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?

So the money has really been split between the children, not the GC. Half each to your father and his sister.

I can see where the GPs are coming from - it was your dad's choice to have 4 dc, and I have seen other people split inheritance like this.

Oops, posted too early.

But YANBU - I think each GC should get the same. it's just going to lead to resentment and bad feeling otherwise.

We have 2 DSs.

One has three kids,the other none. I was unsure how to divide our assets. I asked for advice on MN , and was told fairly unanimously that DS2's family planning choices were not my responsibility, assets should be spilt equally between DSs.

Now DS1 and DP are expecting a chid themselves so it is evening up.

We are in the process of changing our wills and setting up trusts, with the aim of protecting 'The bloodline'. This is to stop any future wife remarrying, should a DS die, and walking off with family money.

We have made a point of showing our wills to DSs so that there will be no surprises for them. They are happy with the even split and other smaller provisions, jewellery etc. it is up to them how they use their inheritance to benefit their children

Openness and transparency seem the way to go if situations that breed resentment, like the OP's, are to be avoided.

YogaDrone

It's fair because the grand parents decide to divide per child, even the amount set up for grand children. Doing differently would mean they give more to one child, and its family, than the other. That does not sound fair to me at all.

Yes - I can see why this does not seem right to you. I know my Dad left £x to each of his grandchildren and then the remainder was divided between us (his children). That does seem the fairest way.

However, it is what it is and there is nothing you can do about it.

Our wills divide the money equally between our children, with a request that if, in their judgement it would be appropriate, they ensure that their children get some benefit.

But if there's an inheritance for the grandchildren surely the grandchildren should be seen as individual entities rather than extensions of their parents? If you want to split between children then split between the children - don't split the grandchildren inheritance on a per child basis.

By the way, we made our choices because one of the beneficiaries of my Dad's will spent it all on drugs - we wanted to leave our children the choice to do what seems right for their individual children when the time comes.

I can see your point, and everyone else's who is saying it's fair. It depends how it has been worded. If that certain amount of money had been specifically put aside for the grandparents, ie, for my grandchildren I leave £1000, then it's a bit unfair. If the money was left to the children and specified to be shared out amongst their children then it makes more sense, ie for my two children I leave an additional £500 for each child each to split amongst their children, my grandchildren.

I thought this was the standard way. My inlaws have done it this way and my parents have too.

The number of grandchildren isn't a red herring! If the grandparents want to leave money to their grandchildren why don't they leave them an equal amount?

I agree with you op.

I think it's an odd (unfair) way of doing things.

I also think you sound slightly ungrateful. They could equally just leave it all the charity.

We are in the process of changing our wills and setting up trusts, with the aim of protecting 'The bloodline'. This is to stop any future wife remarrying, should a DS die, and walking off with family money.

Sorry, do you mean you've deliberately put measures in place to stop your (hypothetical?) DiLs inheriting money from their late husband?!

mambono5

No. If they just gave to their children it would be fair to divide equally but they're not, they're giving money directly to their grandchildren and not sharing equally. The Grandchildren didn't have any say in how many siblings they had.

We had a similar situation and I also felt it was unfair on the kids and it should've been evenly split between all grandkids. But all you can do is see it as money they wouldn't have had at all otherwise and be happy.

You don't sound at all ungrateful op.

You are just wondering why you're being penalised for having siblings. I think it's odd too. Most people do say £1000 each grandchild.

MargaretCavendish

I thought the same, that would be appalling - My money is DH's money too, if I died how awful if he suddenly had all that money gone - particularly with children to look after. I knew a man in a similar situation his wife died while they had young kids. Her parents left money only to the GC without giving him access to it. It meant the children grew up in poverty as he struggled massively financially.

CripsSandwiches

I still disagree. I would never give more to one of my children than the other, directly or indirectly. I wouldn't make any judgement or anything about their lifestyle. It's not fair to give more to one side because the woman is able or willing to have more children.

Surely grandparents have a relationship with each of their grandchildren as individuals? It's not like you carefully spend two hours with your son's one son, then half an hour each with your daughter's four daughters.

I agree that money left through the parents gets split proportionally to the parents, but I think it's odd to leave money directly to the children and do so unequally.

I say that is fair. I've got more children than sis and would never expect to have more of a share of any inheritance that was to be passed to children. It was our choice to have more.
Any anyway it's not your choice or your money. So suck it up.

I have 2 DCs. My sibling has 4DSC who only live with them in holidays. I am in a much higher income bracket than my lovely sibling.

So what would be 'fair'? Should I get more because I happened to meet someone early enough to have children with? Or should she, as she has 4DSC, but my mother does not really know them?
Should she get more because I own a house and she does not?

There is no right answer, apart from the solution that my mother wants.

My mother has always stated that absolutely everything should be split down the middle between us. Frankly, I don't like talking to her about it, and she can leave it to anyone really. It's her money.

YABU

I think that's a fairly standard way of splitting up the money, tbh.

I agree with you OP.

The grand children are being left a separate bequest independently of the children. It should be divided equally by 5, as there are 5 grandchildren. If more come along, then it would b divided by 6 or 7, or whatever. My grandparents did exactly this. 20% of the residual estate was left in equal shares to the grandchildren who were alive at their deaths. The other 80% was to be shared equally between the 2 children, my mother and my aunt.

We are in the process of changing our wills and setting up trusts, with the aim of protecting 'The bloodline'. This is to stop any future wife remarrying, should a DS die, and walking off with family money.

Hang on - so in the event that one of your DILs is widowed, you want to ensure that she has no access to any inheritance which has passed to your DS? What if she and your DS have had children?!

I would never give more to one of my children than the other, directly or indirectly. I wouldn't make any judgement or anything about their lifestyle.

But giving to a GC isn't indirectly giving to their parent it's the GC's money to do with as they choose. If you consider money going to a GC really money to their parents then why not just give directly to the parent? Obviously it's going to make the GC feel as though they're worth less because they're one of 2/3 rather than an only child.