Grandads Will-Should he include Money for an 'Unborn/INVISIBLE grandchild' in the Will?Advise needed

Marcon

Danny_G said:

Grandads Will -Should he include an 'Unborn/ INVISIBLE grandchild' in the Will? Advise needed




Can this son say to his alive dad, for him in his will to include some money aside for incase he has children one day?



Should this grandparent include an 'extra' share of money in the will saved for the eventuality that the lone son might have children?

Your sound like the son who currently has no children.

What does grandad want to do?

JGB1955

My children were left nothing in my parents' wills but I have moved on 2/3 of my bequest to them via deed of variation.  I don't need the money (in fact receiving it would cause potential IHT problems) and am happy to see it used in my lifetime.  I have explained to my son and daughter that our grandchildren are not mentioned in our wills but that, if they feel financially comfortable, they have the option of making their own deeds of variation in due course.  I HAVE left an expression of wishes regarding the contents of my jewellery box, along with a potted history (and family tree) explaining where all the items have come from over the past 150 years.  I won't know or care if those wishes aren't carried out!  Keeping it simple seems the best plan.

theoretica

To me, it isn't so much a case of I'm related to that person, I must leave them money, as I know and love that person, I would like to leave them money.  I wouldn't expect grandad to leave money to anyone he hasn't met.

In my family there is one pair of siblings where the elder inherited in a will and the younger didn't - it happens, I am sure the parents will sort it out somehow.

Bolt1234

Although on the face of this it sounds rather grabby trying to get money for children who arent even in existence it has come up in our family.  Things like 'its not fair, you have two children and I only have one, surely I should get double etc etc' and indeed the question of family members who havent had children but are thinking of having them...

There is also a fair % of people who think that whatever is in their head will somehow come to pass when they die so what is the point of writing a will. For anyone who has a few £££ I really dont understand the view that they dont need to bother with a will.  A will can sometimes be free or at little cost yet people moan and groan about paying £100!

onomatopoeia99

I don't have children, my brother does (two).  My parents have always been scrupulous in treating us the same.  So,what "grandad" (my dad) has done in his will is left an amount to be split between my brother's two children and an equal amount to me.  This is taken before the main body of the estate (i.e. the house) which will be split in half between me and my brother. 

So, if I have children (very, very unlikely) it is understood that separate amount could be passed on to them, but nothing forces me to.

someone

There may be a number of reasons why Son 3 is not married or has children. It would seem fair to pass on an amount equal to the amount given to the some with the fewest children. This also means the will can be dealt with rather promptly.

TBagpuss

Its up to grandad how he leaves his money.

His options would be:

Leave the estate equally between his children, express a wish that they each use a portion of the funds to give each of their children a lump sum when the child leaves home / turns 18, and leave it up to the conscience of each son to follow his request.

Word the will to leave £X to each grandchild living at the time of his death - in which case further grandchildren born later won't get anything, but their respective parents will be free to give them something if they wish

Set up a trust with the beneficiaries being any grandchildren - trusts normally have to have an end date but you could probably do one where the beneficiaries included (say) any child born to any of the sons during grandfather's lifetime or within x years of his death. He'd have to think about how it would work - does each grandchild get a fixed amount at a fixed time, how is the money entitled until the grandchildren start being entitled, who are the trustees, what is the cut off point? (You could, for instance, make it any child born before the eldest grandchild turns 18/21 which would make the division easier as you'd have a known number of beneficiaries,)

The third option would get the outcome you want, but it is much more complicated  than simply leaving gifts to those grandchildren born in grand-dad's lifetime and accepting that that means that the third son's hypothetical unborn children might therefore miss out. 

Manxman_in_exile

This whole idea is crazy and unworkable.

The OP sets out the problem as being: sons 1 and 2 currently each have two children, with son 3 having no children, and asks how can any future potential children of son 3 be provided for in the grandfather's will.

The common sense answer is that they can't be provided for.  Why is it only any future potential children of son 3 that are important?  What if sons 1 and 2 have more children after grandfather dies?

And as others have pointed out, what if sons 1 and/or 2 (and possibly 3!) get remarried and have more children after grandfather dies?

If the issue here is about fairness and equality between grandchildren, it is simply not practically possible to include in the equation grandchildren that haven't even been conceived yet and may not be for many years to come.

The common sense solution and the only one providing certainty is to leave equal amounts to each son and then they decide how to pass their property onto the next generation.

(As I think others have suggested, it would be interesting to learn who is behind this idea - is it the testator or is it one of the three sons?  As pointed out above, if it's a question of equity bewteen grandchildren, it equally affects future children of 1 and 2 as much as future children of 3)

blue.peter

someone said:

 It would seem fair to pass on an amount equal to the amount given to the some with the fewest children.

Well, that's one version of "fair", and I won't argue that it is unfair. The trouble is that different people have different ideas of what fair looks like. They might give different outcomes, but can still be fair outcomes.

Take my family, for example. I have no children, whilst my siblings all have children, but differing numbers of them. My parents have always taken pains to be scrupulously fair to their children and grandchildren. Their wills reflect one another - the estate of the first to die goes to the survivor, whilst that of the second to die will be split between their children and grandchildren. X% will be divided equally between me and my siblings, whilst Y% will be divided equally between my niblings. X + Y = 100 and X > Y. There is no allowance for grandchildren born after death, and different amounts will go to the families of me and my siblings. Each member of the two generations will get an amount equal to that of the other members of their generation. It's theoretically possible that I might have a child or two before my parents die, and that they might benefit under this distribution, but the chances of that happening are vanishingly small - I'm in my 60s, have no life partner and really, really don't want children.

This is a different distribution from that which you support, and my family (no children) will receive the smallest share. Nonetheless, I'm perfectly happy that it is just as fair. I expect to be the executor (I'm the oldest child), and will do exactly as my parents intend without any quibbling over fairness.

Ultimately, the decision here should be the testator's, and everyone should accept that they are doing what they consider to be appropriate. TBH, I wouldn't be bothered if my parents decided to skip a generation and give everything directly to their grandchildren, even though that would mean that I got nothing.

Mojisola

Danny_G said:

Son 1 = Married and 2 kids

Son 2 = Married and 2 kids

Son 3 = Not married, no kids yet 

Now when he is writing his will the grandad wants to include some money in the will for his grandkids.

Can this son say to his alive dad, for him in his will to include some money aside for incase he has children one day?

Does this son resent the fact that his brothers' children get Christmas and birthday presents from their Grandad?

Does he think Grandad should be giving him money equal to the presents that the grandchildren are given in case he has a child in the future who has missed out on gifts?