To think DS and I are not in the wrong? Will related…

[IfIHadAHeart]

A relative of my exH died recently and has left a fairly substantial inheritance to my DCs. This has some as a complete surprise. One of my DCs is over 18 but the other is not.

The relative has not left anything to my DCs cousin. No idea why, or whether the will might even predate the cousin’s birth. If so, there were still many years in which to update the will if the relative had wanted to, and they were of sound mind throughout.

exMIL believes my DC should split their inheritance with the cousin. She believes my eldest DC should give the majority of their share to the cousin upon receiving the money, and that my youngest DC should then top up eldest when they turn 18 and can access the funds.

Eldest DC has said no, with my backing. I’m now getting rather unpleasant messages from my exH, MIL and SIL (parent of the excluded cousin) about the unfairness of it all and that my DC are selfish.

AIBU to support eldest DC to stand their ground?

I bet the majority of posters would not actually give away 50k just to keep things fair and others happy. It’s very easy to write down what you would do, but very different in reality.

Your relative was of sound mind and decided who they wanted their money to go to. If they wanted the other child to inherit, they would have left it to them.

It would be unethical not to follow their wishes. Doing the right thing is your DC keeping the money as was intended.

There are circumstances in which I would, personally.

But in this situation there is nothing more “fair” to be done because as I wrote above, it is obvious that the children were chosen because of their personal relationship with the deceased rather than the position on the family tree.

The only correct statement in your post is that wills are the intentions of the person writing the will. The rest is just guilt-tripping bollocks.

The first paragraph of OPs first post says one of the beneficiaries is a child. Everyone reading the thread has had that information throughout.

A parent thinking they're entitled to do what they want with their minor child's inheritance is not good person behaviour whatever the relationship between the testator and the person left out of the will, there's no getting round that one.

The only people that can vary the will though are the beneficiaries surely, and as two of them affected by this are under 18 they’re not in a position to do anything. So I am unclear how you’d achieve what you believe to be the right thing!!

They will be upheld as gospel by those they benefit and be argued against by those it doesn’t. They are not divine however - that is only the championed view of those that get the money.

Again louder for the people at the back - Wills are legally stated expressions of someone's intent about how their assets are distributed after death and can be upheld in court. That people argue against them because they haven't benefited and someone else has is down to their grasping attitude, not the fault of the person whose will it is, nor of the people who benefit.

Always good to big up yourself in comparison to a group of strangers you know nothing about.

I agree why in this case the beneficiaries were chosen.

It’s just I find the concept of “earning” an inheritance quite unusual. Most of us are given an inheritance based on familial relationships.

The risk of wider family problems is baked in now, whatever happens.

It's possible that even OPs DC being pressured into doing what Emily's parents want isn't going to stem the resentment from their side at having been favoured. It may also create resentment in OPs DC, either soon or in time, that their relatives behaved that way towards them. OPs second child is no older than 15. And worst, it could cause a rift between OPs own DC. The first one dutifully give away a chunk of his inheritance, waiting for the day the younger turns 18, and the younger says hang on a minute I was never in a position to consent to this.

If a magic wand could be waved to ensure there were no negative impact on family relations, some people would think that was worth paying a chunk to avoid. But there's just no guarantee that's what the outcome would be.

tell them if they don't stop you will report them to the police for harrassment-end of.

No one can make them share, but actions have consequences and I think their grandmother thinking less of them for refusing is pretty reasonable.

And again, why are they the ones expected to be worried about this? Why isn’t the grandmother expected to be worried about being thought badly of by her grandchildren? Or the father being thought poorly of by his sons?

Actions do have consequences indeed, and by treating OP’s DC as they are doing said DC would be fully justified in telling the lot of them to go fuck themselves.

I think given their ex in law Uncle previously pinned their mother against a wall by her throat we can assume family relationships with the ex ILs are not exactly rosy. Plus exILs will be abusive.

The death only occurred a few days ago it is incredibly grabby by the exILs to be pressurising a young adult to share money they won’t get until probate is granted - that could be 12 months plus.

Might be time to give you son a chance to see what his dad’s family are really like. There is protecting someone and then there is making them more vulnerable by not giving them the full picture. At 18 he probably has an inkling anyway and he should be prepared in case e.g. his uncle goes for him.

I confess to not having read every single post.

When my generation ranged in age from late-20s to late teens (I was in the middle of this range), a great-uncle (my paternal grandfather's brother) who had never married left everything to two of my cousins (brothers). The other four cousins (brother and me, and two other cousins) were related through our DMs, who had taken their husbands' surnames on marriage. So we, the DCs of those marriages, had our DFs' surnames. The two male cousins who inherited were related through their father, my uncle, and had the same family name as the great-uncle who died.

My mum and aunt speculated at the time that the estate had been left "to the family name", but we'll never know if that was the actual reason. The brothers who inherited were the oldest of all of us, so it's possible the will was written after they were born but before the rest of us were. However, as the youngest cousin was at least 16 at the time, there had obviously been plenty of time to update the will if great-uncle had wanted.

My DM is pretty sure that her dad would have been horrified that his brother, having chosen to leave his estate to his brother's DGC, hadn't split it equally between all six of us.

DM said that if it had been DBro and me who had inherited, she'd have strongly urged us to share with our cousins. Easy to say, of course , though I think my DM would genuinely have thought that fair. Our cousins did not share with us and each ended up with £100k+ once the house was sold.

It was a bit odd and a bit disappointing, and generally just a bit weird to know that two of my cousins got this massive start in life and the rest of us didn't.

We're all spread across a few different countries now (two not in UK) and I have barely seen most of my cousins since the last one of us got married. The one exception is one of my cousins who inherited. I don't see him often, but we have a good relationship. If he lived nearer, I'd see him more often because I enjoy hanging out with him.

Although I occasionally think about the oddity of it all, I don't feel hard done by. It all happened over 25 years ago now but, even at the time, it wasn't money I was expecting so it wasn't as if something had been taken away from me.

Yes, people like this will find a way to have a problem eventually no matter how many times the children jump through their hoops.

That's a good point. Unfortunately your DC have a violent man as a relative.

Even if there were other circumstances in which I might think it was a good idea to share, given the family's behaviour I would never ever share the inheritance in these circumstances. OP's kids seem like nice kids who actively spent their time with a distant relative to be pleasant - the other family sound absolutely appalling and the more distance from them OP's family can have the better.

Also, if your son does start to feel the pressure I'd probably be tempted to share a bit more about the family dynamics that he doesn't know. He is old enough to make an informed choice with all the unpleasant detail, not a naïve one thinking these are family members who value him and his family (i.e. the OP).

@IfIHadAHeart
Money always brings out the worse in some utterly charmless types doesn't it?
You stick to your guns and support DC
MIL can go suck it up and dislike it
Bet if the shoe was on the other foot
You'd not see the gleam off one penny
I'd tell them to go and reside in "Sod Hall"
Because my response to all this is in that statement!

This would be the GM trying to guilty trip them into giving up money another relative left them by naming them directly in a will.

I'm not sure OP - care about her ex MIL feeling at all and frankly I think the DS shouldn't at just 18 be subject to this level of emotional manipulation.

If GM thinks this strongly she can ammend her own will - ie her money to adjust she can not demand money that is not her's is handed over in fairness.

Given this sides of the family is unpleasant and even violent - the father of cousin missed out - it's not impossible the deseased had their own issues with them and this was very deliberately done.

Sadly I do think it may be time to tell DS you own issues with the family - so he knows they do not have his best interest at heart at all.

This. Otherwise, what is the point of a will? In that case, nobody should have a will, and the State should distribute assets down the family tree via a prescribed formula.

What about them thinking less of their grandmother for her emotional manipulation?

I’m an even better person than PP! If it were me, I’d give 50% of my hypothetical share to Emily and 50% of my hypothetical share to the local homeless shelter.

It’s easy to give away hypothetical money, eh?

You might want to think again about considering yourself a good person. Pressuring someone to give up their rightful inheritance is not a nice thing to do. Neither is ignoring the last wishes of the deceased. If this scenario would make you uncomfortable it would be on you to give up your own money to address it, not bully a young person into giving up theirs.