To think the only fair way to leave your money is equally

[Runbunny]

Between your children. Plus any other legacies, but treat the children equally.

I understand people will have reasons for doing it differently, but you just leave behind a world of hurt and possible friction between siblings.

My Dad spends a lot of time thinking about his will and inheritance tax and occasionally floats various ideas past us. ATM as far as I know, it is to be split equally between SDsis and I . I often tell him I don't care, I wish he'd just spend it all, and I mean it.

However, his latest idea is that he'll leave the lion's share to me and my DC because I'm widowed and neither I or DC are likely to be left anything by DH's parents, whereas DSis's family stand to inherit well from her inlaws.

I'm horrified at the idea. It's probably true that DSis needs the help less than I do, but neither of us are broke and as I understand it there's a decent sum (care home requirements excepted) to split anyway. I think it's about more than the money, and DSis would be entitled to feel very hurt if our parents do anything unequal. Plus no one really knows what ILs will leave or who to.

Yes it was thanks. You might have noticed interest rates have risen and most
people try to pay off their mortgages these days. And it was her choice to exclude her only grandchildren.

I don’t see why a child should be passed over for gc. DH is the only of his siblings with dc, he wouldn’t expect to get more inheritance because of that.

To my mind that is equal though.

Agree.

I also don’t necessarily think because someone is LC or NC they should automatically be excluded. Family dynamics are complicated and fault is rarely on one side.

The way to resolve that would be to leave DH's share directly to his DC. I don't think "you" (as a family) should expect more because you have DC.

I never said about a child being passed over! 🤦🏻‍♀️ are you trying to be argumentative on purpose

So in the scenario, that one sibling gives up working to look after elderly parent and other sibling visits once a year, whilst earning in excess of £240k pa both offspring's should get the same inheritance - realky?

But then to be £100k isn't split equally among the children as per your OP.

I never expected anything and my DH inherited and not me.

No, because you've accounted for a previous "debt" or effectively being given an early inheritance. The assets have still been split equally, but some was during the parents' lifetime

You sound quite bitter about it though, apologies if that's just the way it seems to me.

I think that honestly the best thing you can do in your circs is to stop discussing it with your father.

I can see why people don’t always make it equal. I have 3 kids, 1st I had at 16 and he’s never had his dad in his life. My younger two get a lot of help from their dad financially. He’s paying for them to go to Uni, so no student loans and he’s planning on helping them buy a house in South London, not cheap, but he stands to inherit enough to put a large deposit each on a house.

So when my mum sadly passes I’ll probably let my DS1 keep my share as he cannot afford to buy me and my brother out, as he’s on a single income. This will be hard for me as I still don’t own a property as I live in SE and I’m a single parent but I know moving out with his dogs would be tough for him. I may stipulate that I go on house deeds and I will also ask that he considers leaving his house / savings to his younger siblings to account for the fact I’ve given him this money. My death in service goes to 3 kids and when I do buy my own property I’ll have that go to the 3 equally but obviously thing won’t be totally equal as I’ll be giving my eldest half my inheritance (assuming it’s not all gone in care home fees of course which is perfectly possible)

Well, it just shows what a dickhead the BIL is, he could have just given you guys the money. Bit he didn't... I gave my inheritance (£15,000) to my sister, after the money had been distributed as per the terms of the will, because that's about 2-3 months income for us, but 10 months for her. It meant she had £30k and could use it to help get on the property ladder.

Ouch. I'm sorry that's how he feels. I hope you don't believe you are irrelevant for not having kids it's absolutely not true!

My friend cares for his MIL, she lives with them and their kids. They've given up every ounce of autonomy for caring. His brother is going to get a massive surprise as the MIL has left everything to my pal.

But the point is... They had £100k to give 50/50 to kids, and now you're saying that actually, it should go £10k to Child B, then £45k to each child.
So child A has £45k and Child B receives £55k.

And also, what if there was only £10,000 left to inherit. Then what? Child B receives everything?

That's where it all gets muddy and now that money isn't being "left equally".

I never said about a child being passed over! 🤦🏻‍♀️ are you trying to be argumentative on purpose

I never said you did… but in some examples dc do get less or nothing because money is given to gc or dc with gc as @Onlywayisupmaybe has illustrated which is shocking imo.

In your situation @HaveYouSeenRain I don’t see why you think your dc are entitled to some just because bil is rich. As @Runbunny said you didn’t have to clear your mortgage & could have given some of your share to your dc.

But child A has already had £10k that isn’t included in the £100k. The total is £110k and they’ve had equal shares of the total.

So entitled. Why should your family get a greater share of MILs money because you chose not to use contraceptives?

You sound quite bitter about it though, apologies if that's just the way it seems to me.

Definitely!

I know a multimillionaire who looked after his whole family financially. When his mother died, she left everything to another sibling. He was so hurt. He didn’t want or need the money (she got it from him anyway) but it felt like she hadn’t thought about him. I understood his mother’s reasoning but it caused a lot of pain.

In the ideal world fair & equal would mean the same thing.

Im one of 3 to my Mum each of us in slightly different suituation. I hope my Mum spends it all and has fun. But I think she will split it in my sisters favour. Neither have got on the property ladder, one lives in HA house and the other with her long term partner in his home. Two of us have children. I have a mortgage and work FT & in a better financial place, My sister spends it to fast and has never been a saver. But I know my Mum is a worrier and will want to help them to get out of debt or put a deposit down.
My dad remarried a younger lady and had a son. So it will be left to her - though she has said it will then be split equally amount to our half brother and the grandchildren (she is true to her word)

Feels a bit rubbish for me, as it slightly makes me feel that because I made different choices.
Im secure that my Mum loves us equally. I do understand why my Mum would make these choices.

Hopefully she spends it all on cruises and fun so nothing left!

Your Will is your last chance to tell people what they mean to you. It has nothing to do with whatever wealth they’ve managed to acquire themselves, it’s about what value you place on them. It’s cruel to favour one over another under those circumstances.

In theory, of course split equally is the ideal. In practice, maybe the parents have helped children at different points and due to the different ages of children, it’s unequal amounts. Child 1 buys at 27 as they met their partner at uni, they buy with a 10% deposit and parents gift £17,000. Child 2 doesn’t meet a partner young and ends up buying by themselves at 37, they are only 3 years younger than their older sibling but in the 13 years since their older sibling bought, their 10% deposit is now £29,000. Child 2’s 10% deposit is £12,000 higher than child 1’s but both are given 10%. Should that £12,000 be taken out of the estate on the parent’s death, even though Child 1 has had the benefit of building wealth as a couple for a much longer time?

Life happens and life is unpredictable and unfair. Parents want to help their children when they need it, sometimes through positive things like buying a house or helping with university costs and sometimes through negative things like divorce or redundancy. That’s before you get into anything more complicated like disabilities, addiction, debt management, death of a child’s partner.

I think people often try to make their will fair and split it evenly but there is often feelings in life that are magnified on death. So does the child who quit their job, their marriage suffered to look after their parent feel it’s fair that the will is split evenly with their sibling who carried on working and whose marriage didn’t fail? Probably not. From the parents point of view, they don’t want to blame the child that didn’t look after them and leave them with the feeling of being unloved by their parent because we equate money with love.

If I end up with grandchildren one day I would like to leave a modest amount to each of them, and then divide whatever is left equally between my children. Something like 10% split equally between grandchildren, and my two children get 45% each. Or maybe 20/40/40. Depends - that is all a long way off!