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

AIBU to have said this? (will/inheritance related)

181 replies

Toblernone · 06/01/2018 02:48

(Have not been kept up by this, up anyway thanks to stomach bug!)

DParents visited a couple of days ago and were talking about redoing their will, as some bits are out of date and they want me to be executor so were asking my opinion. Size of estate will potentially (unless they need care) be decent but not huge (eg, definitely under IHT level) but would be a fairly life changing sum to me and DB. DB has chosen not to have kids and I have one teenage DD. No extended family apart from spouses.

DP's in passing asked my opinion on how to split the inheritance, suggesting either 2 ways between me and DB or 3 ways including my DD. I stressed it was up to them but that I felt it would be penalising DB for not having kids and would be best as 50-50. Since been told that was wrong by a close family friend as DD should have had input into what I suggested and I'd somehow 'done her over' by perhaps depriving her of money one day. I politely said it was my choice what opinion to give but was she at all right, especially as DD was in the room for this discussion and got no say in it or did I say the right thing?

OP posts:
SuperBeagle · 07/01/2018 20:18

50:50.

Grandchildren are not entitled to anything unless they are the child of a deceased child.

If the person chooses to leave something to their grandchildren, fine, but the grandchildren are not inherently entitled to anything and would not have a leg to stand on in court.

User11011 · 07/01/2018 20:29

You were right. Say if further down the line your DB does have children (unlikely I know as he has chosen not to but just 'what if') or if he later marries someone who has a child/children. That way you and your DB can give it to your kids as you chose.

My parents will is split equally between all 5 of us children. I have (almost) 2 children, the rest of my siblings have between 0 and 4 each. Makes no difference to our inheritance and I would think it unfair if it did.

manicmij · 07/01/2018 21:29

50/50 end off.

Maemae06 · 07/01/2018 22:01

50/50 is definitely the fairest way. Then with your share you decide to gift your own children is up to you. My mum gave me and my sister £500 each when my grandad died. He was her dad and she did not need to share anything with us. I hate talk like this though...I would rather my parents spent every penny they have while they can rather than leave me anything! Memories are worth far more!!!

Pebbles574 · 07/01/2018 22:17

Which end off, Manicmij?

jacks11 · 07/01/2018 22:42

I am one of executer of my parents will.

I have one sibling. Their estate is divided 50/50 between us. If either me or sibling pre-decease us then our share will be passed on to our DC (so my parents grandchildren). DB thinks this isn't fair as he has more DC than me, so his DC would get a smaller share than mine. Although the money will be held in trust until the children are a certain age- managed by trustees.

Personally, I think the 50-50 split is fairest (or whatever is equal, depending on the number of siblings- so 1/3 or 1/4 and so on), all things being equal (i.e. no family rift/no contact or similar). That said, it is totally up to the individual to make their will according to their wishes.

That said, my parents have set up a trust for DB's share in any case, the reasons for this are complex. Each situation is different and sometimes you can't please everyone so you have to do what you think is best.

jacks11 · 07/01/2018 22:44

pre-decease us? Predecease them (i.e if either my brother or I pre-decease our parents)!

MamaBishop89 · 07/01/2018 22:52

When my husbands pop passed away the two siblings got an equal portion and the 4 kids split the other portion.
This would be the similar situation as yours as our aunt did not have kids and my fil had 4 kids.

I would ask your brother if there were a chance if her were ever going to have kids. And put aside the same $$ as for your daughter and any other kids your having. And if the day comes that he does not have kids then that sum goes to him.

Maybe that’s an option

DoubleAces · 07/01/2018 23:00

Might as well just gift to the children then MamaBishop, result is the same.

TheHolidayArmadillo · 08/01/2018 11:21

SuperBeagle

But (unless you're in Scotland), the dead person's children aren't entitled to anything either. If you were unmarried you could legitimately leave everything to the Cat's Protection if you wanted.

It is entirely up to the individual who they leave what to.

Kt12x · 08/01/2018 16:59

I totally agree with u!
My mil has split everything 3 ways, bil, us and the grandchildren, only us have grandchildren and bil won’t have any. I felt awkward about it and said we would be happy to give them some out of our half. Bil well off and insists he doesn’t need any so wasn’t bothered about his 3rd! So as everyone is happy it’s doesnt matter apparently!
But I agree it should be 50:50

carefreeeee · 08/01/2018 17:16

One set of my grandparents left everything to their children.
The other set left most to their children but also a percentage to each grandchild.

So my parents who are already very well off (and are in their sixties) got a lot of money.

I really appreciated the sum I inherited from my grandparents on one side, because I get that now when I'm in a position to be buying my first house.

I will inherit from my own parents eventually, but I may well be too old to need it by then. Obviously I'd rather they live as long as possible!

It's fair to split 50:50, but there may be an argument for giving something directly to the grandchild as well simply because it's more use to them.

I do find it slightly annoying that my parents own a huge house outright whilst I'm in a rented damp hole, and they have loads of money in the bank that they will never need and is just going to get devalued as they age. I have enough to live on, and they would never see me starve, but also it would never occur to them to help out with buying a house or anything like that.

Because of the fact that wealth is concentrated in the baby boomers hands, there could be an argument for passing over that generation in wills so that the generation below can benefit.

allertse · 08/01/2018 18:02

I don't think that 50-50 is the "only" fair way, I think there can be multiple ways that are fair.

Say I have two children. One of them has one child, one has three.
personally I think the fairest way is to split a majority of my estate between my two children, with a smaller but substantial part split equally between the grandchildren.
Assuming that the grandchildren will inherit eventually, I don't see why one should get 3x more than the others by virtue of being an only child. I want to treat them as equally as possible, the same as I do with my children.

Lucisky · 08/01/2018 18:34

Carefreee, you come over as a bit entitled I'm afraid. Living in damp holes while your parents live in comfort is nothing new. I was doing this in the early eighties, it's just the way life goes. Look on it as character forming.

WitchesHatRim · 08/01/2018 19:58

Because of the fact that wealth is concentrated in the baby boomers hands

Here we go again......

Sorry but I agree with pp. You come across as entitled. Your parents are your GP children. End of.

GnomeDePlume · 09/01/2018 13:07

I'm torn. The older generation's property gains are being paid for by the current mortgage and rent payments. The gains haven't appeared out of nowhere.

Lucisky · 09/01/2018 16:05

GnomeDePlume - please explain your thinking on your statement, because it doesn't make sense to me. For example, we own our house ('a property gain' according to you) because we worked and scrimped for 25 years to pay a mortgage, how, and in what way, was that subsidised?

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 09/01/2018 16:12

So what do you suggest happens GnomeDePlume?

TheCowWentMoo · 09/01/2018 17:06

The only person who can decide is your parents. No one is entitled to their parents money and no one is entitled to their grandparents money. It's their money and up to them who inherits. I generally think it should be split evenly amongst each generation (so all dc get similar all dgc get similar etc) but it really is up to the them.

I don't see how it's unfair to split between you, your dc and your db, you and your dc are completely separate people and you and your db would still have the same amount of money? I think it would have been better if they had asked your brother not you how he felt. Dps grandma bypassed his parents generation and just gave to the grandchildren, her reasoning was that all her children were comfortable and she had given them plenty over the years but her GC needed money the most. I think it's whatever the person who's will it is wants and maybe depended on circumstances, e.g. how comfortable their dc are and how old their gc are.

Bluelady · 09/01/2018 17:42

I'm perplexed too, Lucisky. We've paid our mortgage off, no idea how anyone can conclude how anyone but us has done this. My inheritance is being used to provide an interest free loan for my son to buy a place of his own. He'd never get a mortgage and I know my parents would have whole heartedly have approved.

MotheringMilly · 09/01/2018 18:01

GnomeDePlume the older generations property gains are an asset and aren't of any use until they are liquidized. Many won't benefit unless they downsize and why should they unless their children are really struggling.

GnomeDePlume · 09/01/2018 20:33

House price inflation has significantly outstripped wage inflation. As the discussion is about inheritance it is reasonable to assume that the estate will be realised in cash. That cash comes from current house buyers with their mortgages. I did not suggest that mortgages were subsidised.

The current generation of new entrants to the housing market may well look askance at significant inheritances going to their parents' generation.

I am not sure that there is a solution except by doing as Bluelady has done by making the inheritance available to the next generation. It doesnt solve the wider problem but does alleviate the problem for individuals.

Original poster
Toblernone · 09/01/2018 21:26

Presumably then though GnomeDePlume the parents that are the ones inheriting should look after their children and pass it down if they're sorted already, so it depends on the circumstances. I'm certainly nowhere near baby boomer age, that's my DPs, and I'm not even on the housing ladder yet, starting to worry I'll never make it on (due to low income as DH has health problems) and there are many people in the same boat so the younger generation may have to look at us taking longer to get sorted and settle in for a wait for their leg up Sad

OP posts:
GnomeDePlume · 09/01/2018 21:53

Toblernone that is what I understood from Bluelady's post.

There is going to be a further change to the situation as more families find that care home fees eat into any potential inheritances.

IMO that possibility should be considered when writing a will. Care home costs can burn their way through assets very quickly.

Museumland · 04/11/2018 19:37

I think 50/50 is the fairest way. If a cash specific amount is left to the DD or any other grand child that doesn't take into account other eventualities- for example if the estate is depleated the cash item could be disproportionate to the value of the estate.

Swipe left for the next trending thread