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

I would maybe help youngest two now if I could and then split equally after.
But equally is he fairest way.

Equal shares, minus any previous lump sum gifts for deposits, weddings, etc; but put DC4's in trust.

If one child was disabled and unable to live independently that would be different.

DC5's need may be the greatest now, but they might win the Euromillions lottery or (more realistically) get a higher paying job down the road than older siblings.

Been there, done that. My parents had wills leaving a much bigger percentage to the golden child, which we only found out when one of our parents died. No reason, we were all in a similar situation, own houses, jobs, kids, nothing different for either of us. No fall outs, no drugs, debts, bad life choices, they were just the favourite.
All my life I've had it rammed down my throat that golden child wasn't the favourite, I was just jealous etc etc. Soon proved the lie of that.
It's all been changed now to an equal split, but it doesn't begin to cover the hurt I feel about being "not good enough". I've tried to get an answer as to why my parents felt it was a good idea, can't get an answer, so there's no closure. Pisses me off even now, years later. It's certainly made me feel less caring about my remaining parent, who after all the upset it caused, is STILL favouring the golden child.
Our children have benefited to different degrees re house deposits etc BUT because of the appalling treatment from my parents I've made bloody sure it's reflected in our wills, plus we've written explicit instructions in a letter to each of them explaining how, when we've gone, our estate will reflect this difference. AND we've told them now so if they have any questions about it they can ask us now, rather than try and get answers later (or not as the case may be).
It's horrible feeling that you are not loved or thought as much of as one of your siblings.

Sorry to derail your thread but having lived through this situation ( and still living it now to a certain extent) it's shit.

OP - can I assume from your most recent comment that you are not one of the older children?

I don't think it's always as easy as older=better financial opportunities. My tuition fees were cheaper than my youngest sibling's - however by the time they were in university my parents had semi retired so they were entitled to grants I hadn't been. They also got part of their costs refunded by the government which I wasn't entitled too.

Similarly perhaps house prices were cheaper when I bought - but H2B ISAs were introduced just before, so younger siblings benefitted from £££ in free money from the government for paying into these for a few years.

I graduated straight into the recession so was unable to get on the grad schemes that all pretty much stopped recruiting for a few years; by time sibling had graduated these were all back up and running.

Life often isn't fair, but it's a lot easier to shrug when it's external factors making things different rather than your own parents. I would say equal, every time.

I know a woman with one child with an addiction.
She is very worried about leaving equal shares, as she believes that the money would result in that child dying.
It's very sad.

Someone who's not supported themself up until now won't suddenly change because the rug is pulled out from under them - they'll either expect the siblings to give them money now the parents are gone, or even perhaps commit suicide (I've seen this happen). The time to be strict is long gone (maybe should have been tried when the sibling could have changed with support) - it's about damage limitation now. If it's feasible, give the one who can't be independent a trust fund so that they don't cause a liability to the siblings. It's best for the siblings to avoid the ongoing financial liability for the sibling (or guilt from suicide) - those outcomes are worse than no inheritance.

Always equal!

My db is better off than me, but it would have felt very wrong to have not had an equal split. Dh’s sibling much better off than him ( London house, and only one child, plus a large amount of money given towards the house, so no mortgage). Probably an equal split, but it could be unequal towards his sibling, so extra unfair.
An equal split is the only way.

@onceandneveragain

Actually I’m one of the older ones 😂

I see what I have in terms of house as luck rather than working ‘harder’. Life much more difficult for young people.

I’m happy to get nothing And would rather the younger ones had more . I know I could ‘give away ‘ mine but then I feel that would possibly cause issues with my own dh who would feel that the money could be used to help our own children rather than my siblings

Essentially I’d rather the decision was out of my hands

It's difficult but I can see your husbands point of view. You may have started out equal with your siblings but life changes that and it's not your job to rebalance it, your job is to do the best for your children.

I asked a similar question a few years ago regarding my own money. The overwhelming advice was to split evenly. One reason was to avoid any feelings of rejection. In my case the three recipients all worked hard but one was in a worse financial position than the others.

One wise person said that circumstances for them might change. Exactly that has happened, the two youngest have had a reverse of fortunes.

My siblings and I have had varying amounts of support from our parents over time. My younger brother the most, my sister getting close to it due to her financial incompetence and my older brother - v clever just in a job that pays peanuts. I have had very little - because I did not need it- it was offered and declined.

The wills have always been openly discussed and we have always known it was split equally between us - no differentiation or favouritism. it has made the process of grieving so much simpler.

OP in your case if the elder kids had had support to buy houses etc that the youngest has not yet benefitted from - then there could be an argument to ensuring some equality but otherwise just be equal

Equal. But maybe let the two younger ones live in the family home for a certain period of time parents death. (If they are still living there.)

And maybe for the drug addict child set up some kind of fund that gives him a little bit of money every month for 10 years rather than a great big wedge that he can kill himself with.

If they do decide to leave more to your siblings don’t be surprised if it does impact you after all. My parents (still alive) have given my brother a six figure sum for long complicated reasons. I was fine with it. I really was. Until it actually happened. And now I’m mainly still fine but there is a little bit of me that wonders if “mummy and daddy love him best”. They don’t know this. Dh barely knows this. But deep down we are all about 8 really.

I voted according to need. I’m very surprised that I am in such a small majority.

I would still leave something to the older ones so they are not disinherited, but my aim would be to make things equal. My parents won’t have a lot to leave but I think this is the way they feel from the way they talk.

In my family one child has a good job (2x good incomes, on the property ladder, savings etc). They got on the property ladder when it was easier and houses were cheaper, not much of a deposit needed. Another sibling of mine works very hard but in low paid, insecure jobs, stuck renting. I’m a single mother so one income, and am stuck renting.

My instinct would be equal but they might need to be careful about the addict and also make provision for them and the youngest not to be made homeless. It would be one of those occasions where a review of circumstances every few years would be important as things could change a lot.

My parents have a slightly different problem as my ds is a nun. Any money left to her will automatically go to the convent . My parents would like my ds to have some money of her own just in case she ever needs it. Atm she is an equal split. My dm would like me to keep the money for her but that could saddle me with other problems.

Equal split.

Equal

In my view, it should always be split equally. Circumstances change; people lose their jobs, families split up, nothing stays the same.
The only fair way is an equal split.

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!

This is a fair point. A friend of ours has done extremely well. Able to retire early. A stunning house plus other properties. Her sibling is a single parent who has a creative but low paying job. Our friend has told her parents to leave everything to her sister.

I saw some research that said parents is such circumstances would tend to split distributions in wills reasonably equally as wills tend to be publicly visible so wouldn't want to be seen to treat their children differently but would tend to gift money outside the estate before dying unevenly to reflect different circumstances.

Always equal. Just because someone earns more money than someone else doesn’t mean they deserve less inheritance. You’re suggesting family members are ‘means’ tested with a sliding scale of inheriting money according to how much money they have? Madness.

YABU equal split

I assume you are the second oldest OP ?
You could negotiate something with your parents perhaps, to help the younger child now, then there is still an equal split in the will ? Although circumstances can change dramatically. Someone may do extremely well, or win money. Someone else may have serious health issue, or a divorce. I think wills should be equal, and that siblings should then support each other when they can, if they all get on well.
I remember reading an article by Polly Samson, who is married to Dave Gilmour. Her mother left her nothing in her will. It was explained as the other siblings being in greater need, as Samson is very comfortable, but it hurt her terribly. Partly because it suggested that her mother didn’t trust that she would have given up her share to her less well off sibling/s, but also because it is hard not to equate it with love.
Your situation is different, but all the siblings would need to feel happy about an unequal share, or it can cause a huge amount of pain.

Zilla1: "...would tend to gift money outside the estate before dying unevenly to reflect different circumstances."

That sounds right. I voted to split equally and still believe that is correct but hopefully the parents aren't going to peg just yet so can help their children as and when needed - discreetly, without anyone else knowing. In their position, that is what I would do.