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?

I think it’s fair to expect both children to pay for ‘extras’ from their inheritance.
We funded ds at university (including fees as we were not uk residents at the time) and he completed two paid internships in the summer vacation of years one and two. We expected him to use some of the money from this to fund his extra expenditure. We paid his rent, trips home etc but he used this money for entertainment, meals out etc.

I would talk to them about ringfencing it. So majority goes into savings they cannot easily access. 9k for uni (3k per year seems quite a lot) and then maybe a grand for a few treats or a holiday.
I don't agree that you should kill yourself to support them and personally believe part time jobs are essential learning

i think this is one of those threads where, if the situation were reversed, and the dad wanted to go part time and wanted to use the money left by his wife's mother to grandchildren as a way to of funding children through university, there would be an outcry on MN.
i think it is very kind of the grandmother to leave her life assets to her grandchildren and not to a donkey sanctuary etc.

[quote ImGoingOutOut]@sanbeiji would you ask if a woman was a lazy waster because her husband earns more or is it just because its the man who is earning less? I earn more than my husband, he works harder than me and longer hours, I'm just lucky I work in a field that pays better.[/quote]
Nope, I'd ask the same question to anybody!
Those who work hard know what a toll it takes. They wouldn't force another person to continue, when an out was available.
This isn't necessarily 'paid work'. It also includes busy SAHP. Or people who can't work although they want to, in fact they should understand even more what it's like to be pushing ahead with something hard.

Those who don't know however... don't understand the effort.

I agree with you OP.

Our oldest two inherited about 50k money each but they both paid for their own Uni costs. One worked throughout his undergrad and postgrad courses, but he's always been a serious grafter.

I personally don't think that parents should automatically fund 3rd level education. If it's something that the child wants to do they need to be motivated to do it and if they're funding it themselves, it provides an excellent motivation to put the effort in.

@Mrstwiddle

I can’t imagine leaving money to grandchildren rather than my children, that just seems so bizarre. I agree with the OP re self-funding.

I can now

My parents left my son a considerable amount of money more than then the OP DC
But in the will it was specified that xxx amount was for a house deposit xxx for a car and xx to blow on whatever
I’m glad they did this as otherwise my DS would probably blow it on Pokémon cards 😂

@thing47

Carrying on as though the money doesn't exist is stupid. Basically PP are saying if they had 100K and their mother was working very hard, they'd happily let her. I'm saddened and disgusted by the entitlement, and lack of appreciation for parents

To be fair @sanbeiji, we don't know that OP's DC are thinking like this. I get the impression that this is just a conversation between OP and her DH at the moment. It could be that the DC are not entitled at all, we can't assume that they are from the information given.

I was thinking more of other posters... would they let their mothers do this? I wouldn't. Calling the OP 'grabby' means if they were the DC they'd be happy to let her work while they sat on a nice sum. That's sad

@MaudieandMe

I agree with you OP.

Our oldest two inherited about 50k money each but they both paid for their own Uni costs. One worked throughout his undergrad and postgrad courses, but he's always been a serious grafter.

I personally don't think that parents should automatically fund 3rd level education. If it's something that the child wants to do they need to be motivated to do it and if they're funding it themselves, it provides an excellent motivation to put the effort in.

Yep. There are plenty of ways to fund uni. Get an apprenticeship, there's loads. Uni isn't a right.

Sounds like OP and her husband need to think together about their finances in the round. But I struggle to see how her going PT funded by stopping paying for the DC can be anything other than use of mIL’s money to fund her lower hours
Agree with this.

OP says herself she's a bit bitter about inheritance skipping to grandchildren because she could do with the cash.

If the OP is running herself into the ground then there was a discussion to be had with her DH entirely separately to when the children inherited from their grandparent. The OP and their DH need to look at their own finances, household arrangements and parental contributions required for their children.

Given the OP says they'd have benefited from the inherited money more than DH's siblings, it's quite interesting that as soon as there's money for the children, now they're mentally working out how to benefit financially from the situation and work part time.

One thing I've seen is how often inheritance brings out some funny emotions in some family members.

I'd agree with your dh. Infact dd has about 40k in the bank from us saving for her and inheritance but she's not touching it while she's at uni.

I certainly think you should make it up the amount they'd have if it wasn't for your wages.

There was another horrible thread involving a retired grandparent looking after grandchildren five days a week and admitting she was exhausted. So many posters asked with mock concern why she had retired at 63 and was there something wrong with her that she had retired early and not kept going until 68.
I am afraid I think the OP is wrong to try and gain financially from her daughters inheritance.

It isn’t an and /or. I’d match them like you said before you stop paying then don’t pay.

I was in your dc’s position (inherited during my first year) and I didn’t even think to ask for money from my remaining parent once I had £40k in the bank!

That was fifteen years ago so I appreciate things will be more expensive now. But even £10k pa would leave them with plently of money for a house deposit after uni.

But she never said she should unilaterally decide. She said her DH refused to even consider the possibility, and felt very strongly about it.

Op said she feels she should get more of a say in financial decisions because she earns more.

Perhaps there's a middle ground? E.g. fund the first 2 years for each DD or fund a certain percentage and they can make up the rest with a PT job or with their inheritance.

As an aside I have inherited money three times, twice it took two years to receive the cash and once it took a year. So depending on how complex the estate is they may not actually see the cash any time soon.

@Dishwashersaurous

Op are you paying the expected parental contribution or are you paying more?

It would be perfectly responsible and reasonable to only pay the parental contribution.

Then for extras they can get a job or use the inheritance

Exactly agree with this. Inheritance for extras. Basic expected parental contribution for basics.

University is a choice. Your children have decided that this is the route they are going down to (hopefully) ensure a highly paid job when they are older. Now they have money of their own they can choose how to use it. However, they are going to be in a position to fund themselves so I think they should. This is their investment in their own future.

What would happen if you refused to pay for their uni fees? Would your husband step up and earn more to fund them? If not, then I think he shouldn’t be telling you to stay working full time to fund their education when they have the means to fund themselves. I agree with a PP who say one DC has benefited from your funding them in uni, the second DC should receive the same. After that though, the bank of mum and dad is a bit more limited.

@Imdonna

But she never said she should unilaterally decide. She said her DH refused to even consider the possibility, and felt very strongly about it.

Op said she feels she should get more of a say in financial decisions because she earns more.

'More of a say' isn't the same as 'unilateral'. There's no such things as 50/50 decision making. If you're at a road and there's A and B, you have to decide which to take. You can't go in the middle. What happens is each side discusses, and decides together, however there will usually be one person who has 'more' of a say for the logical reason that they are 'more' affected.

This does not mean that they get to dictate (which is what unilateral means). It does not mean that NO discussion takes places.
It only means that their points should have more weight.

In this scenario the decision is actually being unilaterally made by the DH, but he's not the one earning the money. So fair enough if he wants her to earn more, but if she's stressed he should be adressing that.
Not just 'no you promised, so pay up'.

It’s also worth thinking about whether, had this cone in a couple of years’ time, you would have asked them to repay the money you gave them at uni? If not, why should they pay just because if an accident of timing?

If the kids uni fees are the only thing stopping her working part rime, she probably could have. As the kids will get a higher maintence amount and the parental top up would be lower.

Not sure why she never looked at this.

If you're making the large financial contribution now at great personal cost, it's appropriate that your husband/his side of the family chip in where they are able to. Your DH doesn't earn enough to give his daughters houses or demand that they be able to do so unfortunately. Your girls should be able to work holidays, contribute quite meaningfully now and this will lighten the load while giving them many more opportunities than most young adults have. They're in a very privileged position but it's disappointing that no one cares enough about you to see they neither need it nor are entitled to it

@Batmanontheedge

If you're making the large financial contribution now at great personal cost, it's appropriate that your husband/his side of the family chip in where they are able to. Your DH doesn't earn enough to give his daughters houses or demand that they be able to do so unfortunately. Your girls should be able to work holidays, contribute quite meaningfully now and this will lighten the load while giving them many more opportunities than most young adults have. They're in a very privileged position but it's disappointing that no one cares enough about you to see they neither need it nor are entitled to it

^thus.

I’m sort of with your husband in that large inheritances should be for house deposits. However your DC should be working some PT hours to help fund their way through Uni and take the pressure off of you and your husband a bit.

I’m with you and can’t believe how many people are saying this money should sit untouched and be used towards a property in future. It’s a long time ago now but I got the minimum student loan because of my parents income. I suspect they were just over the income threshold - both middle managers in public sector. They did give me monthly support but obviously made sacrifices to afford it and my younger brother went straight to work so he didn’t need support. I also had to work part time to make ends meet. Could they at least use the money to put towards a property where they study to live in and maybe rent out some rooms to friends?

In this scenario the decision is actually being unilaterally made by the DH, but he's not the one earning the money. So fair enough if he wants her to earn more, but if she's stressed he should be adressing that.*

Except he hasn't made the decision because op isn't having it.

And she believes she gets more of a say. If 2 people have input in a decision but one has 60% of the decision making power and can over rule the other....then 2 people don't really have a say.

So if they have to make this decision, op is clear, is mainly her decision. That is unilaterally