Who's being unreasonable regarding Will

[Freshpinkroses]

Name changed as this could be outing and I'd rather avoid extra tension while trying to figure out what's fair.

So, bit of a background: my husband is 18 years older than me (54) and he has just one older sibling which is brother (66), his brother has 6 children. My husband barely knows his brothers kids and he sees his brother very infrequently (about once every 5 years or so on average).

I'm 36, we have a 4 year old daughter and I'm currently pregnant and due to give birth in September. I have 2 sisters and 2 brothers who my husband and I see every single week, so we're really close (we did have a little fallout this year but everything is good now). Also my sisters each have one child.

The reason for the background is that my husband and I need to write a will, we haven't got one and since we're about to have another child we just feel it's really irresponsible that we don't have this stuff sorted out. We agreed on everything in the Will in the event of either of our deaths as in who we'd make the children's guardian and who would be the trustees etc. What we can't agree on is in the event us and our children died, who our estate would be left to. Even though my husband is older than me, we each bring an almost equal amount to the table (he brings about 20% more than me right now but my earnings are increasing each year so this will level off). The total value of estate is about £3m. He believes most of this should go to his brother and his brothers children??? I can't understand his logic for this and it's really infuriating me as he said himself he wants my sister to be our children's guardian if we were to die, yet he'd want to give his brother almost everything if us and our children were to pass. I personally believe our estate should be divided equally amongst all our brothers and sisters at very least and I'm even willing to flex and let him give his brother 20% more than my siblings. What are your thoughts on this?

YABU- his brother should get majority (roughly 80%)
YANBU - it should be divided close to equally amongst all of the siblings

I welcome any other ideas/thoughts on this.

Thank you in advance!!

It should be split 50/50 between you and him and you should each do what you like with your halves.

It's madness that he can't see this.

I’d go 50% to your siblings and 50% to his.

If he won’t agree then maybe your wills don’t have to be identical? Like if you both genuinely have equal wealth, and you him
and your kids all die simultaneously eg in a plane crash, then what’s to stop you leaving your half of the estate to whoever you like in your will, and him leaving his half to his family?

Remember that you are creating two wills here, not one, and they don’t have to be the same.

So your will could say something like “I leave my entire estate to my husband, or if he does not survive me by thirty days then to my children in equal shares or if they do not survive me by thirty days then to my siblings in equal shares…”

Your husband’s probably just grumpy cos he doesn’t like discussing the possibly of his children dying young. Men aren’t good with those kind of emotions.

...almost all of our money would be going to his brothers children (who I have never met!!), when my family are all hard working and much younger and could do with that extra income to really change their lives, not just piss it away having a fun retirement.

This makes sense to me, is this how you explained it to DH, what can his objection be?

For everyone who's asking about our estate - my husband did not bring more money to our estate than I did! I already explained that he earns about 20% more than me right now BUT my income will soon match his, and I'm the one who has the life insurance policy of 1.2 million and I have 750k inheritance from my dad passing ( I have different dad to my siblings) and ive put 650k into our house, the rest is a mortgage that his life cover would pay in the event of death, so as it stands right now I'm the one with the most capital in the bank, he just has 20% more annual earnings than I do.

This question only arises if you all die together or within thirty days of each other (usually a thirty day survival clause) OR die and the survivors do not have capacity to change the will/s.

Which is so vanishingly unlikely I'd not bother to write it into the will and would let the intestacy rules take over.

I don’t really understand why you are bothering to argue about this. I genuinely don’t think I could get worked up about such a remote possibility especially one in which neither I, DH nor our kids were alive to have to deal with the fallout. Just split 50:50 between the 2 families or leave it to charity, either way neither family is going to be seriously thinking that they might see this money.
I do agree he is taking quite a strange stance though - is this usual for him?

No you didnt
You said how much you earned relative to each other but not assets brought into the relationship or accrued since

You have explained now

@VanGoghsDog our solicitor told us to consider tragic events like car crashes or house fires as these are the situations that can leave no survivors. Trust me this is incredibly distressing for me to think about especially whilst pregnant. I just want to get it done and over with, but fairly.

If you want your siblings to inherit if you predecease them, then I would write your wills as such, with provision that should they predecease you, their share is to be split equally amongst their children. Rather than splitting it to siblings and their children.

I think you then have two options:

1. Split it 50:50 your side and his side.
2. Treat your siblings equally, so each gets 20%

OR, ignore your generation and say it should be spilt equally between any surviving nieces and nephews at the time of your death.

The problem you've got is the disparity in numbers between your generation and the one below. You have more relatives of your generation, he has more of the one below. You are going to have to agree a principle which works for both of you.

FWIW, I do think him expecting it to help an older brother isn't the best planning.

You can think about it and tell your solicitor thanks, we've thought about it, we're happy to leave that to the intestacy laws.

You're not compelled to cover every eventuality. Your solicitor is building their part!

@CarAccident I did actually say that our estate is funded almost equally. But people kept missing that bit so I gave specific details afterwards.

I may be missing something here, but in the extremely unlikely event that his (currently 66yo) brother survives him, you and both of your very young children, if the amount of your estate is £3m, how would the brother have a 'good retirement' with 80% of it - so £2.4m - but have to 'suffer' a bad/average retirement with 'only' half of it - so £1.5m?

Even if he doesn't already have his own house, income, savings and/or pension pot to be going on with, that's a huge bonus for anybody to just come out of the blue?

Personally, I cannot imagine in a million years being left the immense sum of £1.5m and my reaction being to be devastated that it wasn't £2.4m!

@FatherJackHackettsUnderpantsHamper because I don't want to leave his brother 50% nor do I want to leave him 80%. I want to divide it like follows:

50% gets divided amongst my siblings and their children.

50% gets divided amongst his brother and his brothers children.

So his brother would get about 250k (as would each of his children).

What a load of old rubbish. If you and your husband die together the law assumes that he died before you (because he's older) so you will inheret his estate which will then pass to your beneficiaries. Got to a solicitor instead of posting crap on here

@VanGoghsDog no, now that it's been brought to my attention I'd rather deal with it.

@ScierraDoll please read my post if you're going to comment.

There’s nothing to even discuss. You leave it all in a trust for your children.

Take 50% each and decide how you want your half split between your family.

Is anyone else really enjoying the number of posters who can’t understand the question?

How very odd. You are a married couple with a child so everything should go to your child/ren and any life insurance to the childs guardian until they are 18 surely? I own my own home and would never even think of leaving anything to my siblings as this house is my kids inheritance.

@LexRider it's unbelievable! I don't know how many times I need to clarify the question lol.

50% to each family seems the most equitable. He would be well-advised to follow your lead because if you write individual wills leaving all your estate to your own siblings, when you tragically die together UK law assumes the elder spouse died first.

YANBU. I had a similar thing. My DH wanted to make a separate provision for his sister if he died. He wanted to do this on the basis that he will likely have had a small inheritance off his Dad. I said no if you die everything should go to me and the kids. He got uppity about it. I said fine I will sign over my (far more substantial) inheritance to my sister if I die then. He soon changed his mind.

@Psychoticbreak if you read my post, you would see that I am asking the question in relation to the event that myself, my husband AND our children were to die. Like a car crash or some other tragic event. Our solicitor has told us to plan for this (despite is being a distressing thing to think about) due to the size of our estate.

What will it matter, you'll all be dead and won't know or care. You do your wishes in your will and he does his.