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As wills are often made many years before the testator dies clauses which seemed perfectly fair at the time can become out of date (eg leaving an estate to named grandchildren can seem like a nice thing until a late arriving grandchild is born and not being named is effectively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

I think instead there should be more public education, with notices put out reminding people to check their wills every 10 years to make sure they still reflect what the testator wants. That would avoid at least some problems - e.g. people who leave it all to their named first grandchild but are still alive 10 years later when they now have 4 grandchildren and would actually want it split between all of them.

However I do know of one family where the parents had made a terribly unfair will basically leaving the most important things to their son and just giving monetary amounts to their 3 daughters. They genuinely thought this wouldn’t cause problems as they thought the girls would appreciate why it should stay with the only one who would keep the family surname. Luckily they mentioned this in passing to the kids one day and the daughters were understandably upset. The parents were very surprised by this reaction and changed their will to split things equally between the four. If they hadn’t happened to mention it in passing they could have caused a lot of upset and confusion when they passed. So maybe the moral of the story is that if you think you’ve made a will that everyone will be happy with, do make sure to let people know your plans in case there’s been a hiccup somewhere along the way!

It's not needed, OP. Such a thing as a "deed of variation" exists.

For example, my grandad passed away a few years ago. I was his only grandchild until 14 years ago and unfortunately I am the only grandchild named in the will as he hadn't changed it after d-sis was born.

So, my dad, who is the main beneficiary and the executor of the estate, simply spoke to me and my sister then a solicitor, had a deed of variation done and bingo, we both had the same inheritance.

Most families are reasonably normal people who are capable of fairly sorting these things out of there is an obviously unfair discrepancy.

Awful idea. I'd leave the lot to charity if a family member looked up what I intended to do. Grasping and greedy.

A person should be free to leave to whoever they like, they shouldn't ever have to justify their decision or be coerced into changing it.

Very sad how many see inheritance as a right even though they did nothing to earn the money themselves.

People change their wills anyway. It's not fixed.

But how much bullying/manipulation goes on where people are persuaded to take on care or other responsibilities (sometimes at cost to themselves) on the promise that they will be 'looked after when I'm gone' only to find that no such provision has been made?

This is why you shouldn't expect anything, do what you think is morally right and practically possible/the caring thing to do. One has children so they can go and have a nice life. You make your own life. Even if you cared for someone to a point, who knows what will happen. That way of thinking lies nothing but resentment. Just get on with your own life.

However I do know of one family where the parents had made a terribly unfair will basically leaving the most important things to their son and just giving monetary amounts to their 3 daughters. They genuinely thought this wouldn’t cause problems as they thought the girls would appreciate why it should stay with the only one who would keep the family surname. Luckily they mentioned this in passing to the kids one day and the daughters were understandably upset. The parents were very surprised by this reaction and changed their will to split things equally between the four. If they hadn’t happened to mention it in passing they could have caused a lot of upset and confusion when they passed.

That's really common still.

I know a case where the mother's will split everything into 4 equal shares - 1 each to her son and two grandsons and the 4th to be split between her daughter and 3 granddaughters. Done because it's tradition to leave everything to the males.
Even though that meant their daughter was less considerably less than her own son. It caused huge bad feeling and even though the will has now been recitified to leave it split between their son and daughter their relationship with their daughter will never be the same.

No idea why that post is hidden. Just echoing the poster who experienced a son being favoured over a daughter in inheritance. strange.

Quite ridiculous. I have a will and have recently updated it. Issues around potential difficulties in the family were discussed at length with the family and the solicitor with various scenarios. It is my business who I chose to share this info with, if anyone. NO ONE is entitled to inherit

People’s sense of entitlement to other people’s money never ceases to amaze me.

This idea that everyone should see the will and should be able to change it. WTF? I’ve told my parents I hope they spend their money. The very thought of manipulating them into leaving it to me horrifies me.

My DP has a situation in his family at the moment. Firstly, he grew up in foster care so his siblings are not bio siblings iyswim but some of the other FC were adopted. So the situation is this. Firstly, the bio children have been talking about how if one parent dies first the other one isn’t responsible enough not to spend the money so there won’t be any left for them. and secondly, they said that the will they believe is made out to leave part of the estate to each child, which they have assumed to mean just them. But they told DP that they’ll see him alright, but some of those adopted children? They’ll not be giving anything to them. I pointed out that if the children were adopted and the will states to “all my children” then they would automatically be included. They hadn’t factored in that one..... DP said he wants nothing to do with any of it.

Threads like this make me want to leave my whole estate to charity.

I can't get round my head around the fact that the OP is complaining about coercion and bullying, and yet this whole idea would literally coerce people (by expose/shame?) into doing what the rest of the family want.

Definitely not!! It also annoy's me people know how much you've sold your house for
that should be private .

I think posting wills will result in more financial abuse on elderly people than itll prevent.

I think it would also stop a lot of people making wills, which causes another whole set of problems

To try and answer some of the points made:

• Bullying/manipulation go on anyway it is just that the result is secret until after the testator dies which means the executors hands are tied
• Deed of variation is only possible if other beneficiaries agree. If the beneficiary which loses out is a charity then I have my doubts as to whether they would agree

• A lot of people write their will then never think about it again forgetting that in the mean time beneficiaries or executors may have come and gone.

- Most people write their wills with the intention of benefiting their nearest and dearest, a poorly written clause may have the opposite effect from that intended. (an example of this was a family friend who disinherited one of his DDs through a clause which meant well but had the opposite effect)

• Having the will accessible before it comes into use would give potential executors or beneficiaries the chance to discuss provisions with the testator. A chance to query unintentionally unfair clauses. Beneficiaries (or others) could ask questions while the testator is still around to answer them. Once the testator dies there is no chance to ask why a particular provision has been made. This can result in much hurt to those left behind.

- Charities already put pressure on people to get a mention in the will especially with people who haven’t already written wills. Not sure that having wills available to read in advance would make much difference to this. Might actually put some off if they knew that an individual had already made a will as they would be unlikely to change it. - Does having a will make a person more vulnerable to theft? If specific cash sums are mentioned then that would be a risk but I thought that most wills these days dont mention specific sums as the value of these sums can change (reduce) significantly over time. - Many wills contain specific bequests (eg jewellery to a daughter) but unless the bequest is of great significance (eg 'I leave the Rembrandt to George and the Monet to Mildred') then will it make the testator more vulnerable? Eventually a will becomes public anyway so the beneficiary of a bequest will be no more vulnerable to theft.

Most people write their wills with the intention of benefiting their nearest and dearest, a poorly written clause may have the opposite effect from that intended.

what makes you think the average joe offspring of a testator is going to be better placed at spotting an inadvertent unfairness than a solicitor?

Does having a will make a person more vulnerable to theft?

Can you really not see that the answer is yes? anyone who wanted to make a specific bequest would have to publically record what that bequest was. Jewellery, art, furniture, cars etc - all listed nicely for a burglar or conman to peruse. And what about those who set up trust funds for their beneficiaries? That’s a pretty good advertisement that you have assets that might be worth stealing.

unless the bequest is of great significance (eg 'I leave the Rembrandt to George and the Monet to Mildred') then will it make the testator more vulnerable?

If people only bothered stealing when the goods were as valuable as rembrandts there would be virtually no burglary in the U.K., and yet house breaking is a common crime. How do you figure that one out?

Having the will accessible before it comes into use would give potential executors or beneficiaries the chance to discuss provisions with the testator.

What if testators want to include unfair clauses? What it they prefer one child to another, or want to leave everything to a donkey sanctuary? It’s their right to do so. Should they be harangued for the remainder of their lives because of it?

Or what if they split their estate absolutely equally between all descendants but one entitled little narcissist things they deserve a bigger share? Are you really saying you want to actively encourage potential beneficiaries to argue with old and vulnerable people about who most deserves to benefit from their death?

You’re acting as though there’s some golden rule whereby all testators want to split everything totally equally between their descendants, only they keep falling prey to accidental mishaps in the wording. The reality is so much more complicated than that. Not all families are happy. Not all people are good.

Old people deserve better than to be considered nothing more than a vehicle for making their descendants richer. They deserve to be protected from manipulation and coercion from interested parties. They deserve to have the freedom to decide what happens to their estate, and nobody has the right to try and persuade them out of the decisions they make.

When do beneficiaries get notified of the will? I have been told that I am in a will but no idea of what I am inheriting.

You will be contacted by the executor after the death of the testator.

You will be contacted by the executor after the death of the testator.

The problem is the executor is my father and we have a very strained relationship at best. So he has told me I am in the will but is trying to use it as an excuse to get my address (and my sibling’s addresses). No one wants to give them to him but he is not giving us the lawyer’s contact details. Unsure how to proceed (sorry to hijack thread but didn’t think it warranted its own thread)

Publishing a will doesnt stop the testator making any provision they like. It doesnt stop a testator being badgered or manipulated. What it does stop is the result of that badgering or manipulation being secret until it is too late for the testator to be asked if what the will states is what the testator wants to achieve.

I am aware of a few wills which didnt or wouldnt have had the effect that the testator intended. All were written by solicitors. In one case the flaw was pointed out to the testator and the will changed. In other cases the problems were left to the executors to sort. Many wills are now written by will writing services. They act on instruction but may well not know the detailed family circumstances.

Wills arent just about the intentions of the elderly. What about unmarried couples? A will written before a relationship started could still be valid even if that was not the spoken intention. Many people intend to update things like wills but dont get round to it what with one thing and another. It's like POAs, it doesnt matter until it does matter and when that point comes it's too late to change.

What it does stop is the result of that badgering or manipulation being secret until it is too late for the testator to be asked if what the will states is what the testator wants to achieve.

You keep saying this, but how will it change anything? A manipulative relative could coerce an old person into changing their will and terrify them into telling everyone it was absolutely their own decision and wasn’t influenced by the manipulative relative. Then the poor old person would be stuck between fear of the manipulative relative and recriminations by everyone else. How does your mad solution stop any of that?

Wills arent just about the intentions of the elderly.

Yes they are! This is literally what they are! It’s in the bloody name - it is what the testator wills for their estate after their death.

Many people intend to update things like wills but dont get round to it what with one thing and another.

And that’s just a natural consequence of people having free will. Preparing for death won’t be a priority for everyone. It’s not for the state to meddle.

And there’s nothing stopping a potential beneficiary saying ‘hey dad, just checking you have your will in order?’, is there? why do you think it’s necessary to endanger old people for these conversations to be possible?

I think your issue is that you’re starting from the premise that descendants deserve to inherit, and the law must be changed to actively facilitate that - at the expense of the rights of the testator. The autonomy, independence, freedom, peace of mind and safety of the testator are all less important, in your mind, than making sure potential beneficiaries have the opportunity to try and carve out what they think they’re entitled to.

But the reality is (and, in my opinion, should be) that the law protects the absolute right of every person to decide what happens to their estate when they die without being pressured or manipulated or begged or coerced or guilted by their relatives.

I see enough threads on her about family spats caused by wills to know that it’s a fraught area. But surely the solution is a public information campaign and better public resources instead of actively wanting legislation that would be so obviously open to horrific abuse?

YABU, it's an absurd idea and all the drip feeding changes nothing.

I disagree OP however what I would welcome is for it to be compulsory for people make a will and to review itand keep it up to date. So much heartbreak is caused following the death of a loved one by family arguments and legal issues because there is no will or a completely out of date one.

I believe it is one of the kindest things that you can do for your family to leave your affairs in order with no shocks or surprises.

HBStowe we made our first wills when we were in our early 30s because we had young children and wanted to be sure that we appointed the guardians that we wanted if we were to die when the DCs were young. We made our latest wills because the DCs are now adults and two of the executors we had nominated originally are now dead. So not at all about making provision because we are elderly.

SilverySurfer not sure what drip feeding you are claiming I have made. I was challenged to share the contents of my own will which I did happily. I was challenged to address points which I did.

I have been told IABU so fair enough.

And there’s nothing stopping a potential beneficiary saying ‘hey dad, just checking you have your will in order?’, is there? why do you think it’s necessary to endanger old people for these conversations to be possible?

Unfortunately, people find it difficult to have these conversations and this is part of the problem. There is a concern that asking by this question you could cause upset or appear grabby but actually it's a fair question if those left behind are going to be left with a mess to sort out.

There's also the issue that some people like to hold power over family members by keeping their will contents secret or playing family off against one another. FIL likes to occasionally drop something in conversation about the will not being finalised just to keep everyone on their toes.

Potentially interested person? Sorry but FO. How we dispose of our wealth or otherwise, accumulated over a lifetime, is no-one else’s business.
What a dreadful idea.

Most estates are gobbled up with care home fees