To expect dc to self-fund uni after receiving inheritance

[trippinglyonthetongue]

We have 2 dc, one already in uni and one should be going next year. They don't get full loans due to our income and we have to pay rent and provide money for other living costs. We had saved for this but a lot still comes from our monthly income. It's our biggest expense and will obviously increase further when dd2 goes.

Dh's mother passed away a few months ago and it turns out she has left her (quite considerable) estate to be shared between her gc. We aren't sure of the final amount yet as property is being sold but it will be in excess of £100k each for our 2. I have said to dh that this is a weight off us in terms of funding uni and the girls should be able to sort most of it themselves now. He is adamant that the money is not for that and is for houses for them. I'm actually shocked at how strongly he feels about it and he's made me feel like I'm robbing them or something. I would still pay for things like holidays and maybe rent, but I don't see why it's so awful to expect them to fund some things and surely they'd still have a fair bit left if they're sensible? The thing is, I earn quite a bit more than him and have found my job increasingly stressful and draining since covid (hcp) and would really like to step back from management and/or go part time, which would be out of the question with funding the girls.

Am I really being so unreasonable?

@twominutesmore

"By doing what she has done, she has created a divide between parents and children."

She probably didn't think their mum would be jealous and want to take some of it off them.

Then she was very naive. More likely, she knew it would create conflict. And chose to do it anyway.

I think you should still make the contribution you should be based on your income. If you are reducing your hours you will receive less pay. Therefore wouldnt your contribution amount be adjusted.

They now have their own money, of course they should at least partly be self funding.

It sounds like you make the biggest contribution to their costs so I don't think yabu in the slightest.

My SIL was in a similar situation, inherited a sum from a GP - she paid off her DM's mortgage first before using the still substantial amount left to buy a house for herself.

My ds is working this year to help himself through uni as he also won't get the whole loan due to our recent payrises and me going full time, but we have debt and loana so not loads of disposable income so he is working to help
I don't see an issue with them using some of the money or they could get a part time job even

With the exception of cases of children needing lifelong care to be funded, I have never known any inheritance that isn’t split evenly between children directly to be motivated by anything other than control and usually there is a toxic dynamic involved (golden child / scapegoat etc).

Big red flag when people claim they split unequally to ‘be fair’ or to help the grandchildren.

There is always another dynamic doing on. Always.

"Then she was very naive. More likely, she knew it would create conflict. And chose to do it anyway."

Well youre just making stuff up now and attaching motives to a dead woman you know nothing about. Nobody knows why she did it this way but it's not that unusual. Maybe she didn't want op to get half when she divorces her dh. Maybe there are favourable tax implications. Maybe she loves gc very much and thought her kids were financially secure. Maybe she thought it'd ease the burden of helping the gc onto the housing ladder for op and her dh. We'll never know will we.

@twominutesmore

"You should be able to go part time if you want considering the circumstances."

I wonder how many people would say that if a man posted because he was fed up of supporting his SAHM or modestly-paid wife.

And isn't the timing grand for deciding to go pt

@DockOTheBay this is what my ds is doing and also getting a part time job once there to help fund , infact this is what many many students have to do
The op said they would still contribute but just not as much I think she mentioned paying rent still, if they don't want to dip into the inheritance
They could also get a job
Although I would pay the same for dd2 that I had paid for dd1 if it were me

Can’t believe people are blaming the MIL…oh sorry, this is MN, of course I can

I imagine she was aware that young people have a tough time getting on the property ladder and simply wanted to help with that. Still, never mind, OP’s worked out how ensure she gets at least part of the benefit herself that should be going to DC.

By my reckoning, Uni fees and accommodation would come to about £65,000. If they also pay for food and other bills, I think they could burn through almost all of their inheritance.

If your husband's Mum died 6 years from now, they would have received £100k. If the fact that she's died now means that you withdraw financial support that you were already willing to give - this means that you are the one benefitting from the inheritance, when it was meant to be your daughters.

So, on that basis, YABU. Let them use their £100k for what it was intended. You provide the financial support that you had already agreed to and expected to give.

Anything else feels really "off" to me.

Yes, would have been best if she had.
By doing what she has done, she has created a divide between parents and children.

Well intentioned or not it was a dumb thing to do. She should have left her money to her children and let them manage their families as they see fit.
Skipping a generation seems designed to create ill feeling and suggests she doesn’t trust or love her own children.

So yes I think she has done the wrong thing
The relative who has passed away hasn't done anything.
The OP and her DH are responsible for a situation where she is working long hours and he's opted not to progress in his career.

The divide creation will potentially happen due to the OP and her DH if they don't get over the fact that the relative has made their wishes clear and OP is unfortunately trying to find a way to use the inheritance to her advantage.

Time after time on Mumsnet we (rightly) see people advising that they specifiy who they wish to inherit from them. Setting aside the OP's situation,
if a grandparent wishes their grandchildren inherit then the way to ensure that happens is to put it in the will. Passing it to children and hoping some gets to their grandchildren doesn't give the same outcome. Marriages can end, assets get moved around, the inheritance gets frittered away, grandchildren don't get any, their child passes and the estate falls to their son/daughter in law who then remarried and before you know it their grandchildren get nothing. There's countless threads about why it's good to put who you want to be a beneficiary in your will and not leave it up to good will and circumstances. When large sums of money are concerned some people become quite grabby and selfish.

@twominutesmore

"Then she was very naive. More likely, she knew it would create conflict. And chose to do it anyway."

Well youre just making stuff up now and attaching motives to a dead woman you know nothing about. Nobody knows why she did it this way but it's not that unusual. Maybe she didn't want op to get half when she divorces her dh. Maybe there are favourable tax implications. Maybe she loves gc very much and thought her kids were financially secure. Maybe she thought it'd ease the burden of helping the gc onto the housing ladder for op and her dh. We'll never know will we.

I said more likely. That isn’t making anything up. It is more likely.

Nobody can know more than what the Op has said.

I’m giving my experiences. That’s what we do on public fora.

@MelaniaFlump

Can’t believe people are blaming the MIL…oh sorry, this is MN, of course I can

I imagine she was aware that young people have a tough time getting on the property ladder and simply wanted to help with that. Still, never mind, OP’s worked out how ensure she gets at least part of the benefit herself that should be going to DC.

Their parents could have ensured that if she had left the money to them.

Tell you OH to get off his arse and work more. He has no right to work you into the ground. You should be able to take a step back. He should step up if he believes that strongly!

There is no way I would have accepted a penny off my parents if I had inherited that much OP.

What do they think about all of this?

I criticised the OP and for a long time I was the main earner (not when my children were very small but certainly by the time they were in university).
If OP's husband is lazing around while she has a stressful job that would be different but it sounds as if he is working at a less well paid job.
They are certainly not poor if they are assessed for their children to only get the minimum loan.
If the husband's job doesn't attract a very high salary he can't just click his fingers and increase his earnings overnight.

Also if you're not happy with your husband's financial contribution to the family, take that up with him, it's not on to loot the kids' inheritance for that.

@LolaSmiles why they are adults the op said they would still cover the rent difference, they could always get a job to cover food wtc like many many students do
Even those on lower incomes the loan doesn't cover it all so they have to top it up normally by working
Even if they spent £20000 they would still have £80000 a pretty good deposit

@LolaSmiles

Yes, would have been best if she had. By doing what she has done, she has created a divide between parents and children.

Well intentioned or not it was a dumb thing to do. She should have left her money to her children and let them manage their families as they see fit.
Skipping a generation seems designed to create ill feeling and suggests she doesn’t trust or love her own children.

So yes I think she has done the wrong thing
The relative who has passed away hasn't done anything.
The OP and her DH are responsible for a situation where she is working long hours and he's opted not to progress in his career.

The divide creation will potentially happen due to the OP and her DH if they don't get over the fact that the relative has made their wishes clear and OP is unfortunately trying to find a way to use the inheritance to her advantage.

Time after time on Mumsnet we (rightly) see people advising that they specifiy who they wish to inherit from them. Setting aside the OP's situation,
if a grandparent wishes their grandchildren inherit then the way to ensure that happens is to put it in the will. Passing it to children and hoping some gets to their grandchildren doesn't give the same outcome. Marriages can end, assets get moved around, the inheritance gets frittered away, grandchildren don't get any, their child passes and the estate falls to their son/daughter in law who then remarried and before you know it their grandchildren get nothing. There's countless threads about why it's good to put who you want to be a beneficiary in your will and not leave it up to good will and circumstances. When large sums of money are concerned some people become quite grabby and selfish.

Yes I’m aware of all that. But it’s still best to not skip generations and trust your children to look after their children. You raised your children. They are a product of your upbringing. So why wouldn’t you trust them?

"I’m giving my experiences. That’s what we do on public fora."

You must know a great number of toxic elderly people who wrote unfair wills and confided their motives to you before their death.

@Booklover3

Tell you OH to get off his arse and work more. He has no right to work you into the ground. You should be able to take a step back. He should step up if he believes that strongly!

There is no way I would have accepted a penny off my parents if I had inherited that much OP.

What do they think about all of this?

Agreed on both counts!

"Their parents could have ensured that if she had left the money to them."

Maybe she wasn't certain that op would do that.

(Their parents could have ensured that if she had left the money to them*
They might.

Or they might not.

They might decide to 'borrow' from the pot and say they'll put it back in one day and it doesn't happen.

They might have an acrimonious divorce and the money gets caught up in that.

They might decide to use the money so that one can go part time and the other doesn't have to bring in any more money.

They might have it in savings or in an asset which is used to fund their care.

One parent might pass away, the other remarried and before you know it the grandparent's assets tbey wanted to go to their grandchildren are actually being passed to their child in law's new spouse.

If someone has a wish for someone to inherit from them, it needs to go in the will.

Also this whole scenario shows exactly why when I'm old I will leave money to the youngest generation, and why it will be tied up so that it can't be used until they're out of uni. The MIL presumably wants this money to ensure the grandchildren can buy houses after uni. They don't want it to subsidise the DIL or allow lifestyle changes.

I see where dh is coming from, the money would be wisely used for future investments. But by the same token, I worked to fund myself through uni, absolutely no help from my parents and nowhere near the maximum student loan. Is that not an option?