Inheritance split - how to split when siblings have different numbers of children

[Benja1405]

Divorced parent died - two married sons in will, one has 3 children and one has 2. What do you feel is the fairest way for the estate to be split? Lawyer thought 50/50 between the two sons. Son with 3 children thinks 55/45 in his favour is fairer as he has more children. Just interested in views, thanks.

@SamphirethePogoingStickerist Oh yes, sorry. The OP’s DH could contest it if he wants-whether he wants the hassle is another thing.

I’d probably leave it tbh as he’s getting 45%, but in his shoes, I’d never really trust my brother again.☹️

I feel mumsnet should pin this to the top of the thread somehow!

50:50 is best.

Well I agree it's not fair. But as it's now documented in the will (presuming the parent has died?) there's nothing you can do.

I think siblings and grandchildren should be equal. I don't think families should be equal if that makes sense. So if I have 3 dc and db has 1 I don't think his dc should get 3 times what mine get. So by that logic my "family" would get more but everyone would get the same if that makes sense. But I can see how that isn't fair on siblings with no dc. It's a tough one. I just hope my dp's spend it all so we don't have these problems- ideally on global trips and not on care.

We had this situation in our family with my childless great aunt. My mum and her sister, who both offered care and support and who were the nearest living relatives, had been told “all the money is coming to you” and so understandably thought they would receive a 50/50 share of a property worth about £300k.
After my great-aunt died, it turned out that the he wording said the estate was to be split equally “between my nieces and their children” which meant my mum and her 3 children got more than my aunt and her 2 children. My aunt thought we should give up our inheritance but she also knew there was no way to make us and we all needed it really, except my mother who is very comfortably off. The relationship has never been the same again.

I'd leave £X amount to each grandchild and then split the bulk of my estate equally between my children.

THERE IS A WILL STATING 45/55% SPLIT!!

We know that: we're not discussing how it will be distributed, but whether people believe it to be fair based purely on the fact that one son has an extra child - especially as said son 'suggested' (however strongly or forcefully) to the father that having an extra child should somehow entitle him to more than an even split with his brother.

50/50, no question

PILs have split by ratio of grandchildren 1:2:3 . Good thing DH and I didn't remain childless! I think it's a bit odd but try to be the bigger person about it, don't want to end up with a family rift.

Definitely 50:50. I come from the side of the family with lots of siblings. Why should Aunt and cousins miss out because my parents decided to have more kids.

The whole thing is weird anyway, worrying about what your kids might get 2 deaths later. Pretty distasteful and it might all be spent anyway.

50:50.

It's inheritance for the 2 sons.

If the parent wanted the GC to benefit they would have left a certain amount to each of them personally.

My mums will is for me and my 2 siblings. 2 of us have children and she said she didn't leave anything for GC as they'll benefit from us and she didn't want to 'disadvantage' youngest sibling for not yet having children.

That may be reflective if the fact we are all still early 30's to 40's as mum died young (cancer)

My aunt thought we should give up our inheritance but she also knew there was no way to make us and we all needed it really, except my mother who is very comfortably off. The relationship has never been the same again.

I can well understand your aunt being aggrieved in that scenario. Did any of their children do any of the caring or just the two daughters?

Do you know that she didn't need it?

I think there's also the potential, in some circumstances, that splitting an inheritance between both the children and the grandchildren can end up being inequitable owing to the timing and different stages of life. It may be that the deceased's children are struggling to make ends meet and servicing a big mortgage - for the whole family - whilst the young GC end up blowing their share on luxuries or leaving it sitting in a bank account.

If all of the money had gone straight to the children, it could mean that they could focus it on providing for the family and clearing the mortgage and then, when they are the age that their own parents were, they would have far more to leave to their own children, who could then be at a stage of life where it would do them much more good.

If both siblings’ families are complete, 4/7 to one child, 3/7 to the other (if the grandchildren are minors).

That’s how my grandparents did it, and it made each and every one of us feel equally loved. Nobody felt sore about anything. I will be doing the same.

50/50 I have 2 siblings we have different numbers of children ranging from 0-3 our parents have stipulated that whatever's left is to be split 3 ways between us and it's for us to decide if we give any to our children. They have it written in their wills that some special belongings to be given to the grandchildren.
Secretly I'm hoping they spend the lot anyway as it'll save on the inevitable arguments and fall outs.

In a situation like this it would make sense for a set sum to be divided equally among all grandchildren, with the whole of the residue of the estate being split 50/50 between the deceased's two children.

If both siblings’ families are complete....

Even that isn't foolproof, though. There was a thread a while back where a couple had two daughters: one married with two children and the other adamant that she never wanted to get married and certainly was never going to have children; so they constructed their will to include money to pay for their two GC to be privately educated throughout.

A while after they died, the second daughter's life took quite a turning and she did end up marrying and having children. She approached her sister for her children's 'share' of the GC education money. Unfortunately, not only was there not enough to pay to fully privately educate more than two children, but it had been specifically left in the will for that express use for the two named children (may have been in a trust iirc) - and under 18s cannot agree to a deed of variation, even if they wished to.

Also, even if they had somehow made amendments to split the money so that all of the GC could have had partial private education, the named GC had already had their private primary schooling - and, had their parents known from the start that they would only have enough to fund primary OR secondary private education, they would (like most parents in that situation) definitely have focused the funding on private secondary.

It was very sad indeed and nobody was a winner. What was intended as a a generous way to massively advantage (what were believed to be) ALL of the GC ended up single-handedly causing irreparable damage leading to the ensuing family schism.

50:50. Mr 55 is trying it on

Well said.

OP any reasonable person would say 50:50, you know that, and what happened was unfair. This thread is only going to negatively impact on you as particularly whilst you are grieving.

accept what happened and move on. If you can, forgive your brother as it will benefit you. This doesn’t mean forgetting that your brother showed you exactly who he is.

I know the will has already been done but normally 50/50 is the best and fairest way to split.
I don't think adult kids should be rewarded in wills for providing care etc and I say that as the child who provides care!
An equal split between direct children leave no room for drama or upset.

My mum and dad are leaving their estate equally to their four children even though ones a bum and ones an absolute darling (me 😇). I've encouraged them to do this.

I see your point. But when all the siblings are the other side of 45yo, things are very unlikely to change. Stepchildren are a completely different matter.

My mum and dad are leaving their estate equally to their four children even though ones a bum and ones an absolute darling (me 😇). I've encouraged them to do this.

@EveryName Silmilar with my in-laws. None of their four children are bums, but one takes advantage of their good nature and another is nice enough but totally self-absorbed …I don’t think it would ever occur to him to do anything nice for his parents. The other two are far more caring and considerate….luckily one of them is my DH.

Goodness me, your BiL is a bit of a nasty man. Sorry for your DH about that.

50:50 definitely.

I think siblings and grandchildren should be equal. I don't think families should be equal if that makes sense. So if I have 3 dc and db has 1 I don't think his dc should get 3 times what mine get. So by that logic my "family" would get more but everyone would get the same if that makes sense. But I can see how that isn't fair on siblings with no dc.

It's an odd way of looking at it, in my opinion. It's really assuming that the grandchildren's "share" is in the parent's keeping.

It's not really following standard practice basically - it's usual that estates are passed from one generation to the next, not to 2 generations at the same time.