To be fighting about FIL's will

[Angelofod]

So my husband's father died last year rather unexpectedly. Anyway fast forward to sorting out his will and he has put in there that there is 10k to be split between his grandchildren. When he died we were expecting our first child, he already had 3 grandchildren from his eldest son, one of which has been adopted by another family and the other 2 are in care. I'm not saying they shouldn't get their share but do you think my child should too? FIL knew we were expecting and he was so excited to be having a grandchild he would actually see and be able to have a connection with! We were all utterly devastated when he passed. The only issue is the person sorting the will out doesn't think my child should receive anything as he wasn't born when the will was made or before his grandfather died. I just can't help but think FIL would have definitely wanted our child to have a share, the will still hasn't been sorted and my child has been born now and is still a grandchild.

Angelofod The executor needs to take legal advice. My unborn child did indeed inherit directly in a similar situation. Ignore anyone on here who isn’t a lawyer because their opinion is irrelevant and look up en ventre sa mère.

I agree that the OP doesn't sound grabby. I think she's trying to get for her child what she knows her fil intended them to get.

People write their wills not appreciating that if they die unexpectedly, their poor choice of phrase will make a huge difference between what they want to happen to their money and what legally can happen to it. Bil needs to investigate the legality of giving money to the adopted child but I suspect the fil would want that child to benefit too.

Op, please take legal advise.

A friend had this exact situation with her DHs grandmas will. It was a large estate, with set %s left to children, Grandchildren (incl her DH) and GGC.

Friend was about half way through pregnancy with her second. He definitely was included in the split to GGC - she just had to prove (via Drs letter) that she was past x weeks (think about 20) at time of death. I don’t think any GGC were named, but he was definitely included as she has talked openly about his inheritance.

So it is not true that the baby has to be born to be included, he wasn’t in my friends case

But surely the dc adopted out is no longer legally a part of the fil's family?
Your bil is a twunt.. Your dc is entitled to a share imo. The adopted dc is not.

Sharing is caring!

🤮

Very wise words from bundles

not willing to bend the rules for the OPs child

Oh ffs! When will people listen? An executor can’t ‘bend the rules’. They have a legal responsibility to abide by the wording of the will or risk prosecution.

I don't know legally but I would assume, if he only said "grandchildren" then your child should be included as they are a grandchild

then your child should be included as they are a grandchild

They weren’t a grandchild when the OP’s FiL died though, that’s the point. The only children the will legally alludes to is the two children currently in care, with ‘legally’ being the only term that matters in the whole thing.

MIL’s will has a clause that states any living grandchildren and any grandchildren born or adopted within 10 years of the creation (or whatever the right word is) of this will.

Just an update for anyone who is following this thread and wants to know outcomes, we have found out the solicitors that FIL created the will with who hold a copy of the will too. We have been advised to contact them as to the exact wording and legal position of our son, as beneficiaries named in the will we have a right to know the full details of it.

Have you never even seen the will?

We saw it shortly after FIL death but did not take it all in as it stated for BIL to take charge of it. We only saw it briefly

DS2 was born a couple of weeks after my Grandad died. He didn't inherit because the will specified grandchildren "alive at the time of my death". I think generally a child isn't considered to be alive until they are actually born.

Why should my child suffer just because he's not in care

Umm your child is "suffering" because it hasn't been born yet. Dont take this out on the other children.

Also where would this end? What if Your SIL dicovers that she is a few weeks pregnant? Would those babies be entitled too?

No one here can give you answers, go find a lawyer

This is ridiculous. Of course your child should be included.

The legal rights and wrongs aside here, I can’t believe that people actually think that a child who didn’t actually exist at the time of death should be more entitled to a share of an inheritance than one who has been through the trauma of the care and adoption system.

Seriously? While legally the child who has been adopted is no longer a member of this family, do people really think it appropriate for the family to wash their hands of that child because they were removed from presumably abusive and/or neglectful parents and placed for adoption? If they came looking in eighteen years should that family then say “no sorry you’re not family we don’t want to know you.”?

If a child is placed for adoption would people expect the grandfather who presumably knew that child, to say “I have two grandchildren,” rather than three?

@Theinnervoice I think the OP has made it quite clear that she wishes things were different for the children in care/adopted but is simply looking for some answers about her own child who she presumably also cares about.

OP you are doing the right thing by seeking legal advice at least then you can hopefully put the problems with BIL aside as it seems like he needs support of his own!

I was talking in general though. There are posts on this thread from other posters which actually state that the OP’s child is entitled, the adopted child is not. I mean even as an opinion from anyone how crass is that?

Adopted children surely have to be only entitled to automatically inherit from one set of parents. To say they can’t inherit from the biological family sounds bad, but it would be even worse surely to say they couldn’t inherit from the new, adoptive family.

While legally the child who has been adopted is no longer a member of this family, do people really think it appropriate for the family to wash their hands of that child because they were removed from presumably abusive and/or neglectful parents and placed for adoption?

Inheritance isn’t about what is morally right though. It’s about legalities.

Unless the grandfather named the adopted child, and put in a clause about unborn grandchildren, then only the two children in care are entitled to inherit.

That’s just how adoption works otherwise if you maintain a legal right to inheritance from birth family then you can’t create one with the adopted family and cause a world of pain that way.

You need to consult a solicitor, you won't get a definitive answer on here. I'm assuming your DH and his siblings will share the bulk of his DF's estate? In which case, DH should receive sufficient to put a similar sum away for your child.

Your BIL does not decide this. A lawyer does

@SilverySurfer There are 6 children to share just over 17000, so just under 3000 each, is a lot to us but not much in the grand scheme of things