Opinions - how would you do it?

[Ceejay123]

.

 

[lindseymw]

Me personally I would split everything 3 ways but the inheritance that would go to the youngest, I would put in trust until they are say 21 or 25 & name you & your other sister as Trustees until she reached that age (if she hadn't reached that age of course).

Whilst I'm sure you and your sister would see that your youngest would get money, I have seen far too many arguments over inheritances that I would want it in black and white who gets what.

ETA: Also, just to point out that I'm sure you & your sister would give the money over, if anything should happen to either one of you, your share would automatically go to your children (unless your dad has arranged overwise) so it could get complicated making sure your youngest sister gets a share.

 

[lilyd]

For the time being, could he not make her the beneficiary of the first £300K of the life insurance policies (and the remainder split 3 ways) with the funds being held in trust (you and your sister could be trustees) until she is 21.

I say for the time being as your dad is only 45 and therefore is likely to still be around when she turns 21. This however may cover your concerns about your sister if anything did happen.

As the value of the houses is likely to increase in the long term, the financial picture will change constantly. Maybe every five or so years he could reassess the beneficiaries of the life insurance policies.

Eg. If your houses were worth 400k each and the policies are £500k, he could make your sister the beneficiary to the first £400K and the remainder split 3 ways.

Having said that, if the houses are in your names and your sister inherits via life insurance, she will be subject to Capital gains tax which you and your other sister wouldn't. It depends just how evenly you would want things split.

 

[lilyd]

Me personally I would split everything 3 ways but the inheritance that would go to the youngest, I would put in trust until they are say 21 or 25 & name you & your other sister as Trustees until she reached that age (if she hadn't reached that age of course).

Whilst I'm sure you and your sister would see that your youngest would get money, I have seen far too many arguments over inheritances that I would want it in black and white who gets what.

ETA: Also, just to point out that I'm sure you & your sister would give the money over, if anything should happen to either one of you, your share would automatically go to your children (unless your dad has arranged overwise) so it could get complicated making sure your youngest sister gets a share.

Sorry, didn't mean to copy your work! You can obviously type faster than me!

Totally agree with what you've said.

 

[lindseymw]

There is also one thing to take into consideration about putting yours/sisters names on the deeds, then if you get married, your DH would be the beneficiary. So if again, if anything should happen to you/sister, the house would go to DH (or jointly between DH and Dad if his names on the deeds too). Unless you write a will too. (Probate can get very complicated!)

 

[Ceejay123]

.

 

[Eleanor ace]

I agree with your sister, it could feel very isolating for your youngest sister to be treated as a daughter by your dad now but not in his will. I'd go for the trust fund option, he can stipulate when she would receive the money (though hopefully she'll be well into her adult years before it becomes an issue anyway ). With regards to your son (and your sisters LO, all being well!) it might be easier for you both to pass money on to them from your inheritance.