Money Moral Dilemma: Should we change our wills following our daughter's death?

Bonnypitlad

“Well he would say that, wouldn’t he?”
( the solicitor who expects you to return every few years)
A good solicitor plays “ what if” and can cater for most scenarios ( something that your solicitor didn’t cater for in your original will)
IMO. Change your solicitor!

LP53

Sorry for your loss.
You do what feels right in accordance to the circumstances of both family’s You know more about their finances. That been said I suppose your other grandson hasn’t got a house to inherit etc.
You could look at it in the way that the money was going to your daughter and now her would have been inheritance is handed down to her son. Or Would it cause a rift between grandchildren in years to come? 

 

Matilda542

I think people mean well when trying to sort out who gets what but to leave different amounts to siblings, whatever their financial situation, in my opinion is a sure fire way for resentment to start. I personally would just divide it equally with the proviso that if anything happened to one, which sadly happened, then it goes to the child/children 

Spendless

Bonnypitlad said:

“Well he would say that, wouldn’t he?”
( the solicitor who expects you to return every few years)
A good solicitor plays “ what if” and can cater for most scenarios ( something that your solicitor didn’t cater for in your original will)
IMO. Change your solicitor!

He did! It goes to each other first, followed by our adult children, then their share to any children they have but if not to each other and then how the money is split if all our heirs go at the same time  as we had an issue at that point over what intestacy would do if this (highly unlikely) scenario took place, it even includes our wishes over who decides where any pets would go.
We have the circs where one of our adult children is marrying in a few weeks, the other a student and single. Our future DIL is included in our disaster scenario, but I can't put a future  partner of my younger child in and if I could that would be a really bad idea as anyone could lay claim. I might go on to  highly dislike whoever my youngest ends up with and have no wish to include him. Something could happen to me and DH and one of  re-marry in our 50s or both live a long life and by the time we both go have no interest in another relationship. It is perfectly normal to go back and update your will every few years as your situation changes.  That is why this moral dilemma only includes the situation the poster has now

Ed264

What a sad dilemma to be faced with, and I'm sorry to read of your situation. Personally, I feel that each grandson should be treated equally, so 25% to your daughter and 25% (x3) to each grandson is realistic. Having said that, 70% to your daughter and 10% to each grandson is also realistic. It's your personal choice and I'm not sure that anyone giving you advice on this forum will be suggesting the perfect resolution. Best wishes. 

DrJDK

At the time both daughters were alive, I would certainly have recommend wills which split the inheritance equally between your children and leave it up to them to sort out the inheritance in the next generation. 

In that situation, on the death of your daughter, her part should automatically go to her descendant(s). However, if you wanted to give a specific bequest to each of the grandchildren you can specify that separately.
Your children’s personal situations should be irrelevant when considering inheritance, unless there’s a compelling reason for disinheriting someone, and perhaps skipping a generation.

Ramboh

Yes I think you should make a change. To recognise your families current  circumstances. I would not have differentiated initially so it might be difficult (if they knew) to make changes now. I would simplify. 50% to surviving daughter, 50% to orphan grandchild.  What the surviving daughter does with her children is up to her, however if you want to be explicit then maybe 40 % to her and 5% immediately to her children.  Distributing on recipients circumstances is usually stacking up problems for when you have gone and can cause bad feelings. Keep it simple and equitable.

Benthebadger

First of all, I'm sorry to hear that your daughter has died-a terrible thing to deal with.
I don't have any children myself but my Husband has 3 and what he has left to them is equal shares between them, irrespective of their current circumstances, which I think is absolutely fair. They all started off life with the same circumstances and opportunities, so why would it be right to penalise the ones who have managed to climb a few more material ladders? I will only be leaving anything to one of them when it's my turn to go, as step-parents don't have to be impartial but I do feel that parents should show their offspring parity. Whichever of the children is "better off" in the here and now should have nothing to do with it.
My Brother and I would have had an equal share of my Parents estate, despite him struggling more financially than me because he was divorced with  children and that was not the case for me but again, we both thought that was fair-he was responsible for his own life choices, as was I. However, he was the first to die so I became the sole beneficiary.

Loganberry1

There may be more factors at play here but life is likely to be harder for your bereaved grandchild- no-one to potentially turn to for support/ advice/ maybe even financial support so I can see why you are considering this.
I think whatever you decide to do, it us important that you let everyone know in advance.

Making sure there are no feelings of resentment after you have gone is really important too.

abzie87

Personally I would leave as it is, as one Grandchild has already lost his Mum and doesn’t have a Father in the picture by the sounds of it! The money will never make up for the loss of a parent but if your daughter died after you he would have presumably inherited what she had left so I see little difference in that happening now. But it’s mostly down to what you feel. Unfortunately money causes problems either way! And I don’t think that the Children’s needs should come into it either. I actually have a far greater need (especially right now) than any of my siblings, and always will do (previously I would have had a lesser need because I worked my butt off and was extremely careful with money). But even now I don’t think it should make any difference to what they are left overall. Yes if you can help one in need now and the other waits for inheritance then that makes sense but otherwise I think it shouldn’t come into it