Would this will make me an awful person?

Manxman_in_exile

ThePants999 wrote: »

- Mirror wills, where you each leave your estate to the other if survived, or the whole lot to your families in an agreed split if not. This can achieve precisely what you want, i.e. your husband gets your share if he survives you, and then your 50% gets split between your family when he dies. However, it would require a massive amount of trust on your part, because after you die, absolutely nothing but his conscience would prevent him from changing his will to do whatever he likes - your family may never see a penny.

This is what we have done as in my post #5.


But you are right about trusting the surviving spouse. It happened within my family where one spouse died (leaving children and grand children) and the surviving spouse remarried and left virtually everything to their new spouse when they died. The new spouse is meant to do "right" by the children and grandchildren of the first marriage when they die, but who knows what will happen? Nevertheless, this is the route we've chosen. We've taken the view that if you're married you have to trust each other.


But this is why the OP needs a frank discussion with their OH, and they definitely need to seek legal advice on how best to achieve their ends and what all the potential scenarios and pitfalls are.

Brighty

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

This is what we have done as in my post #5.


But you are right about trusting the surviving spouse. It happened within my family where one spouse died (leaving children and grand children) and the surviving spouse remarried and left virtually everything to their new spouse when they died. The new spouse is meant to do "right" by the children and grandchildren of the first marriage when they die, but who knows what will happen? Nevertheless, this is the route we've chosen. We've taken the view that if you're married you have to trust each other.


But this is why the OP needs a frank discussion with their OH, and they definitely need to seek legal advice on how best to achieve their ends and what all the potential scenarios and pitfalls are.

There's 2 big downsides to that approach
1. If you leave everything to your spouse and they then need to go into a care home, the whole lot will be lost.
2. If after you're gone, your partner remarries, their existing will is invalid, so could easily die intestate, meaning new wife gets the lot.

Leaving your half elsewhere, with a life interest for the surviving spouse avoids both of those

Rosie1978

Thank you everyone so much - these are very good points to consider. I have discussed it with my OH and while he agrees with it, he's really not open to paying to create a will as we are only in our late thirties.

My point is that unfortunately, life has a way of catching you unawares and it's the situation a friend has found herself in that has prompted these thoughts sadly.

I'll take note of all of the above because while I trust him 100%, if I pop off first, who's to know he won't be misled or tricked by anyone as he grows older? I'd rather get it all locked down then there's no question!

And I promise that if it's him that goes first that I won't blow it all on round the world cruises and champagne. Promise!

PasturesNew

My aunty died about 10 years ago, a couple of years later her husband left the entire estate (£500k+, possibly £1million+) to some random local handyman/gardener!

Dad was "furious", I've never seen him angry before, but he thought aunty's half should've "gone to family", her 3 surviving siblings.

If you have specific wishes you HAVE to make a will - because the one that lasts longest gets ALL the money for their family alone... or their new wife/husband or random handyman.

Malthusian

Brighty wrote: »

There's 2 big downsides to that approach
1. If you leave everything to your spouse and they then need to go into a care home, the whole lot will be lost.
2. If after you're gone, your partner remarries, their existing will is invalid, so could easily die intestate, meaning new wife gets the lot.

1 is a very remote possibility as they would only lose the lot if they were in the care home long enough to exhaust all (or nearly all) of their assets and fall back on to the council. The average stay in a care home is 2 years.

An option that AFAICS has not been mentioned is to be very generous to your kids while you are still alive, if you have spare cash. If you have the money to be generous to them throughout your lifetime then it will not cause so much of a problem if you die and your spouse remarries and by negligence or design leaves it all to the new one. And it's more satisfying and more tax-efficient.

brewerdave

Rosie1978 wrote: »

And I promise that if it's him that goes first that I won't blow it all on round the world cruises and champagne. Promise!

...why not ?? Can't enjoy it from beyond the grave:)

ThePants999

Malthusian wrote: »

An option that AFAICS has not been mentioned is to be very generous to your kids while you are still alive

That option hasn't been mentioned because the OP doesn't have any kids, and I imagine there's a limit to how generous she wants to be to nieces and nephews :-)

FreeBear

Tammykitty wrote: »

We are in a similar situation too, but have no nieces and nephews either!

At the minute we don't have a will as we are happy with the intestate rules

No children and no OH - Got one niece and some sniffling little illegitimate issue of the black sh*t of the family. No way an I letting the latter benefit from my estate when I'm gone. So Sis & niece get a sizable chunk each and the rest goes to the children of a close friend.

The BS does get a mention in my will in as much as to say any claim from BS is to be strongly defended by the executors.

Yorkshireman99

I was interested to find that even though I have no close blood relatives my solicitor still asked me to provide an outline of reasons for my choice of beneficiaries to be kept with, but not forming part of, my will. The bulk goes to one of a close friend's children. This was my choice because the other two have spouses with well to do parents whereas my choice has no potential family wealth from their spouse. I cannot imagine that the other two would have any legitimate claim but my solicitor obviously wanted to cover any eventuality. Good for her. Knowing the family very well indeed I can't imagine they would even consider such a claim but having said that this forum repeatedly shows how greedy people can be.

DigForVictory

My grandfather's will was a delight to read, as not only did it set out in unambiguous terms what he wanted to happen, it explained why three relatives got "A single Five pound note each, from the green envelope in my middle left hand desk drawer." He wasn't taking any chances on there being any change in the currency, and before the three could try to argue, there was an additional letter which the executor said he could read aloud to the entire company here assembled, and then court, or they could hold their peace.
To notable exercises in self discipline the family managed not to yell "Oh go on, read it!" & the three held their peace, their fivers & (I presume) some shreds of dignity.

If you want to have what might appear to be an "unfair" distribution, you need to discuss it and be very clear in person & in all documentation what your wishes are. That way, a court knows what you intend & if your wishes are challenged later, you can explain from beyond the grave. It may still be overturned, but it requires much more effort & expense. Or cooperation or coercion, but in any scenario you will hopefully be well beyond caring.