Wills, Beneficiary Terminology

Yorkshireman99

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

On the other hand fixed amounts can also be problematic, as they are eaten away by inflation, or if the estate is run down by something like care costs the people left with what was small fixed amounts end up with more than the residual beneficiaries, or their bequests fail totally because there is not enough to pay them.

It is easy to overthink all the what ifs and end up width a will that causes arguments about the meaning. Keeping it as simple as possible is a good policy.

Tom99

The best thing to do is to jot down all of the things that could happen and what you would like done if one of those things happen so:
A dies before you do
B dies before you do
A and B die before you do.
Your solicitor will then transpose that into will talk.

ThePants999

unforeseen wrote: »

Leaving percentages is fraught with danger. The executor can find themselves with the problem that it gets argued that they didn't get the best price for properties and assets and therefore deprived beneficiaries of some of their due money.

I don't understand what alternative you envisage that DOESN'T have that problem. Even if most beneficiaries are left fixed amounts, there's still a residuary amount to be distributed to one or more residuary beneficiaries who could still argue that.

Tom99

unforeseen wrote: »

Leaving percentages is fraught with danger. The executor can find themselves with the problem that it gets argued that they didn't get the best price for properties and assets and therefore deprived beneficiaries of some of their due money.

The vast majority of estates involve %ages. It is the norm and as others have pointed out it is not fraught with danger. Any estate with more than 1 residual beneficiary involves %age sharing of what's left.