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?

Seems fair to me...She has split it in half between her kids.

This thread leaves me wondering how many Mners have written wills like this in practice. Is any of you have left money directly to your DGCs, how have you allocated it?

I don't have GC yet, only dependant children. So haven't particularly though this issue through, Eddie except that it is how my kids inherited from my first MIL. Unfair will things are irritating, bibs, I agree. Such a shame when people fall out over them. She left 50% of estate to trust for children of DS1. 50% of estate to trust for children of DS2. forgot exact wording but that was the result. We each had 2 children but it meant, when we went on to have a third, that it wasn't taking anything away from the cousins, like it would have of one big pot for the whole of that generation IYSWIM? Just from our older children! I didn't feel like this was unfair: I appreciated that she wanted any more grandchildren to also benefit on equal terms with their siblings.

The bit to bibbety was meant to be at the bottom BtW.

I agree with you op, i've never heard of it being done that way, i have quite a few grandkids and i'd certainly make sure they all got the same. So what if one child has more children than another, it's unfair that one grandchild should benefit more than the others because of that. The money isn't being given to the children, it's to the grandchildren, so one shouldn't favour the other. I always treat mine equally, and always will.

If DW, DS and I go in the same smash half of what we have goes to my DSis and the other half is divided between DE's two brothers which we both think is fair.

This is absolutly the fairest way imo. Essentially they could simply leave 50% of their estate to each of their children (which no one would bat an eyelid at) those parents would then leave their respective estates to their children (obviously spilt between however many children they have!) All the grandparents are doing is cutting out the middlemen of the inheritance going via the parents

Seems fair to me...She has split it in half between her kids.
But she hasn't, this is for her grandkids. I'd presume there was a separate provision for her kids.

somerville, the trust owns the money not our sons.

In any case, I think it is highly unlikely that either of them will marry. Marriage is a good deal for most women, less so for many men.

This is the reason why I think it's only fair to leave inheritance money equally between your children. It's then up to them whether they want to pass it down to their children.

Indeed Talcott207 and depending on the amounts there is the potential for a huge saving in Inheritance Tax too.

If someone has the benefit of a trust and the needs of their spouse can't be met (after divorce or death) from other assets then a court will order trustees to release funds for said spouse, no? (In all cases I've heard of, at least; I'm not a solicitor.)

I can remember a thread about a year ago where someone was complaining that it wasn't fair that their child was receiving a small inheritance because there was lots of offspring from sibling that had been provided for. The op didn't think it was fair that her DB had lots of DC and she had only the one, therefore the biggest chunk went on DBs kids.

Practically everyone on the thread thought that was fair, so i can't understand why everyone's now saying this is fair. Its a total reversal.

Somerville as I said upthread, I doubt if our DSs will marry. In any case both of them have substantial houses, so it is unlikely that the trusts would be called upon. It is up to the DSs what they do with their own money, we are simply not keen on our own assets ending up with children to whom neither we or nor our sons have any connection.

I literally don't know a single solitary person in the whole world now or in the past who hasn't left money equally, either between dc or between gc.

My grandmother split her will three ways between me, my brother and my cousin. Cousin reckoned he should have been left half and me a quarter and brother a quarter.

I think what my grandmother did is fairer than your situation but someone is always unhappy.

In any case, I think it is highly unlikely that either of them will marry. Marriage is a good deal for most women, less so for many men.

Statistically the opposite is true. Men benefit in terms of life expectancy, happiness and wealth.

In terms of the inheritance it depends if you consider Grandchildren to be people in their own right, or extensions of their parents. If they're people with whom you have an independent relationship. If they're just extensions of their parents just give to their parents, if they are individual people them split it fairly between them.

It is of course up to the grandparents but for myself, if I was in their place I would prefer to leave equal shares for all - it just seems fairer that way.

I wouldn't have a will any other way. Perfectly fair and if someone benefits more through being an only child then so be it.

You never met my father Hully.

TrickyD - marriage is a good 'deal' for many women?! Really, what a cynical way of looking at marriage.

OP - I would be hurt if this had happened to me and there was no apparent reason for one individual to be favoured. (I'm assuming here that none of you have fallen out with GPs or whatever - if I hadn't got along with someone I wouldn't be surprised if it all went to a cats' home, but if I thought that we all seemed to be equally loved, I'd wonder why.)

Is there any reason why the singleton grand-child should have been left more? (e.g., are they particularly close to their grandparents? do they have a precarious financial situation? etc), If not I can't guess why this has happened.

However, as others have said, it's their money and they can do what they like with it.

To all of those who are saying, "This is how it would work out if there wasn't a will." - - that has no bearing. There IS a will, and GPs have chosen to give more to one than to others. It may be that they have made provision for their children as well as their grand-children - none of us know. It's the fact that there is a will and there is a disparity in the bequests that has caused the problem.

I personally would be more hurt than anything else - I would wonder why they seemed to care more for my cousin than for me.

It does not matter if the OP thinks the split is fair or not. Her grandparents feel that it is fair, and it is their feelings that count about the distribution of their money.

And, as the OP seems more upset about the money than the relative dying I think she probably had the right idea. How awful.