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?

That would be the mother of the exH? She might have a vested interest

This thread has given me some laughs - how can you ‘hide behind legality’. You mean, act in accordance with the law - how is that ‘hiding’? I think the arguments have been done to death here. A child under 18 cannot consent to a variation - that’s it. Nothing else to discuss.

OP I think you are acting with dignity and restraint. You have clearly worked hard to bring up your boys and steer clear of the toxic behaviour shown by their father’s family, while still supporting them to maintain a relationship with him.
It’s great that your sons have received such a generous and unexpected windfall, and I hope it helps them to get a good start in whatever career they choose. Keep supporting them.

There is no legal way that I can see of achieving what you think is the right thing. One of the beneficiaries is under 18, so their share is held in trust. The trustees have a legal obligation to act in the best interest of the beneficiary of the trust. So they can’t give away someone else’s money. The child that’s under 18 also can’t give away the money. The adult who’s 18 can, but has no way of enforcing any agreement that says they’ll get anything from either of the other two when they are of age. The only person who could change the beneficiaries of the will in this case is dead. So the will can’t be changed. And there’s no legal way of varying it to achieve what some people think is ‘fair’!!

I think it's appalling that the person only died a few days ago and they are ALREADY quibbling over money.

The person who died - it was their decision who the money went to. And theirs alone. NO ONE has a right to question that, argue over it or make demands. That is exactly what a will is for. It's for the dying person to make their wishes clear and it MUST be respected.

You are wise to ignore the messages. Maybe block their numbers.

Your children do NOT have to share. It's theirs. They should not be coerced or bullied into giving it away.

Be strong. Tell your eldest that he is entitled to that gift, it's what the person wanted. He can always block their numbers too. It sounds like he had a nice relationship with the person who has died, your children must be feeling sad, this quibbling is the last thing they need.

Unfortunately money and wills bring out the worst in some people! So disrespectful.

Let's put this scenario in different terms.
A cul de sac had 4 houses, 3 families and an old man on his own with no relatives. 2 of the families take the man shopping, to hospital appointments and round to their house for Christmas. When he dies he leaves his estate to charity but gives the 2 families a bequest. The 3rd family says but what about us we were his neighbours too you should share that money with us.
In this scenario no one would say its unfair that the 3rd neighbours got nothing and its the same for the OPs children they helped and spent time with their great aunt in law. She probably had no relationship with Emily.

They can think whatever they like about their grandmother as a result of her words (I just happen to think she's justified in thinking they are being greedy and selfish not to share when it's perfectly possible that their cousin was left out as an oversight, rather than because they'd done anything wrong).

when it's perfectly possible that their cousin was left out as an oversight, rather than because they'd done anything wrong).

And it is of course perfectly possible that she wasn't and that the choice of beneficiaries was deliberate.

This has got me thinking....if little Emily had inherited everything and your children nothing, would they be encouraging little Emily to be giving away what would be TWO THIRDS of her inheritance?

I doubt that very much!

100%

@Isabella70
Do you think that the Grandmother if she'd had been left the money would've shared it with others?
Going by the vibes I'm getting from the messages ive read I seriously doubt it
They seem to be a grabby nasty petty bunch on that side of the family who would've been as nice as need be to get their hands on the inheritance of an old none the wiser man; or so they'd have thought
Maybe this was realised
And that's why they got nothing

Out of interest, how do the in-laws know about their sister-in-law’s bequests?

How do they even know your boys are the beneficiaries?

Young people need to keep their inheritances in this difficult world.

Why aren’t you honest with your sons about your ex B-I-L’s assault?

OP does say her children were named directly - not child of or all necies/newphews - they do have wordng that covers any new chldren coming along but that wasn't used names directly were.

Plus they spent time with relative.

Also the will was a few years ago and there was ample time to amend to include the cousin before the recent death if they had wanted to do so.

It doesn't come across as unintentional - TBH it looks very deliberate to me.

Your relative are taking the piss.

Let’s say your youngest is 12. Oldest is 18.

They ACTUALLY want your 18 year old to WAIT SIX YEARS for the balance of his inheritance that he can have TODAY?

WTAF - No way!

Again the assumption that the will is a mistake rather than assuming the deceased knew exactly what they were doing. Why?

So it’s greedy and selfish for the DCs to assume that the deceased wrote her will according to her wishes and to keep what they are entitled to both legally and, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, morally, but not greedy and selfish to assume based on not being that the deceased was either too ignorant or lazy to write her will to reflect what she actually wanted and therefore demand someone else gives up a significant amount of money that they are legally entitled to to rectify that “mistake”? How on earth are the DCs the greedy and selfish ones in that scenario? There’s only one side feeling so entitled that they’re manipulating other people to get money that isn’t theirs.

I think this ultimately will cost your Son's relationship with his cousin if they are close.

Me too.
Provided excluded family had been involved in the life of the will writer to the extent the OP and her family were.

Do you yet know who the executor is? I’m hoping that the deceased relative has nominated a neutral party, given that he/ she appears to have made very deliberate decisions to leave out your ex’s family. If it’s a bank/ solicitor, it could be worth forwarding on the messages of harassment.

Your children haven’t received the whole estate. If the wider family feel that younger cousin has been left out in a way that merits a legal challenge, they could try contesting the charities’ share- and good luck with that…

My grandad left the majority of his estate to me and my sister with a certain amount for my niece and nephew. My son was born after my grandad died and the estate was still being sorted out at that point but my sister took the same amount out for my son. But we are talking like £3k per child, not huge amounts so for us it was easy to do. I would however tell your son to stick to his guns if it's a large amount. That 3k had no impact on me and my sister.

How does Little Emily even know?

I think the will has been written and that should be the end of it. They are your ex’s family so you don’t even need to reply. Your boys haas a relationship with her and that has been recognised in her will. I also think it’s incredibly unreasonable for them to expect the majority of his share now…. That is a huge no. Who is to say they would split the money with your kids anyway. I’d leave it to be honest. Whoever I leave anything to is who I expect it to stay with. He will prob have a bit of estrangement from his cousin now, but I think I would leave it.

Reading between the lines, ex PIL started going through the deceased’s house the day after she died and came across a copy of the will at some point in the last few days. I don’t know whether this was with the consent of the brother, at deceased’s own request or them taking liberties. I hope it’s clear why I maintain a distance, and I don’t interrogate my DC so only ever get the bits of information they volunteer or what crops up in conversation. I don’t know who the executor is.

Yesterday morning exH called to tell me the DC had each been left a percentage share of the sale of the house (obviously not on the market yet). I asked that nothing be mentioned to either DC until things were more definite or there was an actual will reading, as I’m very much a don’t count your chickens til they are hatched person. My request was ignored.

By yesterday evening, possibly once other relatives became aware, the messages started to eldest DC, telling rather than asking in a “what we will need to do is…” sort of tone. DC has then queried it with me and we discussed it. As I said he was a bit bemused that anyone is asking to go against the deceased’s wishes. The abusive messages then started to me, and the guilt tripping messages to DC.

I have worked hard to be free of this family. I have let a lot slide over the years to maintain a decent environment for my DC and up until now there has been no suggestion of any ill treatment towards them, although I think they’ve seen for themselves over the years that their dads side of the family does things differently than mine. It’s been a difficult balancing act but I take on board the points from PPs that perhaps I’ve shielded them too much.

It’s hard to know whether “Emily” has been told anything about it. It’s not information I’d have shared with my children if it was the other way around and she’d been left the money.

At no point have I suggested that “Emily” has done anything wrong.

Sure, grandmother can think whatever she likes too. I’m questioning why you think they should care?

I’m also curious as to how they’re ‘greedy and selfish’ keeping money specifically given to them, yet the in laws aren’t greedy and selfish for demanding money that has nothing to do with them?

People with this mindset really do have an inflated sense of entitlement directly proportional to a lack of self awareness.

I’ve said large amounts of money brings out the true greed in people, on both sides. If you feel there’s guilt to be had, that’s entirely your own opinion.

Just maintain the support towards your eldest - tell him to repeat in absurdum the same phrase; "I want to respect aunt X's last wish as of her will".

No, it's my opinion too