £5000 and I leave £3000 for my grandchildren" then, it wouldn't matter that John has 2 children and Jane has 1, all grandchildren will get the same.

That reminds me of the family of a work colleague, where the money was divided between children and grand children (can't remember how exactly), but completely ignoring the adopted grand-children. Only the blood related family members were on the will.

YANBU - grandchildren should be treated equally whoever their parents are.
My FIL have done exactly the same, but luckily all the DC have 2 kids so no difference in the split.
But there is nothing you can do, so take your share and be happy you got anything.

The OP says that there is a 50/50 split between the two children of the majority of the estate but also that there is an amount of money to be inherited directly by the grandchildren.

In that case fair and equal would be 20% of the grandchild amount to each of the 5 grandchildren.

I'm rather confused why people are saying that one grandchild getting 50% of this amount and the other four receiving only 12.5% each is equal?