Opinions here please.

Nannagarra

I know someone who contested a will as he deliberately hadn’t been included. (Long story.) He appointed a no win-no fee solicitor and inherited his equal share.
Courts have come to view such matters differently according to the QC consulted and the family was dissuaded to pursue the matter.
Until then I believed wills were water-tight.

Yes that will be a long story with a great deal more detail.

I feel it is fair to be able to leave money to whoever you want to.

Chestnut wrote It's in our interests to consider various outcomes and to wonder where our own money might end up.

There’s no need to wonder about where our own money will end up. Everyone can write a will detailing exactly how their estate is to be distributed. If you don’t trust your surviving partner to follow your verbal wishes it can be written into the will.

please could posters put a word in the thread title that reveals the subject. eg, wills, fair or not ?
thank you.

Fair doesn’t come into it. It probably should have been discussed before one died...but the remaining one can do as he/she wants.

We’ve never had any inheritances, and don’t expect to.

welbeck

please could posters put a word in the thread title that reveals the subject. eg, wills, fair or not ?
thank you.

Can I second that welbeck. I did ask for this on a Site thread. People seemed to find it funny not to do so.

That should be "May I", of course. I now have a ghost shouting in my ears.

I deemed my very wealthy father's will to be unfair and employed a top London solicitor, Mishcon, to contest it for me in the 1980s. The process became fraught with digging into issues that I really couldn't stomach, as I was young and disliked confrontation. I let it go, life's too short, but it does niggle even today that he chose to do it that way.

If, as in the unlikely event of the entire family dying together on holiday, does it matter what happens to the estate?

I found out my husband had been seeing his son from his first marriage secretly for four years and remember my anxiety waiting for the will. It's all a horrible business.

As the OP I wasn’t intending to discuss individual cases, it just happened that I knew of two situations and wondered about how other people would act in a similar situation.
I myself always try to do the fair and what I consider the right thing.
I do agree though that fair is not part of today’s world and we must “suck it up”.

Joseanne

If, as in the unlikely event of the entire family dying together on holiday, does it matter what happens to the estate?

Oh, yes. In the event of everyone you wish to benefit dying leave your estate to charity rather than it going to some distant relatives you may never have heard of.

Germanshepherdsmum

Joseanne

If, as in the unlikely event of the entire family dying together on holiday, does it matter what happens to the estate?

Oh, yes. In the event of everyone you wish to benefit dying leave your estate to charity rather than it going to some distant relatives you may never have heard of.

Note made!
And provision for the dogs!

?

My estranged Dad has never helped me Joseanne, he is exceptionally mean, I really didn't want him to benefit - which on reflection is mean of me isn't it. I didn't find out until after my Mum's death that he hardly gave her any money when we were children and she typed envelopes at night to make ends meet, whilst he spent money on his motorbike hobby without a care. We exchange correspondence occasionally now, he has just written to tell me he thinks I'm doomed in the NE, it's going to be a recession like the 30's and I should sell up and move south. He's 90 and will never change.

Joseanne

If, as in the unlikely event of the entire family dying together on holiday, does it matter what happens to the estate?

Unlikely maybe, but not impossible. That is exactly what wills are all about ........ what if?

annsixty

As the OP I wasn’t intending to discuss individual cases, it just happened that I knew of two situations and wondered about how other people would act in a similar situation.
I myself always try to do the fair and what I consider the right thing.
I do agree though that fair is not part of today’s world and we must “suck it up”.

I'm not sure who said "fair is not part of today’s world and we must “suck it up”. It seems unhelpful.

However, I myself always try to do the fair and what I consider the right thing. is talking about your "fair" and your "right thing". Except, for some overarching areas we all agree are neither fair nor right, murdering someone perhaps, we will not all agree on either.

Did you want to be told you were right? We so seldom are though, in other people's eyes. You only need to be right in your own eyes and, if you have one, your God's or any other form of conscience.

It's fair that a persons money goes to the person they want to have it.
After that, it is for that person to leave as they see fit.

It can't be dictated.

Going back to the OP you say the man was the major contributor to the income of the family but I feel that many relationships are not built on who contributes most financially so don't feel this is anything to do with it.
He can leave his half of it to his wife and she can do as she wishes.
If he wanted someone else to have a portion of it he will no doubt have told his wife this.

My husbands estate is much more than mine. I have made sure his children inherit more. He earned most of it before I met him. I feel this is fair. If he had no children it would be mine.

GSM He was NC (hence excluded), then stripped himself of assets to win on the grounds of comparative financial disadvantage.

You can't please everyone even if you try to be fair. A childless person may leave equal shares to their siblings and then their spouses if they are pre-deceased.

If equal shares went to Tom, he dies first so his share will go to his wife. The same with Dick and his wife, then Harriet and husband. Those siblings can then dole out their share to their children in equal amounts.

But then the disagreements would start. Brothers Tom and Dick have one child each, Harriet has three children. Dear old auntie has lost contact with Tom and Dick's children. Harriet's three children seldom visit but would help dear old auntie in a crisis. Harriet would ask why they should all get equal shares when the other two never visit? Why should they get anything at all, after all they'd leave nothing to auntie but is that the point?

Even trying to be fair causes problems. The money might as well be left to the cat's home. Nephews and nieces may well take umbrage. You really can't please them all.

I’m beyond believing inheritance has to be ‘fair’. As we see in discussions here, there are endless equally valid ways of understanding fairness
Read the estrangement threads and try to understand fairness in family disputes that lead to estrangement
Is it ‘fair’ to leave equal inheritance to five children, four of whom have loved and supported their parents, one of them having caused huge distress and estranging themselves from their entire family? There may be different views on that

It’s a personal choice. I’ve made provision for the dogs, left some cash for their care. Since that will was signed, the two named dogs have died. My current two aren’t anything like as easy to care for. This thread has me reflecting on how fair I’ve been in leaving them to my sisters ?‍?

?

most people have got nothing to leave, or negligible.
next essay: the love of money is the root of all evil; discuss.