Inheritance one

[Oculusopen]

GF & GM wrote matching wills about 15 years ago. They split 10% of their estate among all grandchildren - 6 GCs. 90% of estate to be split equally among their 3 DCs: DC1, DC2 & DC3.

A couple of years later (10 years ago) DC1 died leaving behind GC1 & GC2. DC2 & DC3 took good care of GF & GM. GCs also visited regularly but were not involved in day to day care.

DF & GM recently died in quick succession. GC1 will inherit 1/60 th of the estate.

Does this seem right?

Usually a will states that if a Dc pre-deceases the person whose will it is their direct descendants inherit their share. I.e the children of Dc1 would inherit Dc1’s share between them . In addition to any other bequests they were left.

So by the sounds of it they get their share of the 10% left to grandchildren, plus share the third of the 90% that would have been left to their parent.

Whoever did what caring and visiting is irrelevant.

It is what is written in the will that counts.

DC2 is the executor and told GC1 that’s what they are getting. I also thought DC1’s share would have been split between DC1 and DC2.

Ordinarily the share of dc1 would be spilt between their children, so the 30 percent of estate would be 15-% for each dgc plus their bequest

Is the 90% is now being split 45-45, with the 6 grandchildren still splitting the remaining 10%? Or is the 30% for the one adult child now being split 15-15 with their two kids, plus a one sixth share of 10% each?
Either way - if it’s in the will then that’s how it is, no arguments

90% is now being split 45-45, with the 6 grandchildren still splitting the remaining 10%

The grandchildren should inherit their deceased parents share

The will should state what happens in tbe event of dc predeceasing the parents.
I think usually that would be that the deceased's share would go to their dc (scenario 1)
But the grandparents may have put something different such as split between remaining dc. (Scenario 2).

If scenario 2, all dgc would receive 1/6th of 10% of the estate. End of.

If scenario 1, dg1 and dgc2 would each receive 1/6th of 10% and 1/6th of 90% of the estate.

But you need to know the details of the will.

Unless the will has been changed, surely dc1 will still inherit, but her portion will be distributed according to her will (which I presume is her dp and dc).

Before dc 1 passes away , dc1 gets 30% gdc 1 and 2 get 1/6 of 10% each.

After dc1 sadly passes away, gdc get 15% (dc1share) and 1/6 of the 10%

(predume dc1 left all money to her children. If left to dp, then dp inherits the 30%).

What's the exact wording of the will? Nobody can tell you without that.

I can see the logic but wonder what the legality is if the DC1 is still named in the will.

It feels really mean that the other grandchildren will potentially benefit from their parents share of the inheritance (might be saved for them in the future, help to buy a home etc) but the grandchildren who have lost a parent have also lost that potential support.

It depends on what the will stated. Usually the grandchildren get the parents’ share split between them. But not always. It entirely depends on the terms of the will. You will need to see a copy to see which is right.

It's nothing to do with dc1's will. It depends on the grandparents' will.

Normally if children pre decease parents their share either goes back into the main pot and divided between beneficiaries or their share goes to their children.

So in this case if my understanding is correct 2 out of 3 children have predeceased their parents. So in effect their share will either go directly to their children as well as them getting their portion of the 10%. Or their share will all go back in the pot so to speak and 90% will go to remaining child and 10% to grandchildren.

This happened on both sides of my family. In both cases the GCs inherited their parents’ share. Everyone agreed that was the right and fair thing to do.

Edited to add: DC2 as beneficiary and executor seems to be behaving to benefit themselves instead of all the beneficiaries. Seems dodgy as hell.

It depends on the wording of the will so order a copy online.

Search me. I can't keep up with all these initials

Splitting DC1’s share between her 2 children would have been the right thing to do.

DC2 has access to the will but has not shared it, so no one can see the exact wording. However, DC2 believes that the GCs should each have 1/60th end of.

You need to what exactly was written in the will, without that it's impossible to say but usually it would still be split 30/30/30/10 with the GC getting 30%+1.6% presumably the other GC will inherit from their own parents at some point.

You can view the will online.

You can get a copy of the will online for a few pounds https://www.gov.uk/search-will-probate

The will needs to be shared so that all the beneficiaries and their guardians can see what it says and who is entitled to what.

A beneficiary can ask to see a copy of the will, the executor may decide no however you can instructed a solicitor to obtain a copy.

Depending on the value of the estate a solicitor may need to be involved and ensure accuracy.

Sounds like dc2 is being sneaky and likely trying to get more money than they are entitled to.

The will is a legal document and failure to follow the wishes is not a wise move

What DC2 believes the GC should have is irrelevant.

In any good (e.g. professionally written) will this point should be very clear, and the default, as others have said, would usually be that DC1's share goes to their children. Of course if something else has been specifically stated in the will then that stands.

It is also definitely the right of all beneficiaries to see a copy of the will.

DF & GM recently died in quick succession. GC1 will inherit 1/60 th of the estate
What is GC2 getting? You've said DC1 left behind two children.

Anyway, I agree with PPs. The will needs to be shared.

Our wills are split 3 ways. We have stated if any of the three dies, their share goes to descendants. If no descendants, split equally between remainder of 3. All explicitly stated. I think that if not explicitly stated it goes to descendants of original 3, it would just be split equally between survivors.