Will - excluding a child

DUTR

Sugardonut wrote: »

I don't know the personals of your situation, but think its really sad that contact has been lost has been lost with your child. It must be upsetting for them, and i think being hell bent on excluding them after death would be a further blow. Is it really worth it?

Is what really worth it, fighting over death money or making a last testament statement?

Welshwoofs

serious_saver wrote: »

I think there are many reasons that a family member could be written out of a will. For example if the other parent of the the child had considerably more wealth than would be left for the remaining children. If the OP and their partner both dies their children together would be left without a parent but the child from the first marriage would still have a parent and possibly a step parent (therefore security).

Thank you! I was wondering when someone was going to mention one obvious reason for leaving and estate to one child and not the other in these circumstances!

Absolutely nobody has considered that perhaps the previous child will be amply provided for in his/her Mother's Will and perhaps splitting the Father's estate equally between the two children would actually result in a big inequality in favour of the first child.

BitterAndTwisted

It might be sad that the father doesn't have contact with his son but the reason/s for this have not been disclosed. There could be many reasons why this course of action is completely justified. In any case, the OP is not the father but the wife of the father. A wife who claims the majority of the couple's wealth was brought to the relationship or create during it by her. Seems not totally unfair to me. Maybe the child's mother is extremely well provided-for and has assets and wealth of her own for the child to inherit. Who knows?

I

Sugardonut

If my mum or dad left me out their will, i wouldn't be upset about the money, it would be the fact that they'd specifically gone out their way to leave me out. It just seems a bit harsh if they haven't actually done anything other than have the misfortune to be born into a family that split up.

blue_monkey_2

An old friend of mine had a one night stand with the intention of getting pregnant - which she did - and because she knew the father had a 'decent job' that she sound get money via the CSA. She also made sure he lived far enough away that he could not bump into her/see the children. She did not tell him she was pregnant, just went straight to the CSA as soon as baby was born. Her actions horrified me and I've not really spoken to her since. Some women are just wicked, sorry.

The father is not named on the birth certificate and the mother does snidey things like sending cards, letters and photos out of spite to the mans solicitor (yes she told me this), no it is not the childs fault but has got by without the father thus far and would probably never know who he was. Some children never know their father so you should not assume that the child ever did - clearly things are not as clear cut in this case.

Maybe the situation is the same here, some men do have children they know nothing about because of the circumstances the child was born. Maybe the same has happened in this case.

And if everyone kept the children they had then there would be no need for adoptive and foster parents, most of whom do an amazing job and rescue children from some dire circumstances so it is best not to judge.

neverdespairgirl

willquery wrote: »

The will is being created as the fear is that the child they wish to exclude would potentially have some claim if the Husband died in probate - because of their age and the fact that the Husband pays child maintenance. The belief is that a written will would solve this issue as such. Is this right or could the excluded child contest the will successfully?

In England & Wales, not, the belief isn't right. As others have mentioned, the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 applies. As the H is paying child maintenance, the child falls fairly and squarely within the terms of the Act.

neverdespairgirl

willquery wrote: »

This sums it up 100%. Majority of money is from the Wife.

Then the claim would be against the husband's assets.

neverdespairgirl

princessdreamer wrote: »

I would challenge any will left that excluded my children (well they would IYSWIM), all children should be treated equally by BOTH parents.

You could only do that if you had actual grounds to do so, though. You can't challenge a will on the basis that you don't agree with it.

neverdespairgirl

princessdreamer wrote: »

I would contest on the grounds that money came from my divorce out of my families money and therefor should be redistributed. Of course I could be wrong and every situation is different.

You have to have a legal reason. If the money was awarded to your ex without strings, he can will it to whomever he wishes, subject to the provisions of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

Creativeshopper

I wonder if OP would consider taking out a life insurance policy with his eldest child as sole benficiary? It could be taken out until the child is 18/21/25 - whatever is reasonable, and depending on the amount of cover could be a relatively cheap monthly outlay in terms of premiums. This would ensure that the marital assets are protected, but would fulfil the OP's financial responsibilities to his older child.