Family dispute over Mother-in-law's Will

elsien

What's wrong with blowing the lot travelling the world, regardless of age? There's a fair few older people doing that now - or rather they were pre-covid, while they were still fit enough to enjoy it. 
Life is for living, and if travelling is more important to people than a house then go for it. A bequest in a will is a gift for people to do with as they wish, no strings attached. Whether that's fast cars, loose women (or men) or the trip of a lifetime, is up the person. Not the other beneficiaries. 
If the person writing the will doesn't want that they should do their will differently. 

Aranyani

It really doesn't matter what the beneficiaries spend the money on, a gap year, a house, a Range Rover, a cruise, a new kitchen, higher education or 30,000 lottery tickets.  If the deceased willed the money to them then its their choice and not for anybody else to judge or have a say about.

Tea_Pea_Dee

I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered.  George Best

Trotter65

MoneySeeker1 said:

naedanger said:

MoneySeeker1 said:

There is some logic on the one hand of treating grandchildren as "people in own right". On the other hand it is a very old-fashioned view to think siblings with fewer children count for less on the other hand.

I actually think what the op's mother-in-law has willed is the more modern approach. 

It is not a case of saying the siblings with fewer children count for less. They count equally. The op's husband is not going to get his children's share. They are adults. So the op's husband was willed the same share as his siblings.

I also think it is more forward thinking to recognise that as people are living much longer it is actually the second generation who are likely to get best use/need of money. Young adults are more likely to have greater need. In any event the second generation are only getting to share one quarter of the estate, so it is nothing too radically different from just sharing between the children.

Disagree - as the generations that are currently middle-aged to late middle-aged are the first generation where "marriage was expected - and then subsequent divorce is commonplace". Add all the other stuff impacting on various members of that generation and the chances are they've been left little (if anything) by their own grandparent generation and it puts a different slant on things.

A younger person will be much more likely usually to "blow the lot" and do something like taking off for a gap year round the World or the like - whereas a middle-aged person would be more likely to be an age where they "should" be financially straight but divorce/job loss/you name it meant that they weren't and they were at or getting an age where retirement was looming and they absolutely had to be "financially straight" or, for instance, retirement might land up getting postponed or a home-owner chucked into rented accommodation by divorce couldn't manage to get a home of their own again. Upsetting for someone at "should be financially straight/retirement looming or here" age to watch a younger person just "blowing" it (as many will - and it isn't the case they would all be financially prudent and think "Right - there's my deposit to buy my first house" for instance).

You are making a lot of assumptions about the grandchildren! I can guarantee that any inheritance our children receive will be put away safely and only used for a deposit on a house. 

ZaSa1418

@Trotter65 that's good they will use it for something like that. 
I hope your SIL backs off and causes your husband less stress

YBR

Trotter65 said:

At one point she wanted to exclude both my SIL and BIL in view of their cruel behaviour but my husband said that he couldn't be Executor of a Will that excluded them. . 

Does SIL know this?
If not, would it help to say that things are not as she thinks and 25% is in fact generous?
As Executor your husband must, by law, follow the will. End of discussion.

Trotter65

YBR said:

Trotter65 said:

At one point she wanted to exclude both my SIL and BIL in view of their cruel behaviour but my husband said that he couldn't be Executor of a Will that excluded them. . 

Does SIL know this?
If not, would it help to say that things are not as she thinks and 25% is in fact generous?
As Executor your husband must, by law, follow the will. End of discussion.

Yes my husband told her this fact about 2 months before my MIL died. He then showed her the Will and she made her displeasure known - regarding herself as being 'stabbed in the back' because she wasn't getting a third share. However her attitude has got worse since my MIL died.

theoretica

As executor your husband follows the will.  If he thinks there will be a lot of grief over this he could get the estate to employ a solicitor. 

I would suggest trying to change the language of any discussion with the sister.  The will is valid - she is asking him for a present of 1/3 of whatever his inheritance comes to.

TonyMMM

Just explain to her again - she is getting a full third share ( of the the 75% left to the children), the grandchildren are also getting a third share each (of the other 25%) - which is what was wanted and what the will says. Just leave it at that and don't discuss further.

ZaSa1418

TonyMMM said:

Just explain to her again - she is getting a full third share ( of the the 75% left to the children), the grandchildren are also getting a third share each (of the other 25%) - which is what was wanted and what the will says. Just leave it at that and don't discuss further.

Agree with this above