Inheritance: equal or by need?

[HitPeakScandi]

Just wondering what the MN jury say on this.

My mil is doing her will. All of dh's siblings - but not dh - have received money to allow them all to purchase apartments out right. One of his siblings is older, middle aged, single, no kids, always worked in a steady job but has a disability; the others are younger and have made choices which have meant they don't earn much (that's fine but it's not because they couldn't have more).

MIL has arranged her will so that everything will be divided equally AFTER taking into account the money she has given them for the apartments.

So now we've heard from MIL that the two siblings who are struggling have approached her and asked that she basically make the will equal now, ignoring the money they've been given. Their argument is that they need the money more than DH.

Now, the reason we have money is because I sadly lost both my parents relatively early and I inherited signficant amounts from them and I have a job with a decent income. So financially, yes, we are better off and in a comfortable position although it's really all money from me rather than DH (I don't care but he does).

And before my parents died, DH and I struggled for many years when starting out juggling rent then mortgage and raising a young family - something that dh's younger siblings have been spared, they've never had to pay a mortgage or rent!

DH feels a bit betrayed that his siblings want him to lose out.

So should a will be based on equality or need? Should it take into account money given while alive? Is DH U to be a annoyed with his siblings for thinking 'he has enough'? Or is he grabby for wanting his share?

Then when she declined, Guildford, it was the perfect opportunity to say to him “and don’t forget that the money I already gave you will come off your inheritance”

I think in the case of substantial cash or property gifts it would help to have that recorded somewhere official, and state what bearing it has on the splitting of the will.

Cash gifts ARE important. They are scrutinised if the estate is liable for inheritance tax, and the gifts are taxed if applicable and the tax comes out the estate.

If the government views cash gifts as important then so should the person receiving it, and recognise their lucky position. To then minimise that gift when looking at the way the inheritance will be divided out, simply because they want a bigger share, is disgusting.

My PIL are splitting everything equally between their DC down to the last penny taking into account who has had lump sums previously over the years and calculating the inflation rate to balance it, for instance DH had a lump sum when we bought our first property many moons ago, BIL (much younger) has just had a similar cash injection but got more as the inflation was considered.

When my DP go it will be an almighty mess, my siblings and I will share it equally but there will be no taking into account the handouts that they have had over they years. I am hoping that we have a fair few years until we have to deal with this and that they will have spent most of the money as they want before then. As an aside none of us need the money as we are all in our 40/50's with houses and good jobs.

Equal.

Without a doubt.

Equal after previous gifts are accounted for.

The problem with splitting on the basis of need is that needs change between the time a will is written and the time a will is executed.

Equal unless in the case of disability or additional needs.

DP is one of 4.

3 struggle with a mortgage for years. SIL rents, her choice.. her DP doesn't work and chose to be SAHD. The child is now 12.

MIL was thinking of leaving the family home to SIL, since "she needs it more".

So she'd get the lot, and the other 3 continue to pay their mortgage.

Fair?

Thankfully FIL has more sense.

Equal.

In her shoes I would consider that the other siblings have had theirs early.

No problem with the older one with a disability - they will probably leave their apartment, in the end, to the nieces and nephews - your kids.

If she has nothing left but her apartment, that may well disappear in care fees, anyway.

The other two siblings have a cheek.

She should tell them her will is her own affair and to mind their own business.

Would the other two siblings be asking this if the position was reversed and they had not received monies previously but your DP had? I guess not. They would be actively encouraging MIL's plans!

I would normally say equal but in these circumstances I would say disinherit the two grabby entitled kids who haven’t even got the good grace to wait for their mum to dies before arguing over her money

So equality is a fair way of doing things. That's what MIL wants very much too. My parents did this as well, quite scrupulously, and MIL often refers to how they did it as a good example of the right way. Poor thing, she's just trying to do the best by everyone and be fair to everyone.

Quick update. MIL spent w/end with one of the siblings, the most difficult one. Apparently he and his wife sat there with MIL, trying to figure out how much inheritance I received from my parents and how much I earned to prove to MIL why DH doesn't need to receive any money!

MIL was so horrified she came back home yesterday and went straight to her solicitor and has signed the updated will! She then called us to say never to discuss anything to do with our finances with BIL and his wife as they are not happy for us and that the less they know about our situation the better :(

I should add that there have been no family squabbles or arguments. All the conversations have been through/with MIL. She's very close with DH and literally tells him EVERYTHING. I think in this case it would have been preferable to perhaps not have known this about his other siblings and what happened. Siblings don't actually know that DH knows!

Anyway, she's signed the will now so hopefully this will be an end to things and we won't need to think about it for a long long time. I know DH would absolutely help out his siblings (and I'd support him in it), as would his sibling with disability who's also able to do so, if they were stuck but not for lifestyle choices as that's not fair. They've usually been good and close siblings which is why this is all quite a surprise and why I wanted to ask here if this is normal! I never had anything like this with my own sibling.

I think she should spend it all whilst she's alive! Nothing to argue over then!

When my Uncle (no kids) was alive he gave my brother money when they were struggling. He asked my brother give that portion of money to me and my other sibling out of his inheritance.

When he died last year my brother attempted to do this and me and my other sibling refused. I think I would have been pissed if he hadn't tried to uphold my uncles wishes but I didn't actually care about the money because I love my brother and we are all in the same ball park in terms of standard of living.

Splitting inheritance by need is all very noble but it is hard to have much sympathy for some people when their reduced circumstances are entirely down to multiple piss poor and irresponsible decisions in life. I have seen a few friends end up having huge rifts with their siblings when they have essentially been excluded from a will on the basis of them ‘doing alright’ in life while said siblings have squandered various large cash bail outs over the years. Yes it’s a bit grubby talking about inheritance but it’s human nature to feel a bit put out when your hard graft is ignored and someone else’s crap choices is rewarded.

I think your mil original plan is the right one.

My husband's brother is a multi millionaire (self made) with no children and almost zero chance of ever having any. We are ordinary, with three children. Inheritance would make a huge difference to our lives, and our children, and none to my husband's brother. We absolutely should not be prioritised over his brother.

She sounds like she is being abused slightly by the younger two siblings.

It sounds as if she wanted to make sure her eldest disabled child was ok so bought him an apartment and then the younger two insisted as well and are still taking money from them

It’s no ones business but your mils she’s not even dead and people are like vultures around her, completely disgusting behaviour. That been said I don’t understand why partners who are married into the family feel they have a say so in how the inheritance is divided up between their in laws children surely it’s nothing to do with you? You have no right to it even if your married, it’s protected and is your dh money if he wants to share it, that’s his decision.

I would never begrudge the fact my dp have helped my single brother who has been struggling and my other eldest brother has had help from his dw father but no help from my parents because it’s not been needed they got help elsewhere. Parents will help out dc in their lives the way they see fit in the same way you got help. It’s totally not my business what my parents do with their assets and how they divide it up.

These threads are pretty grim more so when the person isn’t even dead yet.

Hear hear dancing

Also to add there would be no way I would be involved in such discussions with my in laws, it’s not my business whatsoever and I would not feel comfortable dicussing it.

I don’t agree with dancing monkey because in my view deep down it’s not really about money at all but about fairness and feeling your dh has been treated equally.

I don’t get the impression OP is stoking up trouble but supporting her dh who feels betrayed not hard done by. That shows how deeply her dh feels about it and why it’s not about money at all. Your dh’s siblings are being completely underhand in my view OP and trying to manipulate his dm, which is appalling. It’s none of their business how much you earn or even worse, what your parents left you. For all they know you could divorce your dh, leaving him in a much worse financial position. No one knows what may happen in the future so equality is by far the fairest way.

MiL has talked about this with OP's DH. By the sound of it she was looking for reassurance that her original plan was fair. She's had that reassurance and cracked on with the original plan. Absolutely nothing wrong in my view.

We have discussed our wills with our DCs. They know what is in them and who the executors are. The DCs know where the wills and things like life insurance are kept and are free to look at them. When we die they will need these and at a distressing time I want everything to be as straightforward as possible.

I think it should be based on need so far as there is actual need (E. G. Leaving money in a trust to pay for grandchildren's school fees or for a disabled child). However bring poorer in itself doesn't create a need iyswim.

It should be split equally taking into account that those who received apartments have already had part of their share. DH's sister is rich because she married someone with rich parents who bought them a house in cash. It still wouldn't occur to me that MIL shouldn't treat her two children equally, even though SIL needs it less than we do. Imo the OP's inlaws are just being greedy.

I would split everything equally without a doubt, even if one of my children was a millionaire. It's the only right thing to do, IMO.

Personally equally.

Just to reiterate. I AM NOT INVOLVED in these discussions. MIL did ask me once what I thought and I told her the money is hers and she should do whatever she thinks is right.

DH does talk to me about this though (obviously - would be weird if he didn't) and I want to support him as best I can. My AIBU question was not about what I should do or even what DH should do but what people think about what is right in what is quite an emotional and moral minefield.

I was just wondering if perhaps his siblings had a point that the inheritance should be on need not on equality since I am sure that they are convinced that they are not being treated fairly. But I can see that this is considered not the case and that putting pressure on someone to change a will in their benefit to get more really isn't appropriate

I actually don't think there's anything wrong with having these discussions while person is still alive. At least now there is no doubt as to MIL"s desires and intentions and no one will have to second guess when she isn't around to ask! And anyway, its all a bit of a moot point because siblings' pressure caused her to actually put forward the appointment at the solicitor and make the changes to the will that she'd planning on doing so hopefully this will end all the discussions and I hope it won't impact DH's relationship with his siblings.