Regarding 'Wills' and who gets what or not as the case may be?

[Abigail69]

Am I one of the few on the net that feels that the Will owner has the right to give or not give etc whatever he or she wants to whomever or not?

The number of stories and threads I've read, and heard with sibling/family fall out as one or more feel they've been left out or cared the most and left out/etc/etc.

Worse still is a couple of cases in the recent year or so where a high court judge overturned a Will

As long as the owner of the will is of sound mind and has the capacity to decide, why do people that get nothing, less etc complain etc, etc?

In my culture, more often than not the son/s get everything this dates back from their motherland as it was often land that was passed on and almost everyone was married o it worked out fairly. However, many older people still practice this kind of thing as my parents did but it did not bother me as we are on our own two feet and never wanted anything from anyone. Sorry, I digress.

Back on topic. AIBU in believing that the person that owns the assets has the ultimate say and this may upset some/all but it is their money.

We've already substantially helped all of our children to reduce their mortgages and the reason we did this is that they never asked and if they had the answer would have been no. No, because they work and should learn to live within their means.

Am I in a miniorty? I don't really care what someone says EG "I looked after..." "they have a lot more money than us.." etc etc - its the Will owner's money etc their choice, would you agree with me implicitly?

Update
Please don't have a go at me. There are many like-minded people like me just check the voting here.

There is no reason whatsoever why a persons Will could be challenged as long as they made it as per law of their state/lnad etc.

To me, man/woman has equal rights. The same rights to make a Will of their choosing if they have the capacity to leave the money to anyone, anywhere inc a charity/s etc, or go out on the street and throw it in the air and those that want to pick it up can do so.

I'll never understand the upset some have re their parent's Will etc, it is their money, their choice.

It winds me up no end when I hear about a Will being overturned or people upset as they were not left the same amount as x/y and z.

I am not expecting to inherit or relying on it. If I do I am seriously considering giving some or all of mine to my sister because she has greater need.
But imagine if my parents gave me her "share" - she'd have every right to be annoyed.
As for giving it all to sons - that's just a continuation of the patriarchy and the weird idea that men are superior or would be wiser with it. Which is, frankly, bollocks.
I suspect the reason people haven't challenged the law in Scotland is because it's broadly regarded as fairer not to allow the twisted nastiness of a parent to be the final act of betrayal of their offspring.

you are free to make the decisions you choose
BUT
you are not free from the consequences of those decisions.

If you have 3 children and leave everything to only 2 then it sends the message to the other that they are not as valued. This may be an unintended consequence but still possible and probable.

I do agree that you should not expect an inheritance and should learn to stand on your own two feet but if money is left then it should be shared equally amongst siblings/grand children. If you want to give it all the the cat's home then that is also fair because no one gets anything.

I have NC for this.

Have 2 DC, have left everything to 1.

The reason we have left everything to 1 is to protect the other. They have ASD,

realised they were in a controlling relationship, and due to DH having a life limiting disease at beginning of covid, decided to change our wills due to the red flags I had seen/heard from their partner. We didn’t inform them until they unsurprisingly left the relationship and have been living back with us for a while. If they hadn’t left,

When we first told them when the time was right they understood, but then obviously thought on it and asked questions, and were put out. They now understand completely why we did it. The inheriting DC is absolutely trustworthy, and our wishes for them both to inherit the same won’t change. Just will be on the side.

DH and I have 3 remaining parents and all their wills would probably make everyone think it was strange too. All different, all for different reasons. We have always never taken anything for granted.

My post doesn’t make much sense 😂

If they hadn’t left, then they would have been told, but it was difficult to get them alone as everything was monitored by their partner.

This. If you think it through a bit more OP you might understand why the disinherited would be hurt and not wish to continue a relationship with the parents.

It does not require mental gymnastics to understand that the OP of the other thread would be upset at being left a ring worth £1500 whereas her brothers will be left £1m in assets and yet she is still expected to care for the mother.

Judges do not 'overturn' wills. They enforce the will (I.e. intent) of the testator and only generally depart from that intent where the testators free will has been overcome by undue influence.

I read somewhere that if you are deliberately not including a close relative in your will it's a good idea to spell out that you specifically do not want that person to inherit (rather than just leave them out). That makes it much more difficult to challenge the will. If there is a good reason you could include that too.

You are correct, we had to specify the reasons why.

"Am I one of the few on the net that feels that the Will owner has the right to give or not give etc whatever he or she wants to whomever or not?"

"As long as the owner of the will is of sound mind and has the capacity to decide, why do people that get nothing, less etc complain etc, etc?"

You're asking two different questions here though, aren't you?

Of course the Will Maker has the 'right' to do whatever they want with their money, literally and legally - obviously there are exceptions such as court cases etc. but Wills are usually honoured.

As for your second question - why wouldn't people complain? Wills are emotive, wrapped up in family dynamics and potentially life-changing. They're an opportunity for Will Makers to 'thank' the people in their lives who were there for them, care for their dependents posthumously, or in some really shitty cases, to have the 'final say' over a situation that hurt them. Objectively speaking, Wills are practical financial documents, but we all project our own opinions of them - you and me included. DM used hers to ensure we weren't left homeless when she died, as she was a single parent and we lived with her. Our Dad used his to make it clear he still thought he owed us nothing - quite literally! Each Will reflected our relationship with each parent, that's the norm I'd argue.

OP you seem to think its oj for the will writer to do what they want but for their son or daughter not to have any feelings over whats been done to them, surely they both have a right to feel what they do
Imagine being the one who can only work part time and who has to look after your parents etc and then being left nothing and your brother who hasn't seen them for 3 years gets something
Thats when people get upset etc as if they had known the outcome , maybe they would of insisted parent paid for care so they could work full time rather than be financially held back
Most normal people who have a good relationship with all their children leave it as fairly as possible or discuss with kids beforehand if different
Ny auntie is planning to miss her kids and go straight to grandkids as all her kids have homes and grandchildren will be needing the help, no surprises etc
People normally only win when contesting with good reason

We've already substantially helped all of our children to reduce their mortgages and the reason we did this is that they never asked and if they had the answer would have been no.

That’s quite passive-aggressive and controlling @Abigail69

And your view that’s it’s OK for everything to go to the son’s because everyone marries is sexist in the extreme. What if a daughter doesn’t marry? Or what if her husband is a complete incompetent or shags around and leaves her?

Furthermore, in many families with assets, the inheritance pattern is symbolic of one’s position in the family, and in many families how one is treated in the will of one’s parent can also symbolic of the love or esteem or regard one is held in.

It's not always as simple as that.

Will writer plans on leaving to their 3 dc equally.

#1 says to them "I love you lots, whatever you want is fine. I'd rather have you."
#2 earns less than the other two but doesn't say anything because they feel it's fair.
#3 comes round regularly to will writer who is now in not the best of health and explains to will writer that the best thing would be to leave everything to them so they can set up their dream of a new business. They "know" that it will be a huge success so they'll be able to give all three of them more after 5 years. Initially will writer refuses, but gradually listens to #3's comments about how much better it will be for all of them and how if they don't get all the money they'll never be able to do their dream and they promise totally that they'll pay the others asap...

Will writer changes their will to give all to #3 due to their manipulation. #3 loses all the money within 3 years.

There is no reason whatsoever why a persons Will could be challenged as long as they made it as per law of their state/lnad etc.

So in the case a poster described - a man works all his life on the family farm, building the asset. His wife lives in the family home and helps with elderly parents. The last parent to die leaves everything to another child. You think that should go unchallenged do you?

I’m with you OP. My mom and I joked a lot about her inheritance she would tell me she was spending all of my inheritance and I would tell her if I need it when she dies I’ve made some bad life choices and don’t deserve it. And yes that was a not so subtle dig at my sister.

I did see a copy of her will where everything was left to my sister. Yes it stung a bit until I remembered that my sister is a 50 yo grown woman who is a train wreck of her own doing and would be in the exact same position after she pissed away all of the money which she would do.

I was given a copy of the updated will before she died which had me back in for half. I will be shocked if I see any of it. I’m fully prepared for my sister to siphon off most of it as the executor.

When my father died when I was ~20 I didn’t receive anything from that inheritance either. It all went to his wife.

Maybe that taught me a life lesson to have low expectations when it comes to inheritance. But I just don’t believe anyone owes anything to me. If I want or need it I have and will need to provide myself.

So you were disinherited OP. No if or buts about it. Pure unadulterated misogyny leaving you entirely reliant on a good husband and your own ability to earn . !

What would you have done if your DH had turned out to be a financially controlling arsehole. Or even worse, physically abusive. You would have been obliged to stay in the marriage or live in poverty trying to look after small children whilst trying to earn money - leaving you with much reduced earnings and earning potential..

Meanwhile your male siblings have no such difficulties. They are sorted.

This type of decision left and still leaves women in the lap of the Gods unable to make the same choices that people with their own money get to make.

You abvu. and living in a bubble where a man willingly shares his money. Regards it as both of theirs and marriages are and remain happy.

I would not be angry about the money this decision makes. I would be very very angry about the precarious and therefore dangerous and uncaring position my own parents had put me in -and their much lesser regard for my independence, security and therefore happiness compared with my male siblings.

Utter utter misogyny with no redeeming features.

This seems to be a hot topic on here. I don’t want any inheritance, I’ve worked out when I can retire based on our earnings, leaving out inheritance because potentially, I won’t get any if dm needs to go into care.

A friend’s sister has gone nc with her because their mum changed the will in my friend’s favour because she was basically her personal carer for the last 18 months and her sister is abroad. She argues that she did the caring years back before emigrating. I think it’s a terrible shame that siblings are now nc, neither ‘need’ the money.

Everyone is at liberty to do whatever they want with their assets.

However, when we die everything will be divided equally between our children, I think to do anything else is fundamentally unfair.

I have seen unequal distribution of parental assets destroy relationships, NOT because of the money but because of what it represents. As Daisy Goodwin put it, when a beloved parent dies what is parcelled out may look like goods and chattels, but it feels a lot like love.

I’m sorry OP but my idea of good parenting is very different to yours. I can’t imagine ever penalising a son or daughter who asked for financial help if they were in need. On the contrary, we’ve told our children they must let us know if they’re struggling.

In Belgium the kids get the lot - even a spouse normally gets only a life time interest.

@Abigail69 so if someone cares for their parents, looks after them, visits them regularly, has a good relationships with them and then, for no discernible reason, the parents leave all their money to the feckless sibling who has never been near them in years, that shouldn't bother them?

Ahh, no wonder I'd come across a number of cases of inheritances not following what was stated in a will for family farms:

www.tanners.co.uk/site/what-we-do/wills-trusts-and-probate/proprietary-estoppel/

A very, very, very informative and helpful post. Thanks

I agree with this. I have posted on the thread mentioned.

No it should not as the parent was not stupid and they made an informed decision who is to get their money, Their money, their choice. If those are left out are "bothered" then its hard s...

The fact remains it is the Will owner's money their choice,

Whe I was young and naive, I could never work out why someone had left money to their cats/etc, now I know.