How to divide inheritance fairly between children in will

It is very hard for your aunt to predict the value of her house and the amount of her cash assets on the date of her death which is where the problem lies.

Daughter A lives at home and will as your aunt ages probably take on more and more of a caring role, cooking, cleaning, shopping, doctor and hospital appointments etc., although from what you say above I am now doubting this. So during her lifetime daughter A benefits from 0 housing costs. It seems she has little potential to build savings so maybe has marginal employment if anything.

Daughter B has probably benefited for being educated and now lives independently from her original family. But is a great help to her mother. She has said she is happy to inherit the non house assets of the estate when her mother dies, and happy for her sister to inherit the home.

I think your Aunt should take this at face value, and believe Daughter B.

So in her will
Leave the house and contents to Daughter A
Value house on date of death, leave cash to the value of the house to Daughter B.
If cash assets are less than value of house daughter B gets all cash assets.
Leave the residue of the estate equally to both daughters.

Perhaps your Aunt has some specific pieces, Jewellry, items, etc that have specific sentimental value to Daughter B, she should call these out specifically in the will and give to B.

And sure at the end of the day B may inherit less in absolute value than A and pay more tax but she also is probably very happy that A has a secure home for her old age too.
 
If you look up RIP you will see removal from her Daughters/sons Residents/nursing home/hospital on 0/0/2025 and arriving at a church 50/100/ 200km away ,where the deceased person left there own home where the has family to live out there final years with or near a son/Daughter who they felt cared for them the best,
There are several warning signs the parent may have been over protective of the Daughter which long term did the daughter living at home no favour' and may struggle to care for the mother in later life as well as her sister who lives away from home,

just one example she wants to protect one daughter from paying tax at the expense of her other daughter who appears to be more caring towards her mother,(Daughter living away has no problem with her sister getting more

Now If you look at it the other way around would the less caring daughter If She Was The One living away from home be as generous to her sister,

(Less caring I know is the wrong word to use just using it to make a point,)

Daughter living at home who already looking for the biggest slice of the cake and already seen by parent as not the most caring of the 2 daughters may or may not be the best to look after Her Mother in her final years,
 
Last edited:
suework said:
It was not agreed that daughter A gets the house if it is the only asset, that only happens if daughter B gets equal value.

To clarify daughter B agrees that if its the only asset her sister stays in the house with joint ownership and that sister paying the running costs. This is not the desired outcome by all.
Click to expand...

Okay, I had felt there was a strong desire from your aunt that daughter A continue to have a home to live in after she dies but if joint ownership of the house with the diktat that daughter A pay all running costs is one potential scenario then I don’t think that is a good option at all. It would lead to potential feuds over simple costs perhaps in 20 years time etc.

The simplest solution, without the Aunt wondering about tax or homing a daughter is to say house to be sold and whole estate divided equally between both siblings. Daughter A to have the option to purchase house at market value. In this way Daughter A can still have a house to live in if she uses her 50% of cash inherited to “purchase the house”. She just has to transfer value to her sister.

1st option

House value €500K
Cash €500K

Daughter A gives her €250K cash to sister and takes house at €500K. Daughter A ends up with house, €500K, sister with cash, €500K

Second option
House value €400K
Cash €600K

Daughter A gives €200 K of cash she would inherited to sister, to buy out her share of house. Daughter ends up with house, €400K and cash €100K and sister ends up with €500K cash.

Third option
House value €600K
Cash €400K

Daughter A will need to find €100K from somewhere and gives her sister €300K to buy house. She ends up with house €600K and €100K debt, sister ends up with €500K. If daughter A cannot raise the loan the house sold and both end up with €500K cash and daughter A uses it to purchase a new property.

The solicitor can word it to ensure all three options are clear.
 
Ask your solicitor will recommend an accountant he has used before to you,
I expect an accountant to be better at the tax end of estate planning than a solicitor,
 
Last edited:
It’s laudatory that your aunt has accumulated an estate of a house and cash. Her daughters should be grateful that she will bequeath this to them. If she wishes absolute fairness, i.e. to give each an equal share, she should require the house be sold and the estate (i.e. house plus other assets) divided equally between the daughters.

As for your aunt not wanting any disagreements, it may sound harsh, but you could point out to her that it’s irrelevant. She will be deceased and not aware of any if they should unfortunately occur. Also, such disagreements would be between her daughters, and not a reflection on her decisions. If there are any, it reflects badly on the beneficiaries, not on your aunt, but she should not worry in this regard. It is more important that her will be legally sound and reinforce her wishes clearly.
 
There's a circle here that can't be squared. The testor has two objectives:
  • She wants her estate to be divided equally between A and B.
  • She wants A to have the house
Both of these are attainable, so long as the house represents 50% or less of the estate. This is currently the case, but it is not possible to know whether it will be the case when the will takes effect. If the house represents more than 50% of the estate, the testator has to decide which of her two goals will prevail.

I suggest a will that provides as follows:
  • The estate is to be divided between her daughters A and B equally.
  • If the value of a 50% share of the estate is equal to or greater than the market value of the house, daughter A may choose to take the house as part of her share of the estate.
    • [The will could say, at this point, that if she doesn't choose to do that, the house is to be sold. Or it could be silent about this, in which case the executor would have the choice of selling the house, so that each daughter gets their share of the estate entirely in cash, or of transferring the house to the two daughters jointly, and letting them work out what to do with it.]
  • If the value of a 50% share of the estate is less than the market value of the house, daughter A has the right:
    • to take, as her 50% share in the estate, an interest in the house of whatever percentage will equate to 50% of the estate; and
    • to buy the remaining interest in the house from the estate at market value.
      • [I suggest the will should say that she has to do both of these things, or neither of them. The point is to enable her, if she wishes, to acquire full ownership of the house, in a way that means B still gets the full value of a 50% share of the estate. B ending up with a minority interest in the house which A doesn't want to buy and which, realistically, cannot be sold to anyone else, is not fair to B.]
This solution subordinates the "A to get the house" goal to the "both to get 50% goal". It gives both 50% on terms that give A the greatest possible chance of ending up with the entire interest in the house, if that is what she wants.
 
I knew a family where a father left the cash to his daughter in his will and the son was to get the house as he resided there with his father. Unfortunately the gentleman ended up in a nursing home prior to his death. All the cash savings were used up. Just something to consider
 
Tumeric said:
I knew a family where a father left the cash to his daughter in his will and the son was to get the house as he resided there with his father. Unfortunately the gentleman ended up in a nursing home prior to his death. All the cash savings were used up. Just something to consider
Click to expand...

That's exactly the kind of think that can happen. Or, of course, the exact opposite might happen; the house that the testator had at the time the will was drawn up might have been sold to cove the nursing home costs. You need to consider these possibilities and permutations at the time the will is drawn up.
 
Fundamentally, no. I'm just trying to nut my way through to a will that doesn't set out three different sets of rules to be applied in three different contingencies; that just invites challenge from an unhappy beneficiary. Ideally, the will would contain a single set of rules to apply in all circumstances, that would produce the right outcome in all circumstances. Maybe something like:

  1. My estate is to be divided in equal shares between my daughters A and B.
  2. A may choose to take an interest in the house in satisfaction or part-satisfaction of her entitlement on condition that, if she does, she also buys from the estate, at market value, the entire remaining interest in the house.
In all circumstances, that should produce the right outcome.
 
Amazing wording @TomEdison, well done.

@DannyBoyD i know I ended up saying the same thing as you and TomEdison but I think on a chat board that is acceptable, the approach from each was different but the outcome was the same and the original poster may find it helpful to see that different people considering different aspects end up in the same place, and use different wording to say the same thing.

It might reinforce that this is the best possible outcome or it might make them think everyone is wrong apart from themselves., Who knows. And sometimes people don’t read every post in a topic, they may focus just on the original poster and their subsequent clarifications.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top