Why don't sole beneficiaries of a will share more?

[malificent7]

I mean in cases where it's clearly unfair. Such as the step mum inheriting all when there are children about or one sibling unexpectedly inheriting everything.
Jusr a bit shocked about inheritance threads ( and concerned about my own stepmum getting everything).

Yes, but presumably one reason the courts tell a spouse who's only been married for a few months that s/he isn't entitled to 50% of the other spouse's assets is because they haven't been built up together during their intertwined lives as a married couple. Exactly the same applies to a couple who've only been married a short while, one of them dies, the surviving spouse scoops the pool and the adult children of one or more earlier marriages get nothing. The word 'grabby' has been used on this thread about children expecting to inherit from a parent. It seems to me far more applicable to a spouse of very recent standing refusing to share an inheritance with stepchildren.

I don’t think the law needs to change. I think that people should be able to leave their money exactly where they want to. The idea that you would be forced to leave money to anyone is awful.

The couple that are still married are not seeking to break the marriage so it’s not the same. The person who is dying considers themselves bound by that contract. They often allow their spouse to make decisions for them, they are as one. It’s not up to others to judge that relationship and quantify how married they are.

One of my relatives left the majority of her money, which was a lot, to a cat charity. I thought bloody good on her. She didn’t marry or have children, but always had cats. Surely the will shows who the money should
go to. If the deceased wants it to go to one person, then so be it.

The problem is that only a minority of British people have wills, though. The intestacy law gives effect to what most people would want (roughly), but it's not going to get it right for everybody. A lot of people don't think this through because it means facing some difficult facts, e.g. I'm not going to live forever, my new spouse doesn't get on with my kids and seems to be on much better terms with her own kids, etc etc.

We'll have to agree to disagree there. A short marriage at the end of life is just not comparable to the relationship with adult children who aren't estranged.

Irrelevant. If you love someone, you don't weaponise their death and their estate and trample on their wishes for their children because you had a quarrel with them. The kids didn't choose to have you in their lives, it's not for you to punish or reward them based on whether they did what you wanted.

But it happens, a lot, so protect your kids with your will.

I think the problem is that leaving everything to the stepmother means you disinherit your own children who aren't hers - and sometimes leaving it to her kids instead. I suppose everyone has a right to leave their money and property as they wish, but I don't think you should disinherit your children. You brought them into the world, and you should do right by them. Family is the only bond that stays rock solid, although I guess that's already failed in the case of people leaving stuff to their kids' step parents.

I personally think that if your mother spends your father’s estate on her own living costs, that is one thing.

If your father’s estate goes to your mum, then your new stepfather, then his estranged cousin’s children because he doesn’t have children or siblings of his own and those are his next of kin, and you don’t inherit anything from your own father yourself, I do think something has gone wrong somewhere.

It will happen and it has happened and that's a fact.
Just look at those going to the High court

I would assume the legal advice was poor. This happened to a friend who employed a very expensive solicitor. The will was wrongly drafted and a huge court case ensued. Absolutely outrageous, but the solicitor, despite charging a fortune, got it wrong. It is a minefield. But I would always recommend using an estate planner, not a solicitor, if you have property or investments.

I'll tell you why. In my case, I'm married my DH after he had four kids with his ex-wife. We had those children every other weekend without fail through illness, sickness and trauma. We wanted to have them much more, but their mother was adamant that she was best place to look after them. Massively helped by the amount of £1500 worth of child maintenance paid every month on the dot plus the mortgage of the Michael home. The mother never worked. She felt that giving birth to the children entitled her to this.

They were absolutely and completely poisoned against my husband. At Age 16, they stopped coming. Although they continue to text and send kind messages to me and their dad for the next six years (the cAO expired at this age) , but they told us they could no longer visit because their mum got so upset And they felt obliged to take her side by this point, they had been divorced 20 years...

They refuse to visit . My husband is so upset by this but doesn't want to push it. I would absolutely love them to visit.

My husband made his Will last week and left everything to me. He had a large premium bond win two years ago (the children do not know this) he does not want them to visit because he has money. As he says, they either want to see me they don't and the only person in the world who truly loves me is you therefore I want you to have the money. (It's mine anyway, because we're marriage, but that is how it happens.)

No
Look at the cases in the papers in the High court - The judge makes a decision as the judge felt x/y/z should have not been entirely cut out

Its playing silly games as its easy to say "write a will properly" and you think those in press where often a million plus was let to one person and even reasons given why others were not included and the judge went ahead and over ruled it

Re "poor advice." Dot forget, if those fighting the case have deeper pockets and the defendant of the Will does not, any good barrister could run rings around a barrister that was not an expert in the field

The sad truth is (read my initial post here) - a dead persons last wishes are not respected. Why should Mrs Dakota Sumerhigh have her will over turned when in the Will it explicitly stated that not a penny to going to money-grabbing parasite, Johnny her son, Adam her second and everything was left to her thrid child, Goodmary as she was that looked after her for years and never tried to chet her out of her monies.

Reforming could mean someone in my situation, a similar age to DH's children, losing my home so they can have their share. How would that be fair?

Conversely the second wife could have been married to the man for thirty years, and been the major breadwinner. If the man dies, she should cart herself off to the YMCA so her DSCs can have all the joint marital assets.

This really isn't a difficult problem. Just make damn sure your share of any joint assets are left in trust for your kids.

You'd be amazed at the mental gymnastics people can perform to justify what they want to do as fair anyway, whether will related or not.

IF your kids deserve it !!

If assets are joint your share automatically passes to the survivor.

you would need to make sure the family home is not joint tenants, and bank accounts, savings, or any other assets aren’t joint.

you would also need to make sure your share does not exceed IHT levels- considerably less than passing to a spouse or a joint asset.

it would make marriage obsolete as a major point of marriage is inheritance so the remaining spouse is financially provided for.

if you want to leave your assets to your kids, don’t get married and keep all your finances separate.

also bear in mind that leaving to your kids could mean selling the family home once all are adults. I had a friend who inherited his mums house, and evicted their stepdad asap, leaving him with nothing.

@malificent7 for context, can you tell us how much inheritance you "expect" from both parents after they've worked all of their adult lives to pay for their wealth and how much a stepmum might be contributing to your father's "estate"? Then we can advise you more clearly on how much you should or shouldn't feel entitled to

@Yogatoga1 good point. Tenants in common for the house or other biggest asset and lifetime trust as needed.

I think that the wishes of a person should be respected, unless there is evidence of coercion or not being of sound mind.

If you believe they were poisoned against him as children then it's a shame they're being punished for it. I'm also a little disturbed that he appears to be so transactional towards his kids after apparently being so desperate to see more of them. The maintenance money wasn't a favour to their mother either, it was their due as his children.

More to the story, perhaps.

That's really sad for his kids, first he leaves them, then he leaves them nothing

My children don't need to earn their inheritance from me. I'm their parent and I want to do right by them; it's not a reward for living as I tell them. And they sure as fuck shouldn't have to earn it from a step parent whose presence in their lives wasn't their choice. My love for them is unconditional. They don't have to love me back, although of course I'd be devastated if they didn't and something would have gone wrong. But their inheritance isn't payment for their love. I'm not King Lear.

But that's why, if I become single, I'll never marry again. I don't want to complicate or risk their inheritance.

oh i agree... i personally would do 'the right thing' but when vast sums of money are being handed to some people, greed simply takes over! I have learned from this and i have amended my own will, and have made sure my daughters are fully included no matter what happens