Apportioning your will

[Lozz360]

Assuming you didn't marry her last week and she's not half the age of your youngest, then I'd lean towards option 1 also. My understanding is that if you don't have a will then it would revert to your spouse regardless. In such a case a will might be appropriate only if you wish to gift particular items to each of your kids.

Edit to add: I don't have kids, nor do I intend ever to so have but the only thing that might change my thinking there would be if the kids were from a different marriage, in which case 🤷‍♂️

If you don’t have a will but you do have a spouse / civil partner and kids then £270k goes to partner and the remainder is split equally amongst the children.

 

[keithmac]

Main thing for us is where do our children go if both me and my wife die at the same time (which is plausible).

Sobering but needed sorting out.

 

[HarryTheDog]

Interesting @Lozz360 I did not know that £270K rule.
I would have thought that as long as your current spouse is the parent of all of your kids then leaving it all to the spouse is the usual thing. However if your kids are desperate for money and your estate is large enough to keep your spouse comfortable then yes a share to the children may be a good idea.

Where it comes complicated is when its your second spouse and you both have children from previous relationships and or kids which you have had together.
With my current partner I have 2 kids, she has 2, from previous partners. We both have our own houses ( but she has mainly lived in mine) and our wills do not leave anything to either of us, ie financially indepenent. Soon we may sell both our houses and buy one, Then the will will be half the house to spouse, half to kids with a caveat that if at a certain age , we are thinking above 80 then the kids cannot evict the surviving partner but I dont know how practical that will be.

My ex wife's partner has no kids and she is leaving everything to the kids nothing to her partner as the place where they live is totally hers with no financial interest in it from him. She has also mentioned to the children that she would not want him evicted but my kids are not too happy about that.

 

[Lozz360]

Option 1 is what I've done. 2 kids get 50% each if we both peg it at the same time. Also I expect spouse to divide everything 50% if she outlives me (which she probably will).

Very unlikely that you would “...both peg it at the same time.” Even if you are both involved in the same fatal incident it is likely that one would survive the other if only by a few minutes. Assuming your wife has a mirror will, this point is academic as it sounds like your kids will inherit regardless of who dies first and when. Wills often have the clause that when the estate goes to the surviving spouse then that spouse has to survive their partner by a month to inherit. This is to allow the surviving spouse to make or amend their will given their sudden change in circumstances.

Edit to clarify that one partner surviving the other by just a few minutes would be relevant in the situation of a couple that had no will and no children. In the event of say, they are involved in the same accident, the wife’s time of death is recorded as 10-mins after husband then according to the laws of intestate she has inherited everything. Wife then expires and the same law means that her estate goes to her parents. So due to not having a will, the husband’s (and his wife’s) entire estate goes to his in-laws!

 

[Lozz360]

Main thing for us is where do our children go if both me and my wife die at the same time (which is plausible).

Sobering but needed sorting out.

I guess you are talking about appointing a guardian for your (under 18?) children in the event of you and your wife dying prematurely, as opposed to a will. Again, a solicitor will help with the legal side. At the same time think of any friends or relatives you would trust to being appointed guardians of your children in the event of you both no longer being around. Obviously, get the agreement of whoever you choose before appointing them.

 

[PaulSB]

The thing to consider if you intend to leave money to someone who is disabled, is whether they are receiving any benefits due to the disability. If those benefits are means tested then by you leaving the disabled offspring money, will destroy their entitlement to state benefits. So you may as well leave your money to the state as it will not benefit the beneficiary in the way you intend. One solution is to set up a trust for the disabled beneficiary which is then managed by other beneficiaries and/or solicitor so that the disabled person doesn’t lose out on state benefits. Professional advice is essential in this situation.

This is quite correct but it's important to set up the right sort of trust. If the individual is the sole beneficiary this may not achieve the desired outcome. The trust needs to be a Discretionary Trust accompanied by a Letter of Wishes to guide the trustees.

I have an adult son with Downs Syndrome. We've had this type of trust in place for ten years with the intention of protecting his benefits but having money available should he need it. It's very important to have such trusts set up in conjunction with correctly written Wills.

It took me years to find a quality solicitor who understood exactly what we required and how to achieve it. This is why I was trying to say to the OP one should consult a professional because their questions open one's eyes to things one may not have considered.

The advice is not expensive but must come from a very experienced professional. Your average high street solicitor will not, in my experience, have the knowledge.

The firm we eventually chose gave a one hour presentation plus 30 minutes Q&A at no cost. In the one hour presentation every question we had was answered before we had the chance to ask.

 

[Lozz360]

Interesting @Lozz360 I did not know that £270K rule.

It is the Law of Intestate. Used when the deceased has not left a will.

I would have thought that as long as your current spouse is the parent of all of your kids then leaving it all to the spouse is the usual thing.

Agreed. Surviving spouse should benefit from the money until such time they don't need it and then leave it to the children. There will always be exceptions to this. Not every situation is the same.

However if your kids are desperate for money and your estate is large enough to keep your spouse comfortable then yes a share to the children may be a good idea.

Or if your estate is large enough and your kids are desperate it might make make sense to help them out while you are still alive.

Where it comes complicated is when its your second spouse and you both have children from previous relationships and or kids which you have had together. With my current partner I have 2 kids, she has 2, from previous partners. We both have our own houses ( but she has mainly lived in mine) and our wills do not leave anything to either of us, ie financially indepenent. Soon we may sell both our houses and buy one, Then the will will be half the house to spouse, half to kids with a caveat that if at a certain age , we are thinking above 80 then the kids cannot evict the surviving partner but I dont know how practical that will be.

Life becomes complicated as so many of us now have "blended families". No doubt you will be talking about your situation to a solicitor and receiving their advice.

My ex wife's partner has no kids and she is leaving everything to the kids nothing to her partner as the place where they live is totally hers with no financial interest in it from him. She has also mentioned to the children that she would not want him evicted but my kids are not too happy about that.

Your ex-wife can stipulate in her will that her new husband can remain in her house for the rest of his life in the event of her dying before him. The house then goes to her/your kids when he dies or no longer needs the house. Your kids may not be happy with that, but would they be happy to evict, what is probably, an old man who is recently widowed?

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Many years ago my GrandDad died
His will was quite simple because my Dad was his only child and his wife (my Gran) had died many years before that)
Except that he had been 'living with' his 'lady friend' for many years. Apparently he had suggested they got married but she didn't want to.
Hence, his will set out that she was left the contents of the house, except for a few bits that my Dad and Mum were left, and the house was left to my Dad.
However, she had the right to live in the house free of charge until she no longer wanted/needed to.
As a result my Dad had to maintain the house while she lived there. This worked out well because everyone involved was reasonable but I can see it going wrong very easily.

As an aside - the only problem was that her son-in-law was a painter and decorator so had done all that work in the house since they moved in.
My Dad got someone else in to actually do the job properly becuase the son was not very good at his job. The SIL complained about it but his MIL didn;t really seem to mind - which summed it up really!

 

[Arrowfoot]

Many years ago my GrandDad died
His will was quite simple because my Dad was his only child and his wife (my Gran) had died many years before that)
Except that he had been 'living with' his 'lady friend' for many years. Apparently he had suggested they got married but she didn't want to.
Hence, his will set out that she was left the contents of the house, except for a few bits that my Dad and Mum were left, and the house was left to my Dad.
However, she had the right to live in the house free of charge until she no longer wanted/needed to.
As a result my Dad had to maintain the house while she lived there. This worked out well because everyone involved was reasonable but I can see it going wrong very easily.

As an aside - the only problem was that her son-in-law was a painter and decorator so had done all that work in the house since they moved in.
My Dad got someone else in to actually do the job properly becuase the son was not very good at his job. The SIL complained about it but his MIL didn;t really seem to mind - which summed it up really!

It can certainly can get complicated and take years out of people

 

[welsh dragon]

Number 1 option for us. It's easier that way. Then whoever survives can be the one to decide who gets what's left in the end ( if there is anything left).

 

[Arrowfoot]

This is why I was trying to say to the OP one should consult a professional because their questions open one's eyes to things one may not have considered.

When I responded that I have lawyers and my bank handling the legal aspect. You responded that you poorly worded your reply.

Now you are repeating the same. Do have the courtesy to correct it. Have a blast on how you secured your son's future please do not drag me into your misrepresentation.

 

[PaulSB]

When I responded that I have lawyers and my bank handling the legal aspect. You responded that you poorly worded your reply.

Now you are repeating the same. Do have the courtesy to correct it. Have a blast on how you secured your son's future please do not drag me into your misrepresentation.

I'm afraid you'll have to explain as I've no idea what you're talking about.

As for having a blast regarding my son I was simply agreeing with a different poster but adding the extra point re the need for such a trust to be discretionary. I mentioned my son for no reason other than to clarify I've some personal experience of this situation. 30 years worth and I can assure you it's been far from "a blast" in some respects.

 

[Arrowfoot]

@PaulSB

Please see below

Possibly I worded my thoughts poorly. I'm not suggesting you ask a lawyer or other professional how or to whom you distribute your estate.

 

[derrick]

I would have thought legal/financial advice wise, not a bunch of cyclist's advice.... but... since you ask...my immediate thoughts...

1. Do you need to consider inheritance tax implications? No IHT between husband/wife, but, if (sadly) wife were to die there may be IHT if/when she leaves it all to kids

2. Do you want/need to protect against (possible) events after your death? one example wife gets new partner and/or remarries, then, leaves it all to new partner, who cuts out your children, and/or spends it all

I doubt it is possible to cover every scenario, but, I would think, professional advice wise.

This, Ignore all else.

 

[T4tomo]

There are not so much hidden challenges but questions you need to be asked. You shouldn't be basing your thoughts on those of a random bunch of cyclists.

For example:

Is the house protected against being sold to pay for care should your spouse need it? My wife and I own 50% each of our house. On first death the 50% for either spouse goes into trust for the kids. This half cannot be used to pay for care of the surviving spouse. Sale of the house cannot happen as the surviving spouse only owns 50%

Do you have a private pension? Do you want all of this to go to your spouse? Would you like a proportion to go to children/grandchildren?

It's not as simple as your opening post suggests and you need to discuss the subject with a professional who will ask the pertinent questions.

This is a very sensible suggestion / question, despite the OP getting a bit uppity about the advice