Making a Will - Plane on the woolpack scenario

Spendless

We have recently been to see a solicitor about making a will. He is in the process of drawing it up. One thing he mentioned to us was what he called 'the disaster at the Woolpack - when a plane fell onto the pub in Emmerdale'  killing several people. We'd not even thought about what did we do if all our heirs had perished with us. Whilst I realise this is probably unlikely we'll all go that way, I just wanted to check that I'm correct in thinking that in that case the youngest is deemed to have died last?

Our current situation is me, DH, DS aged 23 getting married this year - our will includes any children he may go on to have in the event he dies before we do, DD aged 20, currently single, no children.

Still alive in our family is both my parents and my FIL. My great-grandma, both me and DH have a sister each, both sisters have adult children.       

Mojisola

Spendless said:

Whilst I realise this is probably unlikely we'll all go that way, I just wanted to check that I'm correct in thinking that in that case the youngest is deemed to have died last?

Unless your will is written to make other provisions.

We have a series of scenarios -

first to each other;

second to children;

third to children's spouses and grandchildren (and on down the line);

disaster clause - if all the above are dead, niblings inherit in equal shares.

Spendless

Mojisola said:

Spendless said:

Whilst I realise this is probably unlikely we'll all go that way, I just wanted to check that I'm correct in thinking that in that case the youngest is deemed to have died last?

Unless your will is written to make other provisions.

We have a series of scenarios -

first to each other;

second to children;

third to children's spouses and grandchildren (and on down the line);

disaster clause - if all the above are dead, niblings inherit in equal shares.

Thanks. We've asked for 

1st - to each other

2nd to children 

3rd to any grandchildren if not the other sibling inherits their share. This may be adjusted later on as and when Grandchildren come along 

Disaster clause - is where we're stumped. So I'm considering DS current fiancee (soon to be wife) as she would be the one left vulnerable if all of us have gone, but if she also goes with us then Neices/Nephew/Godson equal shares I'm thinking of. Would that be possible do you know? 

poppystar

Whatever you want is possible, the solicitor should reflect those wishes. My fall back is a charity as I ran out of people who I might want to bequeath to. Just don’t take everyone out for a drink at the same time!

boingy

I think at some point you have to stop worrying about scenarios which are vanishingly unlikely. If you entire bloodline is wiped out in a freak event then who cares what happens to the money. Write the will with kids and grandkids in mind and forget the rest. 

annabanana82

We went, Children, future grandchildren, 1st line niece and nephews. We specifically didn't include our siblings as they'd all just waste it

kipsterno1

Our what is plan distributes between a niece and three god children in various percentages and adjusts if any of those gifts should fail.

kuratowski

Under my will, everything goes to my partner, then to my sister.  Neither my sister nor I have any children, and we aren't close to our cousins.  If they both die before me, it goes to my chosen charity.  The charity was founded 600 years ago, so I'm guessing it will outlast me.

Marcon

Spendless said:

We have recently been to see a solicitor about making a will. He is in the process of drawing it up. One thing he mentioned to us was what he called 'the disaster at the Woolpack - when a plane fell onto the pub in Emmerdale'  killing several people. We'd not even thought about what did we do if all our heirs had perished with us. Whilst I realise this is probably unlikely we'll all go that way, I just wanted to check that I'm correct in thinking that in that case the youngest is deemed to have died last?

Our current situation is me, DH, DS aged 23 getting married this year - our will includes any children he may go on to have in the event he dies before we do, DD aged 20, currently single, no children.

Still alive in our family is both my parents and my FIL. My great-grandma, both me and DH have a sister each, both sisters have adult children.       

If you all die at the same time (although in the eyes of the law you can't!), the most useful clause you can have in a will is a survivorship clause - something along the lines of  leaving bequests to x, y and z 'provided they survive me by [28 clear days]' or whatever period you fancy.

Spendless

Marcon said:

Spendless said:

We have recently been to see a solicitor about making a will. He is in the process of drawing it up. One thing he mentioned to us was what he called 'the disaster at the Woolpack - when a plane fell onto the pub in Emmerdale'  killing several people. We'd not even thought about what did we do if all our heirs had perished with us. Whilst I realise this is probably unlikely we'll all go that way, I just wanted to check that I'm correct in thinking that in that case the youngest is deemed to have died last?

Our current situation is me, DH, DS aged 23 getting married this year - our will includes any children he may go on to have in the event he dies before we do, DD aged 20, currently single, no children.

Still alive in our family is both my parents and my FIL. My great-grandma, both me and DH have a sister each, both sisters have adult children.       

If you all die at the same time (although in the eyes of the law you can't!), the most useful clause you can have in a will is a survivorship clause - something along the lines of  leaving bequests to x, y and z 'provided they survive me by [28 clear days]' or whatever period you fancy.

This was mentioned but I think it got a bit lost in everything we were thinking of - why 28 days survival - could you explain more please? 

poppystar

Spendless said:

Marcon said:

Spendless said:

We have recently been to see a solicitor about making a will. He is in the process of drawing it up. One thing he mentioned to us was what he called 'the disaster at the Woolpack - when a plane fell onto the pub in Emmerdale'  killing several people. We'd not even thought about what did we do if all our heirs had perished with us. Whilst I realise this is probably unlikely we'll all go that way, I just wanted to check that I'm correct in thinking that in that case the youngest is deemed to have died last?

Our current situation is me, DH, DS aged 23 getting married this year - our will includes any children he may go on to have in the event he dies before we do, DD aged 20, currently single, no children.

Still alive in our family is both my parents and my FIL. My great-grandma, both me and DH have a sister each, both sisters have adult children.       

If you all die at the same time (although in the eyes of the law you can't!), the most useful clause you can have in a will is a survivorship clause - something along the lines of  leaving bequests to x, y and z 'provided they survive me by [28 clear days]' or whatever period you fancy.

This was mentioned but I think it got a bit lost in everything we were thinking of - why 28 days survival - could you explain more please? 

This seemed strange to me at first but if you think about that chain of deaths from the Woolpack, without a 28 or whatever day survival clause, then the first estate would go to another estate then another then another as you work down the list.

 With a survival clause the estate of the first would go direct to the person/people who are its alive beneficiaries rather than passing through everyone else’s estates. So it would go to the people you want rather than going where whoever the final person deemed to have died wants. You may have a Will you are happy with but all the money might end up with the spendthrift friend of your adult grandchild. 

If everyone who sadly deceases while enjoying the hospitality of the Woolpack has a 28 day clause then the estates will go to each of their final alive beneficiaries not to others who were also at the deadly drinking session. 

This might all seem extreme but it shows you have a good solicitor who wants you to be aware of all that could happen - from future births to the Woolpack scenario. This is why so many of us recommend using a solicitor rather than attempting to diy or use some other Will writing service.