To think that wills should be public documents

[GnomeDePlume]

before the testator dies.

Not a TAAT but so many times in RL and on MN I have heard about wills which do the opposite of what was intended or which make assumptions about who should/should not benefit from an estate.

If the will was public then any potentially interested person could read the will. If they dont agree with it then they can raise it with the testator.

As wills are often made many years before the testator dies clauses which seemed perfectly fair at the time can become out of date (eg leaving an estate to named grandchildren can seem like a nice thing until a late arriving grandchild is born and not being named is effectively disinherited).

The testator has to own the decisions they have made rather than leave the executor to deal with everything whe there is nothing they can do to change things.

For those who are interested (@ReleaseTheBats and @speakout that will be you two) DH and I have very simple wills, we leave our estate (such as it is, basically the house) to our DCs and if they predecease us to their children. Having heard some rather alarming stories from family friends our 'disaster clause' (what happens if we all die) our estate will be split between our respective brothers rather than left to a charity.

Difficult to value the estate as it depends on when we die (death in service benefit, life insurance etc will only be around for the next 10-15 years)

Satisfied?

As I said up thread, the manipulation/coercion/bullying go on anyway but they are done in secret and the results arent visible until it is too late for any sort of intervention.

Terrible idea. Why should any joe bloggs be able to find out how much money, jewellery, art etc someone has?

As I said up thread, the manipulation/coercion/bullying go on anyway but they are done in secret and the results arent visible until it is too late for any sort of intervention.

So your solution to this problem is to give people even more incentive to manipulate their relatives, and to make it easier for them to do so? Brilliant.

It would really be unforgivable to introduce a law that would mean that instead of enjoying their lives to the end, old people were forced to spend their final years fending off relatives who disagreed with their decisions about their wills and wanted to make them change their minds. Nobody would ever make a will again and it would just be left to the state to divy everyone’s inheritance up.

It's a bit pointless since as long as they retain capacity a person can change their will right up to the moment before they die.

There may be something to discuss about English inheritance law. Here someone is given what is very nearly an absolute right to choose what will happen to their property on their death. In other countries, such as France, there are fixed entitlements for surviving spouses and children and the will maker's freedom is restricted accordingly.

Millennial?

Boring ageism again we're not a hive mind.

A persons will is just that. Their will. What you or anyone else wants done with their money after death is not a democratic process and shouldn't be IMO.

If you are doing something with a financial gain arrangement then make a contract. It doesn't need to be public.

There can be many reasons for not wanting simple equality across a family. Wanting the 'threat' of a persons wishes to be laid out to public scrutiny in case you don't agree with them is totally just as much about bullying and coercion!

@TalbotAMan and in Scotland. I believe a third of your movable assets have to go to your children.

Has to be the stupidest idea ever!
You really cant see the problems this will cause??

As I said up thread, the manipulation/coercion/bullying go on anyway but they are done in secret and the results arent visible until it is too late for any sort of intervention

Perhaps all everyone's financial affairs should have to be public, by this logic. Why only wills?

Not public but I think if you appoint someone as executor you need to get their agreement to carry out what you have set out in your will, it can be really awkward sometimes if what is in the Will would cause upset in the family.

Dreadful idea.

We're contemplating leaving the bulk of our estate to DP's grandchild(ren). His son inherited a £100k trust fund at 21, and will get a large estate (in excess of £1m) from his mother, unless it all goes on care fees. He will quite possibly have a significant bequest from his maternal GF, too (GF has gifted large sums to his children, who are nicely set up, so we think it likely he will help his GC out). His GD's mum is living in a shitty 2-bed flat and we'd like to help her make a nicer environment for DGD to grow up in, or give DGD her own place, or pay for uni etc.

Why would we want the whole world to know that those are our plans, and risk alienating DP's DS?

For those who are interested (ReleaseTheBats and speakout that will be you two) DH and I have very simple wills, we leave our estate (such as it is, basically the house) to our DCs and if they predecease us to their children. Having heard some rather alarming stories from family friends our 'disaster clause' (what happens if we all die) our estate will be split between our respective brothers rather than left to a charity

Difficult to value the estate as it depends on when we die (death in service benefit, life insurance etc will only be around for the next 10-15 years)

Satisfied?

I wasn't interested in what's in your will, I was interested in your reaction to being asked, and yes, thank you, it was enlightening.

I think this is a really bad idea. Wills are private. I am an only child and my parents have mentioned that I more or less get the lot. I haven't dreamed of asking further as it's their money to use as they want and need. None of us want their wills out in the open where a particularly grabby cousin could get involved, though. DM has also had a falling out with her DSis that took a few years to repair. Not risking the financial details of a will blowing that open again.

Parents have a big age gap though, so I am slightly dreading the day that I may have to ask DM what happens if she gets remarried.

"and [he] will get a large estate (in excess of £1m) from his mother, unless it all goes on care fees"

Not necessarily though - the other possibility is that his mother could decide to leave it to her partner or spouse. (Or she could even not decide to do this, but the partner/spouse might then contest the will as a dependent - all depending on the circumstances.0 Not commenting on your will! - just making a general comment that I think people underprice the chance of a dparent leaving all to a new partner/spouse when that does seem quite a common occurrence (a thread on mn about that scenario at the moment, in fact)

As you can see I have no problem with being asked.

These are our second wills as the first were made when DCs were small. If something significant changes and we look to change our wills then I would expect to discuss the changes with DCs and explain our reasoning they would then be free to add their own thoughts. I would far rather do this than leave them with unanswered and unanswerable questions.

I am genuinely shocked - what a vulture. What a sad & depressing viewpoint. Nobody is entitled to anything. I guess people with this viewpoint are the people who give to receive.

I can imagine certain charities looking through public wills, then contacting people to convince them to leave them something.

As you can see I have no problem with being asked

Well, good for you. A lot of people would, though, and have complicated family set ups or estates. Or awful grasping family members. Or a lot of assets that they’d rather no one else knew about for various reasons, not least security.

You haven’t addressed most of the problems raised by many on this thread.

I would far rather do this than leave them with unanswered and unanswerable questions.

But there’s nothing stopping anyone from having these frank discussions if they want to. But what about those who don’t want to? You’re suggesting they should be forced to, because it benefits family members to have the opportunity to make their case for why they should inherit. But it clearly doesn’t benefit the testator, who is entitled to make whatever decisions they like about their own possessions, and to do so without fear of recrimination and anger from family who feel hard done by.

OP, please could you address the point of why you think only wills should be public and not all our financial affairs? Misunderstandings, mistakes, lies between people could be revealed if we had to make all our financial affairs public and people could tell others they should be doing things differently, as you suggest should happen with how people decide to write their will.

No, not only because of the possibility of relatives trying to manipulate the person who made the will, but because it could make them a target for robbery or theft, real or virtual (hacking or duping).

Terrible idea. My money is mine until the day I die and what I wish to do with it is my business, no-one else's.

If the suggestion that inheritance law should be changed similar to that in France (fixed entitlements), then I would want there to be provision not only for humans left behind but domestic pets.

Bad idea for all of the reasons listed by others. Also, someone may have a £1m house, but if they become very ill and go into care this can result in a great deal they have being used up on medical/other care.

Some people want to spend it whilst they can, which is what we always told my relations to do, so after a few years of expensive holidays the money pot may be much diminished.