Can you write this in a will?

[stevensfo]

My sister and very well-off BIL have a clever but very lazy daughter in her 20s and a son who seems to be copying her. Both still live at home, both spoilt brats with a father who would like to kick their backsides, and sometimes does but their mother defends them for an easy life. My MIL once confided to us that she'd been shocked to hear my nephew say, without thinking, that no problems cos they'd inherit everything one day, so didn't have to worry.

They were talking about making a will recently and have an idea. Is it possible to specify in a will that, following the death of both parents, the children will have to prove a minimum of 20 years full-time employment in order to inherit anything? This seems to appeal to my sister as giving the brats a wake-up call without seeming too abrupt about it.

But if they die before the kids have 20 years employment, what happens to their house etc...?

Steve

[pochisoldi]

I would guess that it be held in a trust, with the executor(s) as trustees.

[Nimrod103]

My sister and very well-off BIL have a clever but very lazy daughter in her 20s and a son who seems to be copying her. Both still live at home, both spoilt brats with a father who would like to kick their backsides, and sometimes does but their mother defends them for an easy life. My MIL once confided to us that she'd been shocked to hear my nephew say, without thinking, that no problems cos they'd inherit everything one day, so didn't have to worry.

They were talking about making a will recently and have an idea. Is it possible to specify in a will that, following the death of both parents, the children will have to prove a minimum of 20 years full-time employment in order to inherit anything? This seems to appeal to my sister as giving the brats a wake-up call without seeming too abrupt about it.

But if they die before the kids have 20 years employment, what happens to their house etc...?

Steve

It may be an obvious thing to point out, but the children are very likely not going to inherit anything until they are into their 60s. Unless they plan to bump off the parents themselves!!! It is also possible that care homes will take any money the parents have.
What are they going to do for money for the next 40 years, till they reach their 60s?

Luckily my children have shown some get up and go, even though we have given them a great deal over the years. I'm not sure how young people can be motivated, if they won't push themselves. Answers on a postcard please.

[JohnB]

I can't see how a threat that needs 20 years application to avoid could have any influence on the psychology of lazy 20somethings. The classic "you must have married" Victorian condition at least could be satisfied in months, but such a vague term as paid employment, and such a long term opens any trust to big problems.

They need to grasp the nettle now, not leave it to the lawyers when they've gone

[gryffron]

Could it be done, yes.
Could it be easily avoided - also yes. What is to stop the children employing each other for £1pw? (no minimum wage for company directors)

I think that a lesson that has no effects for 40 years is pretty useless. I agree with JohnB. Far better to teach them a lesson now. Chuck them out of the house

Gryff

[Dod101]

Simple really. All the parents need do is leave the bulk of their money to a deserving charity or three. They might leave something to their children if they really want to but there is (in England) no requirement nor as far as I know any right of entitlement for them to receive anything.

Then tell the children what they have done - fini!

Dod

[Clitheroekid]

Is it possible to specify in a will that, following the death of both parents, the children will have to prove a minimum of 20 years full-time employment in order to inherit anything?

You can write anything you like in a Will, but it doesn't mean it would be enforceable. A clause of that nature would be so likely to be challenged - probably successfully - that it would be pointless (apart from giving m' learned friends a reliable income for a few years!) There are simply too many potential problems - for example, if the children succeeded in a business where they were self-employed - for such a clause to be workable.

In any event, by the time they received the `wake-up call' it would be far too late, as they would by then probably be of retirement age themselves, which would make the sanction somewhat pointless.

However, the two children sound pretty thick, so it might be worth telling them that Wills had been made to that effect. Even if they didn't believe it there would be bound to be a nagging doubt in their tiny minds that might just incentivise them to pull their respective fingers out.

From a purely legal point of view the parents' best solution would probably be to use their Wills to set up discretionary trusts. As the name implies, this allows whoever they appoint as their executors / trustees to decide who gets what.

Such a trust is usually accompanied by a letter of wishes, in which the parents would set out how they wanted their estates to be distributed.

The letter could, for example, include comments about rewarding the children according to certain standards, including how hard they had worked during their lives. Because it's not a legal document as such it can express wishes that would not be legally enforceable in a Will.

Although a letter of wishes is not binding on trustees they would normally be expected to observe and comply with the wishes unless there were compelling reasons not to do so.

[didds]

it also leaves the possibility of events outside of their control - say they work for 19 years then get made redundant in some huge recession and they never find another job?

didds

[paulnumbers]

My sister and very well-off BIL have a clever but very lazy daughter in her 20s and a son who seems to be copying her. Both still live at home, both spoilt brats with a father who would like to kick their backsides, and sometimes does but their mother defends them for an easy life. My MIL once confided to us that she'd been shocked to hear my nephew say, without thinking, that no problems cos they'd inherit everything one day, so didn't have to worry.

They were talking about making a will recently and have an idea. Is it possible to specify in a will that, following the death of both parents, the children will have to prove a minimum of 20 years full-time employment in order to inherit anything? This seems to appeal to my sister as giving the brats a wake-up call without seeming too abrupt about it.

But if they die before the kids have 20 years employment, what happens to their house etc...?

Steve

It may be an obvious thing to point out, but the children are very likely not going to inherit anything until they are into their 60s. Unless they plan to bump off the parents themselves!!! It is also possible that care homes will take any money the parents have.
What are they going to do for money for the next 40 years, till they reach their 60s?

Luckily my children have shown some get up and go, even though we have given them a great deal over the years. I'm not sure how young people can be motivated, if they won't push themselves. Answers on a postcard please.

Poverty helps with motivation, it did for me anyway.

[dspp]

I'm not a lawyer, but try this.

Set up a trust with the default option for the trustees to gift the lot to charity after xx years, but with power to vary. In letter of wishes indicate a) preferred charity(s); and b) desire to vary leaving 95% in favour of children if the children have become motivated hard-working useful self-loading members of society (or other similar words) at discretion of trustees. Basically set the default to the charity, and conversely give the children a reason to motivate themselves.

Another way is to set up a generation-skipping trust.

However real task is to get parents motivated to fix the real issue now. Both generations have questions to answer. I have met a lot of these folk over the years, not pretty.

just thoughts. Good luck.

regards, dspp

[pochisoldi]

Just do what ClitheroeKid suggested - do a normal will, and keep it to yourselves (the only thing you should mention is if they are going to be named as executors), then as you get older drop hints/make it clear that you intend to spend your retirement "SKI-ing" aka Spending the Kids Inheritance.

This sends out two messages to the offspring, both of which point to "pull your finger out and make a living for yourself"
1) If you work hard, then you can spend your retirement doing what you like.
2) Don't bank on a massive payoff when we pop our clogs.

I would only go down the trust route if I really really had to - I wouldn't want to be an lay executor if I had to spend the next N years of my life managing trust money, reporting and paying trust taxes, and dealing with beneficiaries, all for no reward. On that basis I wouldn't inflict it on anyone else.

PochiSoldi

[Chrysalis]

It seems really bizarre to use the threat of disinheriting to try to change behaviour which clearly the parents are already enabling!
The two issues are really completely separate. if they want the children to be more independent, they need to start changing the things they have control over - ie make sure they contribute properly to the household, or tell them to move on if they actually don't want them living at home.

it seems a really ineffective and passive aggressive approach to the issue to me.

the only thing that needs to be done with regards to inheritance is to make clear to the offspring not to count on any inheritance.

[Howyoudoin]

it also leaves the possibility of events outside of their control - say they work for 19 years then get made redundant in some huge recession and they never find another job?

didds

I'm guessing they've factored in events like that seeing as (only) 20 years of employment means that most people would have retired by the time they're 40!

HYD (who's looking at 45 years employment minimum (if he's lucky))

[Lanark]

It's been said that 90% of all personnel policies and procedures are a result of some manager who didnt want to have a difficult conversation with one specific person. This sounds like a similar situation.

If this will condition (were it possible) failed to have the desired effect, and they carried on being lazy would you definitely want to follow through and disinherit them?

It can be difficult to make disinheritance stick, in some countries e.g. Scotland its actually not legal. I've heard that leaving a token amount makes it harder to contest a will with the approach "they must have just forgotten to include person X"

The simple way to do this is to write up a will now which leaves the majority to a charity and make the kids aware that they will only be getting £100K or so.
Then if they start to shape up in a few years you can write up a new will.

Alternative:
BIL's will = everything inherited by sister, if sister predeceased then most goes to charity
Sisters will = leave to children

Only show them the BIL's will.