Inheritance - has something shifted?

[NepoInlaw]

My 80 something in-laws have over the years inherited quite a few times. From parents, friend bequests, siblings.
As far as I'm aware these were all straight forward, no conditions, nothing complicated, straight in the family pot. Inherited from both sides.
Sometimes these sums were enough for a holiday, sometimes more significant.
They've just redone their wills and gone down a Complicated trust route, so that only 'blood' relatives benefit.

Having bought Xmas presents, hosted and done heavy lifting for 30 years when their son is crap I am a little miffed.

I figured I'd be the one picking out their care home for them, so what's caused their loss of confidence or trust. Has there been a generational shift?

Do stop doing anything where you anticipate gratitude - I am sorry but it doesn't seem to be forthcoming nowadays. Do anything where you feel kindness is needed just because you are a good human being.

As for inheritance, people leave their money to whoever they want in England, there are no rules here. My late husband played golf with a man locally, and I used to see him and his girlfriend when I walked my dog. He was a widower, and 20 years go, met his girlfriend, a widow, on holiday, and she came up here to live with him. He had two adopted sons by his late wife. He died Christmas 2023 and I continued to be friendly with his girlfriend. She always said he hadn't left her any money - and she didn't have any money. I always paid for everything.

One day I was asked about my late husband's will which had gone to probate and I decided to look at her late partner's will. He'd left her the whole of his estate, £125K. Nothing to his two adopted sons. I felt I'd been hoodwinked as I always took her fruit/biscuits etc as a treat - she was playing me.

Does the will stop your DH leaving any of the inheritance to you after his death even if he dies after his parents?

Why do you think that son in laws or daughters in law get a chunk of the inheritance?

I think it's you who's muddled up.

This is not a shift at all. You've assumed wrongly about how people write wills.

I'm very close to my two DILs but by leaving my estate to my son's I expect them to benefit. If there were GC I would probably revise my will to include them.

But that’s what she means - the in laws variously inherited with the inheritance coming to mil, fil or both and it went into the pot. Using a trust means any inheritance to the ops dh will NOT go into a family pot. It will stay into the trust which will make distributions to dh. If dh dies, the op is not a beneficiary, the trust is not dhs assets, and she doesn’t see a penny of it.

I would absolutely not do that to my children’s partners if they’d given birth to and brought up their children and cooked my Christmases and been at my birthdays for 20 years. They would deserve recognition.

Maybe just me - but I would immediately start wondering if my dh or another is having an affair, and they know about it. Given the lengths they have gone to, this has not been done on a whim, this has taken a huge amount of time, thought and expensive legal advice.

Is your marriage rock solid?
Are you sufficiently close to them to explain the impact?
Do they disagree with the sanctuary?

Your dh if you have a good relationship should move to correct this after they have gone perhaps? Have you spoken about it?

You can put in sage guards, at least you now know in advance.

Although we get on very well with our DILs & SIL, it's never occurred to name them separately in our wills.

We both have our own savings and current accounts and a joint account for household expenses. We have pre-paid our funerals.

Should one of us predecease the other (which is probable) everything goes to the surviving spouse, but both wills leave a small legacy to each of our GC (£5k each). Then, when that spouse dies, the remaining money & property is divided equally between our 3 children, with another £5k each for the GC.

Of course, it's likely that the surviving spouse will need to pay for care so there may not be much money left by the time that person pops their clogs(!)

I think the shift is more and more people divorcing/separating, often after long marriages as well as shorter ones.

My ExH and I had separated but not divorced when my IL died. I have the honour of being named in their will as to not receive anything as their son will provide for our kids. Prior to their death ILs and I got on really well but ultimately blood is always thicker than water. I didn’t expect to receive anything but neither did I expect to be named as being excluded. Makes me laugh now but I was very hurt at the time.

I'm going to go out on a limb that will probably have a lot of people howling with outrage, accusing me of generalizing and painting everyone with the same nasty brush blah blah. My observation is that people in their late 70s/80s were making the bulk of their wealth in Thatcher's heyday. Their formative money-making years were a time of boom, money-minded self-interest, privatization at the public's expense, greed and excess. That was shameless and vaunted wealth accumulation and expenditure. I earned it, you don't deserve it. My own parents fall into this category.

If these people have wealth to leave, they think along very me-me-me '80s terms. If they don't, they are more magnanimous and take a more family-minded view. (Yes, generalization disclaimers apply).

I think parents of young adults today are watching their children struggle to get on the housing ladder and things will be different for them. The next generation of wills will be very different. And these young adult children will also do things differently when it's their turn.

I don't think it's personal to you; I think it's the way that generation think.

This.

You are aware that if the surviving spouse was to remarry then your children may get nothing if all of the assets are left to the surviving spouse.

I suspect something has culturally shifted. Divorce is relatively easy now, average life expectancy has changed, age of having children has increased.

If a couple will stay together no matter what and all children will be from the same partnership then inheritance is easy. It goes to your children, and your grandchildren benefit. (in theory)

When divorce is common and blended families are possible even later in life you want to make sure your money goes to your own children and grandchildren, not step-grandchildren you may have very little to do with as they arrive later in life etc. So stipulations are made.

My folks have been discussing their wills and how they will ensure their assets benefit their children and grandchildren in the event of any splits later down the line for myself and my siblings, given the age of myself and my parents it is not inconceivable that myself and my husband will still be of child baring age when my folks get to the danger zone.

I don't think you're wrong that it's gotten more complex, but it's because relationships have gotten more complex.

It wasn't that long ago really that divorce was fairly rare in this country. You left your money to your kid, and that meant their spouse as well because well, they're obviously still going to be married at that point. If your kid is dead by the time you pop your clogs, then obviously that money will go to your kids widow/er.

Now, nearly half of all marriages end in divorce. Obviously, when I die I want my cash to go to DD. In the future, that will mean that cash benefits her family too, her spouse, her kids. Happy for that to happen. But what if I pop my clogs, her spouse cheats on her, leaves her, and shacks up with the affair partner. Now half of my money has gone to some absolute bastard who never see's his kids.

The thought of that happening would upset a lot of people. Personally, I can't be arsed, I'll be dead, I won't care, and it sounds like a lot of faff to set up,

You only have to look at the relationships board to see how throwaway some people view marriages and relationships. How often does someone complain about their husband and posters respond with ‘get rid’, for what are often not serious issues.

I would think about the trust route too when the time comes, if I were not confident in the strength of my children’s marriages. My main concern would be to protect them as much as possible after I am gone, not just from marriage breakdown but also from them not using it sensibly, by placing restrictions on its use.

The people I know who have remarried in later life are fully aware of this. They all came to agreements in their wills that only their own bio children would inherit.

In terms of housing some couples allow the remaining spouse to live in the house but on their death the equity goes to the children, proportionately.

This is normal I think? My DP’s will states me as beneficiary even though they have known DH for nearly 20 years and they see him as a son. They will just assume that the money will benefit us both - as will the money your DH inherits from his DPs? Unless you think your DH will ring fence that money from you which seems like an entirely separate problem tbh

My parents did a will trust so that only blood relatives benefit. They were advised to do it by the FA. He talked about the implications of potential divorce, stepchildren etc. My parents said confidently "oh we don't think that will ever happen". Anyway it was all sorted out, then my DF died in 2017 and a year later my exH left me. He then got together with a much younger woman who was still young enough to have kids. It could all have been very messy and different.

I can see why people do it, but I can also see why you are miffed. You would be very justified to leave all the heavy lifting to their blood kin now i.e. their son, your husband, but you were before this too.

Ops in-laws are leaving their estate to their children and grandchildren like most people do. How on earth in that 'me me me'?

My will splits my estate between my children do you consider that 'me me me' as well?

I don't really understand. Most parents would leave their inheritance to their children or maybe their grandchildren if they'd fallen out with their adult children. They'd be unlikely to leave it to "my son and DIL", although I guess it does happen sometimes. I think the bigger question is whether your DH is likely to share (as I believe he should) his good fortune with you?

Trusts are a way of limiting IHT rather than what is 'morally right' with the assets.
Trust funds need a board of trustees to manage them and it can get quite complex.

I know where you’re coming from OP. I thought it was lovely when a friend inherited a token sum from his in-laws. Their own DC got the bulk but the DC’s partners all got a small cash bequest.

You don't need a trust to do that- you can just name the beneficiaries with a clause to exclude step children/children from 2nd marriages etc.

This, I didn't inherit diddly squat after DH's parents died, didn't for one second expect to anyway. It was split four ways, a third to DH and his two siblings, with the remaining quarter shared among the grandchildren. Everything DH inherited was used for the benefit of us all, him, me, and our children. No strings attached, thank fuck.

Both my in laws have died within the past year - I would never expect any inheritance from them. I find the idea that I would very odd!! Equally when my parents died it all went to me and my sibling!!

I bought my in laws presents, visited them and took them to hospital appointments because I wanted too and I loved them. You are being very unreasonable and greedy!!