Inheritance split - what’s fair

[Taraohara]

Parents who are not Outwardly wealthy but saves carefully for their children.

They have 5 children oldest pretty well off . 6 figure salary. House around £1 million mark and London rental. No kids. 2nd eldest, stable job comfortably off. Old enough to have been able to get on property ladder . Nice house. 3rd Newly married One baby. Stable job. Small house . Unlikely to manage next house for considerable time due to wages. 4th chaotic . Drink / drugs issues lives with parents. Youngest is single just starting out in work . Lives with parents. No savings .

What’s best way to split inheritance?
Equal for all?
Or split according to how much each would need ?
Not a thread about If inheritance is to be expected or not .
One parent thinks it should be equal split as unequal may lead to problems down the line

YABU = split equally
YANBU = according to need

When FIL died he left it all to us. He excluded the other children because throughout his life they only visited when they needed money.

Unless someone has already had their share or they at at risk 're a dependency of some sort I would say equal. Put any at risk share into a fund for their children perhaps?

Equal.

I agree equal. You can't predict what will happen further down the line - the older successful children could lose their jobs, the younger ones could win the lottery/come into other wealth.

Interesting- overwhelming in favour of equal split!

Equally is fairest. You never know how circumstances might change in future and you dont want to change your will every time someone gets a promotion, has a child, buys a house.

Also what if one of them wins the lottery or is made redundant the day after you die. An equal split is the only fair way.

I think equally between siblings is the fairest way. It prevents one sibling feeling slighted- even though logically they might be able to see why another sibling received more than them, how it actually feels can be quite different, especially during the initial grieving process. It can drive a wedge between siblings and bring feelings that one sibling is favoured (even if not the case).

I’ve seen this first hand- 3 siblings. One had ongoing parental support throughout adult life due to chaotic life/some mental health problems and poor money management. The others were both professionals and comfortably off. Parents (understandably in some ways) chose to leave lions share to the sibling who they’d been supporting for some time and told their children of the plan (not dead). It has caused a lot of resentment- partly because the sibling who stands to inherit is still receiving ongoing financial support (and has had a lot already) and a lot of emotional/practical support- sometimes to detriment of parents spending time with their other children and their families. I know that one sibling feels it is just another demonstration that one sibling is more important to their parents than the others. The other thinks that this is true but also thinks the sibling will waste the money quite quickly and then the other siblings will be expected to pick up the pieces.

As I say, driven a wedge between siblings and between 2 children and the parents. I suspect the parents are just trying to ensure that their chaotic son is provided for and think the others are doing fine so don’t need help. Which is in some ways true, but equally they are not so well off that an inheritance would not make a difference to their lives.

I think it am an be ok to leave inheritance unequally in some very specific circumstances- one child having profound disabilities, for example, or one is fabulously wealthy. Or if one child has done something which has caused parents/siblings to stop contact. But, generally speaking, it is best to treat all siblings equally.

Mutual wills are barely used these days. Life interest trust wills ensure spouse can use your half of the estate during their lifetime but on their death your share passes to the children. Reasonable to make adjustments to acknowledge lifetime support but disability aside different shares reflecting children’s success is very unfair and recipe for resentment

Oh the only way it would be fair not to do it equally is if one child was given, say £25k for a house deposit might then recieve £25k less inheritance than others. But this should be made clear when the money is given.

Equal split

Equal obviously, ehy is it someone who has done well and worked hard gets less 🙄... my mum always gives stuff to my sister who is perfectly comfortable but us more so and it's just not fair . I can see her getting my mums house too at some point .

I have been on the receiving end of unequal. I can honestly say, it has been one of the worst years of my life and things will never be the same again.

Equal split but taking in to account what been provided for the eldest compared to youngest e.g. help with first deposit, uni fees (if applicable), car etc, so the equal split is after all children have had access to the same financial start

Equal if you absolutely have to choose but ideally get together and talk like adults. The rich one night say I don’t need it don’t leave me any!

Equal. How would anyone assess how much each child would 'need?'

In this situation I’d say equal. And always would unless there are clear long term disabilities or health issues that make earning a living impossible.

Equal is the only way, we had a situation in our family where one sibling had received a massive inheritance from their ILs side of the family. They were considerably richer than the other siblings however when the parent died the inheritance was split equally without any consideration for the actual 'wealth' of each of the adult siblings. Of course that meant that one side of the family was much wealthier than the others, but it was the right thing to do.

If the parents don’t split equally between their children, it will doubtless pass on the dilemma to their children. It will cause conflict and the ones who receive more will feel bad about receiving more

@oohnicevase

I’m not sure financial success is always down to working harder. Older ones benefited from house prices massively rising . Vastly cheaper university etc

Equal

@CalmFizz that was a brilliant programme, wish they'd have done more.

Definitely equal.

There was unequal in our family and it felt like an unequal split of love.

Of course it should be equal, anything else is going to feel unfair to someone and might cause a rift.

If those siblings then decided to divide it differently based on their circumstances then that's up to them.

Equal to all apart from the one who will spend it on drugs. Cut that one out.

@Putthekettleonplease

But the druggie still their child... don’t think they would / could disown

Definitely an equal split. There are 3 of us - 2 fairly successful (with children) and one a daily pot smoker who doesn’t do much (no children). The third has had lots of help throughout his life.
Parents announced they were going to split 50/25/25. We were very upset and they ended up splitting the inheritance 40/30/30. It still upset us as he’s always been the favourite and this was another example.

In a will it would have to be equal.

Lifetime gifts are different. The parents can explain why they are giving more to one child than another and can respond to specific situations. The children don't even necessarily need to know of gifts to their siblings.

Wills are different. They are public. The parent is dead so they can't answer any questions as to why one child got more than another and it can feel unfair. Money does not equal love, but in the absence of the parent, being missed out of a parent's will or getting less than siblings can feel very hurtful. It's also not possible to predict when you will die or what everyone's circumstances will be at that time.

In the example you give, as a parent, I would explore whether the child with drink/ drug issues could have their share tied up in a trust. Access to a lot of money all at once, combined with the loss of a parent, could be disastrous for that sibling.