How can I protect my son from a large inheritance at 18?

[Awkward718]

NC for this as it’s quite a sensitive issue.

My DM is in her 80’s and I have a pre-school age DS.

My DM has told me that she has written in her will that she is going to split her assets between her 3 children, me and 2 siblings, however my share will go direct to my DS as she considers DH and I to be financially secure and not in any need. My 2 siblings have no DC of their own.

The amount my DS will receive is likely be somewhere around 300k-400k.

I have no direct need for the money so am not at all bothered that it is being left for his benefit however I do have a huge concern that handing such a significant lump sum to my DS at 18 could have catastrophic consequences for him. He’s far too young at the moment to know whether he’ll be a responsible 18 year old or someone who could ruin their life if handed such an amount at a relatively young age with no restrictions.

Is there anything I can do to alleviate the risk? DM is adamant she’s doing a really nice thing for DS so won’t entertain changing her plans despite me highlighting the obvious risks.

Can an inheritance handed to a child for them to receive at 18 be deviated or not? I suspect it can’t. If so what other options are open to me as I don’t want to live through his teenager years terrified that he’s going to be handed what will then be a huge sum after investment growth on his 18th birthday.

If it can’t be deviated could we do something such as invest in joint assets with him as a child where both parties have to agree to a sale?

Failing that are there any other options? I’d honestly rather not have anything going to him than have this arrangement in place. He’s an only child so will inherit plenty from DH and I at a relatively early age anyway as we are both older parents.

Again not what I’m asking. The person in question is a grown adult and his future inheritance is planned to go into a controlled trust. I’m asking how and why that is possible for adults with capacity to not be allowed access to money left to them.

In that case I would focus now on financial education for your DS. I have two DS, aged 25 and 18. I am reasonably confident that both of them would be very sensible if they inherited money. DS18 would want to put some in a high interest deposit and the rest would go in mid-lev risk investments. He’d probably earmark £10k for travel. DS25 would probably spend more than I’d like on an expensive car but would handle the rest carefully.

I inherited a similar amount at age 23. The will stipulated it was to be held in trust until I was 25 but the solicitor was asked by the other beneficiaries to create a deed of variation allowing me to have the money at 23. I bought a house with it but at 18 I would’ve had no idea what to do with it and probably wouldn’t have been capable of choosing a good house or sorting anything out. I guess DM doesn’t know many 18 year olds to know what they’re like.

Based on my experience I would try to push for a trust until 25 or suggest it is equal between all siblings and you inherit the money to pass on to your DS when he has a solid plan for it (assuming you have a good relationship and she knows you would do this). Personally I would push for the latter because I’ve just entered into a property trust and the rules and responsibilities around trusts are complicated.

The op says she won't reconsider in her post .

I wouldn't spend any time worrying about this possibility, as in my experience it's now really rare for British people to get married young. My son is in his mid-twenties and has a wide circle of friends. Not one of them is married. I'm pretty sure none of them are even engaged.

@Awkward718 - "... My DM has told me that she has written in her will that she is going to split her assets between her 3 children, me and 2 siblings, however my share will go direct to my DS as she considers DH and I to be financially secure and not in any need. My 2 siblings have no DC of their own..."

Sorry but you are contradicting yourself. (Or perhaps your mother is contradicting herself depending on exactly what she has told you).

Your mother is not splitting her assets between her 3 children. She is splitting her assets between your two siblings and your son. You don't come into it.

Assuming you are in England or Wales there is no law that says your mother has to act either logically or reasonably in how she leaves her estate, but what she is suggesting makes no logical sense.

Assuming you and your two siblings are equally financially secure why should they each get (presumably) one third of her estate entirely to themselves to do with as they see fit because they have no children, whereas you get nothing because you do have a child?

If your mother thinks it's your son who really needs the bequest it would make as much sense for her to leave everything to him and nothing at all to you and your two siblings.

You need to try to talk to her about this and explain to her why it makes no sense, but if she is adamant about what she wants to do then there is nothing you can do about it - unless you think she's of unsound mind!

You could try suggesting to her to leave a reasonable gift to your son with the rest of her estate being split equally between you and your two siblings - but if she doesn't want to... well what can you do? Nothing.

If your mum's will stands as it is then your son will be 18 when he gets the money. He will be an adult and can spend it as sensibly or as wastefully as he likes. Nothing you can do about it.

How old is he now?

[Edit - I think some posters have suggested you mum leave it in trust for him until he's 25. I'm not sure that would work. He becomes an adult at 18 and I'm not sure the courts would enforce a trust saying he could only get the money at 25. 21 - hmmm... possibly...]

I don’t know. The remainder of the money comes from his mother who is alive, so it’s her money atm, so I presume she’s set it up like that.

Yes I understand that part I just think it’s completely wrong that it’s even allowed.

I’d probably just go big on financial education young in those circumstances.

For example, my friends 9 year old understands investing and contributes his own pocket money to his JISA. I’d be pretty confident that with grounding like that he’s unlikely to waste an inheritance he gets at 18 as it is part of his psyche to save for the future and enjoys watching his investments grow.

If your DM dies before he turns 18 I’d be talking to him about the inheritance and what he’s going to do with it, how much will go into a LISA/pension/put aside for a house deposit, how much is for fun spending so it’s like a foregone conclusion once he actually gets the money.

Because the money isn’t left to them, it’s left to a trust for their benefit. Sometimes it’s because that money is for them and their children, or it’s for them for a certain purpose and so someone legally controls that.

You can’t control money that’s left to someone outright, but if you want to attach strings to what you do leave behind on your death you can do that with a trust.

Would your DM listen to a solicitor if they raised the same concerns? Could you contact the solicitor involved to discuss?

Not a lawyer but my understanding is that if all beneficiaries agree to the variation then a will can be altered after the death. If you as guardian and your siblings who are also beneficiaries agree to making the request a trust until the age of 21 then I believe this is legally sound.

Would your siblings agree?

The question is why it should be allowed to leave money in a trust to a grown adult with capacity. I understand that’s what the poster is talking about happening but being able to exercise that level of control is extreme.

Perhaps there’s some special provision? He’s had a dodgy time with drugs and many more issues. Perhaps he’s been somehow declared not competent? I believe he will kill himself with drink/ drugs if he does come into a large sum, absolutely no doubt.

I have extremely wealthy friends, 6th generation landed gentry wealthy. All of their assets are in trust as they are just custodians of the wealth for the next generation.

I also work in creating trusts. Many people have earned wealth but still want to instil a work ethic into their children and don’t want them to never have to work. They also don’t want money they’ve worked hard on being lost to a stranger in a divorce or wasted on drugs and alcohol. It’s THEIR money so they get to decide that, and while they’re alive they can decide what to give to their children. After they die, they still want the money THEY earned being spent the way THEY want.

They are not stopping their children making their own money and spending that however they like. No one is entitled to an inheritance, and anyone leaving one behind can leave it on restricted terms. If the recipient doesn’t like it, they can walk away from the trust altogether and never receive a penny

Something similar happened to mine.

I basically brought them up to understand the value of money. I was extremely tight and paid for very little that they wanted. I made them work from their early teens.

I told them about the trusts on their 18th birthday. They understood how significant it was, because they knew the value of money.

They haven't touched it, but intend to use it for house deposit etc. Meanwhile they have learnt about investments etc.

I think realistically, that's all you can do. Don't fuck it up!

This is baizarre and I am not clear how this could even be possible

if you’ve not seen legal expert- do so

this money, if it’s be given to you, even with intents that it’s money for your son at 18, is in your estates. It’s therefore subject to IHT rules re your estate. Any investments earning or interest earnings are payable by you as part of your income.

it’s either a bequest to you, or it’s not, and is in a basic trust you’re managing for him till 18. You can’t leave someone to someone via someone else.

this just doesn’t make legal sense if in England and wales.

Not sure about the wealthy friends passing money through generations that nobody gets to benefit from; what’s the point?

I just don’t think if an adult is to inherit money that it should be conditional at all. Either leave them it or don’t. Pulling strings after you are dead to control your adult child by having a trustee hold them to ransom is awful. I’m surprised it’s allowed. I would absolutely reject an inheritance like that

THIS … absolutely!

Our sons will be wayyyyy richer than us when they get their trust funds in five years. It’s hilarious. I’m just trying to bully them into buying me a house in the middle of nowhere. 🤷‍♀️

I think this would irk me a bit OP, and not because I’d be as worried as you seem to be about how he’ll spend it. You’ll have a significant role in bringing him up not to be impulsive or to make bad decisions like spending it all on fast food or drugs or clubbing.
It would annoy me because, no matter how ‘financially secure’ you are, that’s a large sum of money and I would feel like bypassing me to go to my child would be saying something about their regard for me. Are your siblings financially secure? What if you have more children and/or they do?
I love my child and I know my parents do too and want the world for her, but I was their child long before she was their grandchild. My parents have made their wills and everything will be split equally between me and my two sisters, with nothing going direct to the grandkids. That’s the only fair way really. Obviously it’s her choice and if she chooses to go that way there isn’t much you can do other than educate your child. But I would be trying to have a chat with her and asking such questions as what if you have another child? Would she want that child to feel disregarded in the future when your DS comes into that fortune? And how come she considers that your siblings deserve the money but you don’t? Very tricky.

It's not legally sound as no one (including guardians and trustees) can agree a deed of variation on behalf of someone under 18, that part would be illegal.

I I’m almost certain there’s not much you can do

She said she tried and they wouldn’t do it

Nope, that's not down to the executor. It's the beneficiaries who can choose to bypass some or all of their inheritance in favour of another via a deed of variation.