Inheritance to grandchildren bypassing children

[mucky123]

I just wondered if someone could shed some light on why I feel the way I do. It is absolutely none of my business. I freely admit any thoughts about it are unreasonable. If anyone should have anything to say its my bil/sil.

My dh and I are quite comfortable, not interested in an inheritance. We have 3 dc. My Bil not so comfortable but alright. Think they might have a tougher retirement than we do. They have 2 kids.

My ILs. Have some money not loads but are comfortable and very likely to leave readonable inheritance. They intend to leave everything between 5 grandkids. So my kids will get more of the pot than bils. I'm really irritated by this on every front (1) haven't discussed it with their sons, feels like a kick in the teeth for them, (2) gc will be inheriting fairly young. Will this discourage them ftom working, will they piss it up the wall or lose half on an unsuitable marriage, (3) it's like the parents aren't trusted to send the money on to their kids, and (4) it's unfair between brothers as our kids get a bigger slice of pot. That seems unkind to lovely bils family.
Partly also I'd like to be the one to give my kids a house deposit, pay for their wedding etc and this has all gone as they will now have a reasonable inheritance quite early.
I know I'm being unreasonable,

My nephew got his inheritance from grandad, around £50k.

He's 22. Hasn't touched it and is saving it for houses deposit.

Not all kids are raised irresponsible and will piss it up the wall.

But even if they do... So what? They're allowed to spend their own money however they want to.

The OP is pretending to be all magnanimous but is actually wanting the money herself.

And sometimes that care involves making sacrifices in order to give it. If those sacrifices reduce circumstances l don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that a parent would factor that in when making a will.

So you see this as transactional? That the loving care offered to them in old age is only given as they looked after their children when they were under 18 (and when said children probably didn't have a great deal of say in the matter)?

I don’t know why you aren’t happy for your own children to inherit and to top it off I’m not sure why you’d want them to have less just because you chose to have 3 children and not 2. The fair way to do it is to split equally if that’s what they’ve decided to do. Surely you haven’t brought them up to fritter away money? Start talking now about investments in property or high interest savings accounts etc and how big lump sums can make a huge difference in life. Or better still ask your ILs to write a letter on how they wish them to spend it (not binding but might make a difference) eg I’d like this to go towards your house deposit

Also what @QuintadosMalvados. For my dad it's about control and some sort of resentment about his own children. They actually have no money, only the house and will likely end up in care so we're not talking megabucks.

Yes - so parents are expected to pay twice, then - once by raising them lovingly with all the costs involved at that stage, and then again with their assets when they die? Where does that leave the children of elderly who have nothing to leave? Saying, ah, well you’ve nothing to leave me to make it worth my while, so I won’t bother with supporting you now? We know that IRL that doesn’t happen. Care is shared between generations because it is the right thing to do, because of love/relationships - NOT because there will be a financial dividend down the line.

They might not have the inheritance you imagine, care home fees over several years can soon eat up inheritance unfortunately. My husband's gran left all her money to her grandchildren bypassing her own children (after several years in an expensive care home). She had 4 children and 5 grandchildren. My husband's parent's had 3 children, whilst 1 of her children had none, the other 2 had 1 each. It left me uncomfortable to think that her own children got £0 so my husband messaged his mum who was executor of the will, but she simply said this is her will and her wishes. Her own children were all in their 50's and 60's and had done very well for themselves, none of them are remotely short. The youngest grandchild was only 21 while the rest were 30's.

I don't think my husband's aunty's and uncles saw it as my husband's family inheriting more, the grandchildren are all independent grown ups and 3 are married, so I'm not sure on your thinking there, I just felt uncomfortable as a dil inheriting with my husband when actual children got £0. There wasn't actually that much left in the end anyway, nothing remotely enough to pay for a wedding or house deposit, more just a small savings boost.

There is a good reason to skip a generation - No IHT either for the parents or the grandchildren to pay. In any case, it's the grandparents money to do as they wish.

It's partially about money. Of course it is!
If somebody requires care then it may be cheaper for the adult child to give up work, cut their hours etc to assist the aging parent.

How could anybody in their right mind think that caring for another adult does not have a financial component to it?

Yet they're not getting a penny!

Unless it's to avoid taxes, adult child is dead ergo grandkid gets the money or the adult parent is a completely awful person, I maintain that there is a narcissistic element to this leaving to the grandkids nonsense.

Most people are average, just do the normal thing and leave it to the kids ffs.
Such pretension not to do otherwise.

One really big issue with leaving to named GC or even GGC is that more children could
be born. You have to keep on top of your will and not die suddenly!

People do it so children of a remarriage don’t inherit or query the will but it can lead to other problems.

I was going to write this.
OP’s point appears to be entirely from a place of entitlement and desire to be Lady Bountiful with money she hasn't earned for herself. It isn't even from her own inheritance line, it's her ILs.

Your children will get 1/5, no more or less than the other grandchildren. It's also none of your business.

You could speak with your children about it. If they agree with unfairness, they could re-distribute their shares as they feel appropriate.

My question would be who is going to executor, currently going through this myself and it's emotionally and physically draining and a lot of work. I think it would be hard if I was doing it all to receive nothing at the end of it. I also wouldn't want to put a young adult in that position.

rhe grandchildren need it more than the chikdren. It’s tough for young people now to get in the housing ladder, it will help them more. Giving it to the children puts it at risk, from
divorces, remarriages, care home fees, spending it all, etc and bypassing them guarantees it gives to the grandchildren. Makes perfect sense toe particular the children don’t ‘need’ it

Is there an age where they can access the money? If not then I too would be annoyed.

I think it’s sensible. The younger generation will be in more need of it.

I mean they could give it all to the cats home if they wanted so be grateful.

It’s only sensible if it comes with a sensible age restriction. If someone plonked thousands of pounds into the hands of my kids at 18 and bypassed me, who would have stuck it in an ISA for them, I would be bloody annoyed.

No it will be cash. So uncles who have absolutely token input at rare family events will have control over money until the kids reach 25. They absolutely don't know the kids in question and their attitudes to spending, saving, debt, lifestyle for young people in 2026 will have been shaped 40 years ago.
I think the in-laws feel it will pull the family together but these are not young men, they are close to retirement and cynical with life who barely what's app 'happy birthday'.

I do t know what the answer is, but money without clear communication and flexibility can be pretty toxic.

This is what I am planning on doing and what I am encouraging my parents to do (maybe with a token for me and my sister, but the bulk going to grandkids). My grandma’s recently passed and it all went to my aunt and dad as per will. Neither particularly need it and are enjoying luxuries such as fancy holidays, new cars and expensive (£30k+) landscape gardening. I don’t begrudge them spending the money but I do think it would have had a far bigger impact for me to inherit in my 30s than for me to inherit in my 60s. (I would save 000’s on interest on mortgage tbh). I believe the best way to generate wealth is to skip a generation.

I've known the skipping the generation thing happen.
Ostensibly to avoid taxes, which it did I admit.

I can't help but think, though, that the aging parent used it as yet another opportunity to get one over on their adult child who took on the burden of care and didn't receive any compensation for it.
Not even the ability to buy a little treat out of money they didn't earn.

Don't get me wrong, the adult dc is very well off but still not a penny. Doesn't sit right with me somehow.

I am giving my inheritance to my daughters, despite my own massive debts. Their generation needs it more than mine.

Your ILs are wise to recognise this intergenerational disparity in financial potential.

My parents are going to leave a certain amount to each grandchild, and split the remainder between me and my siblings. It's not the UK and this makes things a bit more tax-efficient, but also recognises each grandchild while pretty much splitting it equally between children.

I do think your feelings are valid.
However, it does mean that their money is "safe" for their grandchildren if the 2 marriages break up. It also means your children will not have to use the money on care homes (as they would if it was given to you). Plus, great for house deposit which will hugely benefit them and why wouldn't you want your kids to be helped out (at no cost to yourselves too!)
Also, please remember, it is your in laws choice and your children still may not get anything if your in laws require care homes etc!!

YABU

1. They should definitely tell their sons (how do you know if they don't?)
2. No, most likely it will allow them to travel and buy a house, both of which are excellent
3. No, it's the grandparents recognising young people have it far, far harder than we did
4. Not at all. It is treating all grandchildren equally. They aren't extensions of the sons, they are whole, individual people