Had a will meeting today. I thought it would be a case of saying I want x to have this and b to have y.
She made me watch 30 mins of videos which gave me lots to think about, including how I can stop kids husbands from getting a share in the future. A trust will definitely looks the way to go.
Looked at various options - including MacMillan - but all seem to be making special offers and not actually given a price that you get to pay when all done and dusted. It appears everything is add-ons unless your single and the will is very simple.
Have E Mailed several local solicitors and all much of a muchness - pretty simple mirror wills, blended family with sorted bequeathments, everything else split amongst the kids including property. Starts getting a bit more complicated as we're after 4 Health LPAs, which include registration costs and stamp duty.
'Full lifetime' packages to manage the wills are at £1700 from three of them.
Daughter in Hull works at the Land Registry in Hull and is obviously up on all this as she works on probate and associated issues daily.
Makes me giggle when there are a few posters on this thread I've known since my teens. The topic of conversations we have nowadays are just slightly different!
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
He did emphasise though discuss your intentions with the children first, in other words don’t leave as a ticking time bomb to go off after your demise.
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
He did emphasise though discuss your intentions with the children first, in other words don’t leave as a ticking time bomb to go off after your demise.
How many people sit down with their children and discuss what's happening with what's left over when they are 6ft under?
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
He did emphasise though discuss your intentions with the children first, in other words don’t leave as a ticking time bomb to go off after your demise.
How many people sit down with their children and discuss what's happening with what's left over when they are 6ft under?
You’d be surprised how many people don’t want the hassle of discussing a less than equal split or meant to but never got round to broaching the subject before popping their clogs.
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
He did emphasise though discuss your intentions with the children first, in other words don’t leave as a ticking time bomb to go off after your demise.
How many people sit down with their children and discuss what's happening with what's left over when they are 6ft under?
You’d be surprised how many people don’t want the hassle of discussing a less than equal split or meant to but never got round to broaching the subject before popping their clogs.
I could imagine there could be quite a few arguments and that's why parents dont talk about the unequal split.
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
He did emphasise though discuss your intentions with the children first, in other words don’t leave as a ticking time bomb to go off after your demise.
My mum and her siblings all fell out over their fathers will (which was uneven between the 4 siblings).
So my mum when she knew her cancer was terminal discussed her intentions for her will with my sister and I. Easier for me to say I guess as I was the wealthier of me and my sister, but as I said to her at the time it's her money and she can do as she wishes with it and I knew she'd do what she felt was right and what she wanted.
That said, my will currently leaves after both of my wife and I go everything equally to my two children, if in years to come one becomes extremely rich and the other doesn't I would consider changing it, but I would talk to them about it first and explain my thinking.
I think the main issues come when children think or assume everything is being split equally to only find out when the time comes it isn't.
I think it's very harsh to split inheritance between siblings on the basis of need or what one currently has versus what the other has not.
We all go through life having to make "life choices". It could be the simple choice of University v Work. How do you know at age 18 (or even 16 back in my day) whether it's better to start work & earn money from day 1 or take 5-7 years studying with the aim of a degree so that you have a better earning potential latter on. Then there is the choice of whether to marry, or to have children. What about divorce, or single parenthood.
I would hate to think my parents have decided that brother x deserves more than brother y just because he didn't marry & therefore couldn't afford a nice house as 1 income doesnt get you much of a mortgage. Or that brother z should get more than both brothers x & y because he gave his life to the church & therefore has spent years travelling the world as a missionary & thus hasn't got much of a pension.
I think it's very harsh to split inheritance between siblings on the basis of need or what one currently has versus what the other has not.
We all go through life having to make "life choices". It could be the simple choice of University v Work. How do you know at age 18 (or even 16 back in my day) whether it's better to start work & earn money from day 1 or take 5-7 years studying with the aim of a degree so that you have a better earning potential latter on. Then there is the choice of whether to marry, or to have children. What about divorce, or single parenthood.
I would hate to think my parents have decided that brother x deserves more than brother y just because he didn't marry & therefore couldn't afford a nice house as 1 income doesnt get you much of a mortgage. Or that brother z should get more than both brothers x & y because he gave his life to the church & therefore has spent years travelling the world as a missionary & thus hasn't got much of a pension.
I disagree in part, taking it to extremes;
Take Peter Jones (or any other wealthy self made person) he may have a sister who say chose nursing as her career. Would you really expect his parents to leave their say £600k in house and assets as £300k each to them, or do you think they should leave it all to the daughter?
For me to change from 50/50 there would have to be a big disparity between my daughters, but using the above example I absolutely would talk to them and I would hope the 'Peter Jones' one I've brought up so that they want to let their sister have the £600k in that example.
Nearly 2 months after starting this thread and since 1st talking to the solicitor end of February I have signed my Will. Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted. Just watched Martin lewis. Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
He did emphasise though discuss your intentions with the children first, in other words don’t leave as a ticking time bomb to go off after your demise.
How many people sit down with their children and discuss what's happening with what's left over when they are 6ft under?
You’d be surprised how many people don’t want the hassle of discussing a less than equal split or meant to but never got round to broaching the subject before popping their clogs.
I could imagine there could be quite a few arguments and that's why parents dont talk about the unequal split.
Quite, it’s down to each individual whether they want to discuss an unequal split of their estate or not. It won’t apply to my children as my will stands at present but if I felt that one of them needed a bigger share then I would not hesitate to discuss it with them before drawing up a new one. It’s each to their own though.
Still struggling with this - and it's an easy subject to conveniently put off.
Got a load of quotes last month following a series of E Mails to local Solicitors for what I think is a very straight forward process for a 'double' will with all going to spouse on death of one with a few bits and bobs going as equally as we can to four kids in what is apparently known as a 'blended' family.
The four then sell the house and get the house and 25% each. Piece of piss, yes?
Then we get into Power of Attorney in case either of us lose our marbles. Seems sensible, but then how do you deal with that? The eldest? The most sensible/reliable? One from either side of the blend? All four of them (and the subsequent cost and still possible arguments down the line)?
I'm inclined to just chose one from each side, but the missus wants all four. None of them are stupid, greedy or money grabbers and all will inherit from us and elsewhere within the next twenty years, so does it really matter? We're not talking millions here.
Still struggling with this - and it's an easy subject to conveniently put off.
Got a load of quotes last month following a series of E Mails to local Solicitors for what I think is a very straight forward process for a 'double' will with all going to spouse on death of one with a few bits and bobs going as equally as we can to four kids in what is apparently known as a 'blended' family.
The four then sell the house and get the house and 25% each. Piece of piss, yes?
Then we get into Power of Attorney in case either of us lose our marbles. Seems sensible, but then how do you deal with that? The eldest? The most sensible/reliable? One from either side of the blend? All four of them (and the subsequent cost and still possible arguments down the line)?
I'm inclined to just chose one from each side, but the missus wants all four. None of them are stupid, greedy or money grabbers and all will inherit from us and elsewhere within the next twenty years, so does it really matter? We're not talking millions here.
When you say 'blended' family, I assume both of you have 2 children from a previous marriage/relationship and none together?
That does add complexity, the danger for the LPoA is if you just choose one (or even both) from each side then if it has to be enacted and the other spouse has passed there is only 'one side' of the family so to speak dealing with it, so I can see why your wife suggests all four or as you say one from each side.
But then having that many add's complications for decision making as all four would need to agree on any decisions.
You could have for the health side just your own 'blood' so to speak and for finances all 4? They are separate documents. You could even have each other also. It might be worth sitting down with all 4 children and discuss it.
You might want to re-consider the 'leaving all to spouse' as well in your will depending on likely estate size. Although in the current climate that's fine as there are carry over allowances that with property takes you both to £1m before IHT kicks in, that's not to say they will exist in 20 years time (had Corbyn got in they would probably have gone by now) but does depend on your circumstances, I;d always suggest, if possible, giving as much away as possible either before you pass or on the first death to try and use up the allowance of that time.
EDIT, if giving away before you die make sure you understand how the 7 year rule works and the ordering as most get caught out by this.
Also what happens if the remaining partner then meets someone and marries them and they have two kids. How does the childrens money not then get diluted? It’s all too tricky.
Can make LPAs joint and several, so can include all on it, but doesn't require all to agree, and can make decisions individually. Recently been through this with inlaws, and now going through probabte for one of them. Not the easiest, my advice would be "have some clear finances and not accounts all over the place with no record of them"
Can make LPAs joint and several, so can include all on it, but doesn't require all to agree, and can make decisions individually. Recently been through this with inlaws, and now going through probabte for one of them. Not the easiest, my advice would be "have some clear finances and not accounts all over the place with no record of them"
Very good point, my father in law has about 20 accounts and I regularly have to sit down with him to go through as he keeps moving it!
Also what happens if the remaining partner then meets someone and marries them and they have two kids. How does the childrens money not then get diluted? It’s all too tricky.
I’m sure there are ways around it with a trust arrangement if you set out all your wishes and concerns with a professional adviser who will tailor your requirements.
Still struggling with this - and it's an easy subject to conveniently put off.
Got a load of quotes last month following a series of E Mails to local Solicitors for what I think is a very straight forward process for a 'double' will with all going to spouse on death of one with a few bits and bobs going as equally as we can to four kids in what is apparently known as a 'blended' family.
The four then sell the house and get the house and 25% each. Piece of piss, yes?
Then we get into Power of Attorney in case either of us lose our marbles. Seems sensible, but then how do you deal with that? The eldest? The most sensible/reliable? One from either side of the blend? All four of them (and the subsequent cost and still possible arguments down the line)?
I'm inclined to just chose one from each side, but the missus wants all four. None of them are stupid, greedy or money grabbers and all will inherit from us and elsewhere within the next twenty years, so does it really matter? We're not talking millions here.
My situation is not as complex as yours mate but I’m sure you’re aware that there are two types of POA you can have these days;
Me and the Mrs have completed both with each other to act and our two children jointly and severally appointed as replacement attorneys (their joint agreement in decision making not required). All of which was fully discussed when executing the documents.
There’s nothing to say that one child wouldn’t disagree with the other’s decision at a future time of course. However we are as sure as we can be that there won’t be any animosity between our two. Fortunately we don’t have the added complication of a blended family but as I said to clb74, it’s each to their own how individuals wish their affairs to be dealt with.
In your case though, jointly and several replacement attorney appointments wouldn’t seem appropriate. Your wife could opt for the all four jointly liable route (they all have to agree) whilst you opt for one from either side jointly liable (both have to agree) route. The downside to joint liability of course is that some decisions are time critical when all attorneys might not be contactable. I’m only a lay person so further professional advice is your best bet and good luck.
Can you change your mind about putting a policy in trust?
Finally, and perhaps most importantly to note: once a life insurance policy has been set up in trust, it can't be cancelled. This is because control has been given to your trustee or trustees. As a result, you can't make any changes to the pay out terms. So it's important that when you write your life insurance policy in trust that you are absolutely certain about whom the money is for.
Quick question. Gift trust of life insurance. Am I correct that once this trust has been set up the trust cant be cancelled?
Not quite sure of the questions, or should I say the terminology.
A gift trust is usually something associated with an actual asset, usually an investment and most usually in the way of an Investment Bond.
A life insurance policy can be put into trust but is not commonly known as a "gift trust". A life insurance policy generally has no value until the insured dies (unless it's a unitised whole of life plan). The beneficiaries can be altered if it is a Discretionary Trust but not if it's a Bare Trust.
But no. Once a Trust has been set up and something has been put into it, then it no longer belongs to the Settlor. Although a Discretionary Gift Trust does retain some benefits for the Settlor, as does a Gift & Loan Trust.
Can you change your mind about putting a policy in trust?
Finally, and perhaps most importantly to note: once a life insurance policy has been set up in trust, it can't be cancelled. This is because control has been given to your trustee or trustees. As a result, you can't make any changes to the pay out terms. So it's important that when you write your life insurance policy in trust that you are absolutely certain about whom the money is for.
Quick question. Gift trust of life insurance. Am I correct that once this trust has been set up the trust cant be cancelled?
Not quite sure of the questions, or should I say the terminology.
A gift trust is usually something associated with an actual asset, usually an investment and most usually in the way of an Investment Bond.
A life insurance policy can be put into trust but is not commonly known as a "gift trust". A life insurance policy generally has no value until the insured dies (unless it's a unitised whole of life plan). The beneficiaries can be altered if it is a Discretionary Trust but not if it's a Bare Trust.
But no. Once a Trust has been set up and something has been put into it, then it no longer belongs to the Settlor. Although a Discretionary Gift Trust does retain some benefits for the Settlor, as does a Gift & Loan Trust.
Thanks Golfie. You answered my question with Discretionary and Bare trust. Maybe I shouldn't be, but I'm a bit upset with the solicitor.
This might help some with questions on wills, LPA, Deputyship etc. Brachers Solicitors from Maidstone are running an event online in association with Mencap on the 9th November.
Time to revive this thread, please as the Fanackapans need to sort their wills ASAP.
An initial question, especially to those that posted here back in 2021.
Have you had reason to amend/alter the wills you made or gained more knowledge on the subject since then which makes you query whether you need a rethink ?
I'm especially interested in whether our assets can be protected in any way if either of us needs to enter Care.
Time to revive this thread, please as the Fanackapans need to sort their wills ASAP.
An initial question, especially to those that posted here back in 2021.
Have you had reason to amend/alter the wills you made or gained more knowledge on the subject since then which makes you query whether you need a rethink ?
I'm especially interested in whether our assets can be protected in any way if either of us needs to enter Care.
Thanks.
Hi Jean,
A lot of the ways to protect property/asset have been removed when it comes to care fee's. It's now very difficult.
You can hold your property as Tenants in Common (i.e. you would specifically as an example own 50% each), that way if one of you enters care at least the other half will be protected (no good if you both enter care though). You would need to build in your wills right of occupancy once the first passes.
You also have a few different types of trust, Protective Property Trust, Life Interest Trust and Interest in possession trusts but you'll need to seek professional advice and it's still not 100% clear if that will do what you want, if the local authority believe you have only put in trust to avoid care fee's or deliberately reduced your capital for the same reason they can refuse to fund.
Ultimately if you have a fair amount in the bank that would get used first anyway, it's worth making sure between you and hubby you have a fairly good split of funds between you rather than all in one name etc, and pensions if possible.
FWIW I've looked into most things and in the end accepted it is what it is as they say. Our house is over the £1m anyway so it's likely some IHT would be payable assuming it's not used for care fee's. We may well when retired sell and move to somewhere smaller/different and try and keep under £1m.
If you can spend & give away your money now, as long as you live 7 years then it won't attract IHT, regardless of the 7 years you can give away £3k per annum to any one person, £250 to any number of people (each) and their are some allowances for children/grandchildrens weddings and the like.
And not for me to suggest, but you could draw out of the cash machine say £100 a week (as an example) and treat your kids/grandkids etc, not sure that would ever get noticed, after all it may have been used to fund your gambling habit .
As always you'll need to keep an eye/up to date on regulation changes. I suspect the next government may make some to the current IHT rules, but who knows.
Comments
Have E Mailed several local solicitors and all much of a muchness - pretty simple mirror wills, blended family with sorted bequeathments, everything else split amongst the kids including property. Starts getting a bit more complicated as we're after 4 Health LPAs, which include registration costs and stamp duty.
'Full lifetime' packages to manage the wills are at £1700 from three of them.
Daughter in Hull works at the Land Registry in Hull and is obviously up on all this as she works on probate and associated issues daily.
Makes me giggle when there are a few posters on this thread I've known since my teens. The topic of conversations we have nowadays are just slightly different!
Still really not the way I want it, but it's now sorted.
Just watched Martin lewis.
Nearly 20% of parents would give one child more than the other if one child was less off.
So my mum when she knew her cancer was terminal discussed her intentions for her will with my sister and I. Easier for me to say I guess as I was the wealthier of me and my sister, but as I said to her at the time it's her money and she can do as she wishes with it and I knew she'd do what she felt was right and what she wanted.
That said, my will currently leaves after both of my wife and I go everything equally to my two children, if in years to come one becomes extremely rich and the other doesn't I would consider changing it, but I would talk to them about it first and explain my thinking.
I think the main issues come when children think or assume everything is being split equally to only find out when the time comes it isn't.
We all go through life having to make "life choices". It could be the simple choice of University v Work. How do you know at age 18 (or even 16 back in my day) whether it's better to start work & earn money from day 1 or take 5-7 years studying with the aim of a degree so that you have a better earning potential latter on. Then there is the choice of whether to marry, or to have children. What about divorce, or single parenthood.
I would hate to think my parents have decided that brother x deserves more than brother y just because he didn't marry & therefore couldn't afford a nice house as 1 income doesnt get you much of a mortgage. Or that brother z should get more than both brothers x & y because he gave his life to the church & therefore has spent years travelling the world as a missionary & thus hasn't got much of a pension.
Take Peter Jones (or any other wealthy self made person) he may have a sister who say chose nursing as her career. Would you really expect his parents to leave their say £600k in house and assets as £300k each to them, or do you think they should leave it all to the daughter?
For me to change from 50/50 there would have to be a big disparity between my daughters, but using the above example I absolutely would talk to them and I would hope the 'Peter Jones' one I've brought up so that they want to let their sister have the £600k in that example.
Got a load of quotes last month following a series of E Mails to local Solicitors for what I think is a very straight forward process for a 'double' will with all going to spouse on death of one with a few bits and bobs going as equally as we can to four kids in what is apparently known as a 'blended' family.
The four then sell the house and get the house and 25% each. Piece of piss, yes?
Then we get into Power of Attorney in case either of us lose our marbles. Seems sensible, but then how do you deal with that? The eldest? The most sensible/reliable? One from either side of the blend? All four of them (and the subsequent cost and still possible arguments down the line)?
I'm inclined to just chose one from each side, but the missus wants all four. None of them are stupid, greedy or money grabbers and all will inherit from us and elsewhere within the next twenty years, so does it really matter?
We're not talking millions here.
That does add complexity, the danger for the LPoA is if you just choose one (or even both) from each side then if it has to be enacted and the other spouse has passed there is only 'one side' of the family so to speak dealing with it, so I can see why your wife suggests all four or as you say one from each side.
But then having that many add's complications for decision making as all four would need to agree on any decisions.
You could have for the health side just your own 'blood' so to speak and for finances all 4? They are separate documents. You could even have each other also. It might be worth sitting down with all 4 children and discuss it.
You might want to re-consider the 'leaving all to spouse' as well in your will depending on likely estate size. Although in the current climate that's fine as there are carry over allowances that with property takes you both to £1m before IHT kicks in, that's not to say they will exist in 20 years time (had Corbyn got in they would probably have gone by now) but does depend on your circumstances, I;d always suggest, if possible, giving as much away as possible either before you pass or on the first death to try and use up the allowance of that time.
EDIT, if giving away before you die make sure you understand how the 7 year rule works and the ordering as most get caught out by this.
My situation is not as complex as yours mate but I’m sure you’re aware that there are two types of POA you can have these days;
1)health and welfare
2) property and financial affairs
https://www.gov.uk/power-of-attorney
Me and the Mrs have completed both with each other to act and our two children jointly and severally appointed as replacement attorneys (their joint agreement in decision making not required). All of which was fully discussed when executing the documents.
There’s nothing to say that one child wouldn’t disagree with the other’s decision at a future time of course. However we are as sure as we can be that there won’t be any animosity between our two. Fortunately we don’t have the added complication of a blended family but as I said to clb74, it’s each to their own how individuals wish their affairs to be dealt with.
In your case though, jointly and several replacement attorney appointments wouldn’t seem appropriate. Your wife could opt for the all four jointly liable route (they all have to agree) whilst you opt for one from either side jointly liable (both have to agree) route. The downside to joint liability of course is that some decisions are time critical when all attorneys might not be contactable. I’m only a lay person so further professional advice is your best bet and good luck.
Gift trust of life insurance.
Am I correct that once this trust has been set up the trust cant be cancelled?
Can you change your mind about putting a policy in trust?
Finally, and perhaps most importantly to note: once a life insurance policy has been set up in trust, it can't be cancelled. This is because control has been given to your trustee or trustees. As a result, you can't make any changes to the pay out terms. So it's important that when you write your life insurance policy in trust that you are absolutely certain about whom the money is for.
A gift trust is usually something associated with an actual asset, usually an investment and most usually in the way of an Investment Bond.
A life insurance policy can be put into trust but is not commonly known as a "gift trust". A life insurance policy generally has no value until the insured dies (unless it's a unitised whole of life plan). The beneficiaries can be altered if it is a Discretionary Trust but not if it's a Bare Trust.
But no. Once a Trust has been set up and something has been put into it, then it no longer belongs to the Settlor. Although a Discretionary Gift Trust does retain some benefits for the Settlor, as does a Gift & Loan Trust.
You answered my question with Discretionary and Bare trust.
Maybe I shouldn't be, but I'm a bit upset with the solicitor.
More info can be found here: https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/4208947421847378960?source=Fin
Just had the call from Brachers about this. Just a warning though, they are not cheap.
An initial question, especially to those that posted here back in 2021.
Have you had reason to amend/alter the wills you made or gained more knowledge on the subject since then which makes you query whether you need a rethink ?
I'm especially interested in whether our assets can be protected in any way if either of us needs to enter Care.
Thanks.
A lot of the ways to protect property/asset have been removed when it comes to care fee's. It's now very difficult.
You can hold your property as Tenants in Common (i.e. you would specifically as an example own 50% each), that way if one of you enters care at least the other half will be protected (no good if you both enter care though). You would need to build in your wills right of occupancy once the first passes.
You also have a few different types of trust, Protective Property Trust, Life Interest Trust and Interest in possession trusts but you'll need to seek professional advice and it's still not 100% clear if that will do what you want, if the local authority believe you have only put in trust to avoid care fee's or deliberately reduced your capital for the same reason they can refuse to fund.
Ultimately if you have a fair amount in the bank that would get used first anyway, it's worth making sure between you and hubby you have a fairly good split of funds between you rather than all in one name etc, and pensions if possible.
FWIW I've looked into most things and in the end accepted it is what it is as they say. Our house is over the £1m anyway so it's likely some IHT would be payable assuming it's not used for care fee's. We may well when retired sell and move to somewhere smaller/different and try and keep under £1m.
If you can spend & give away your money now, as long as you live 7 years then it won't attract IHT, regardless of the 7 years you can give away £3k per annum to any one person, £250 to any number of people (each) and their are some allowances for children/grandchildrens weddings and the like.
And not for me to suggest, but you could draw out of the cash machine say £100 a week (as an example) and treat your kids/grandkids etc, not sure that would ever get noticed, after all it may have been used to fund your gambling habit
As always you'll need to keep an eye/up to date on regulation changes. I suspect the next government may make some to the current IHT rules, but who knows.
I have a few newspaper cuttings I've filed away regarding Will making /IHT etc so will try to get to grips with the info there & with yours.
I'll return here if any serious questions arise but am grateful for your input.