Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Who seems to be unreasonable and greedy? Looking for unbiased opinions and perspectives.

161 replies

SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 00:01

Indian family of 4 sons; father passed away leaving a will (registered and valid) splitting inheritance equally (25% each). Family migrated to the UK when kids were young.

  • 1st son: Rebellious, estranged from parents for years, had a love marriage parents didn’t support. Claims to have signed a document 4 decades ago renouncing inheritance (no copy exists). Wants his 25%, plans to pass it to his kids.
  • 2nd son: No contact with parents, divorced twice, parents still cared and loved him.
  • 3rd son: Family favourite, expected to inherit everything or at least exclude eldest brother. Divorced once, remarried recently.
  • 4th son: Follows 3rd son’s lead, divorced once, remarried recently.

Conflict: Eldest son’s brothers call him greedy/selfish for claiming his 25%. They thought inheritance would exclude him due to that old signed paper. Eldest wants to keep his share for his kids, not sell.

Question: Is the eldest son selfish for wanting the 25% left to him in the will?

YABU: Yes
YANBU: No

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:57

Cinaferna · 04/08/2025 06:12

Split it 4 ways, as stated in the document. Don't squabble with family over unearned income. They are all his sons. They all inherit. 1st son is honouring his plan not to inherit directly but wants his children to benefit from the family estate. Who wouldn't?

4 sons. 25% each. Problem solved.

I agree.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:56

PoppyFleur · 04/08/2025 06:06

@SequinTheDay it sounds to me like the parents caused the estrangement with the eldest son due to him marrying someone he loved, rather than who they chose/approved of. However, in the intervening years the other 3 sons have married and then divorced, whereas the eldest son’s marriage has endured. I suspect the father regretted his decision and made amends through the will be recognising the relationship and mentioning both the son and daughter in law in his will.

The elder son should ignore his brothers and reflect upon the message his father has delivered through the will; he is effectively recognising the harm caused, his role in the estrangement and apologising to his son, daughter in law and by extension, his grandchildren.

Yeah, you've got it right!

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:55

Daschund1 · 04/08/2025 06:06

I don't know why you bother asking. You have a position, think it's right and aren't changing it, regardless of whether YABU, so this is an exercise in futility.

Because eldest son gave up inheritance in his 20's but he's now in his 60's!

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:55

Pipsquiggle · 04/08/2025 06:04

DS3 sounds like a real dickhead.

The most straightforward thing to do is follow the will.

Was the will written pre or post DS1 'disinheriting' himself? If after, DS3 literally doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Why does DS3 think daughter's shouldn't inherit? Is he a misogynist as well or is it just his nieces not his nephews he has an issue with?

Basically, in his 20's he signed a document saying he doesn't want any inheritance. But, his father passed away in his 60's leaving a will which includes him and his wife with equal 25% share.

DS3 thinks land/property should go to sons only, as the girls eventually will get married and have a different surname. They don't belong to this family as after getting married, they will leave. Boys don't leave after marriage. It's misogynistic.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:53

StrictlyAFemaleFemale · 04/08/2025 05:50

Surely if the dad didn't want eldest to inherit he would have written his will to reflect that? He had 40 years to do so.

He denounced his inheritance in his 20's but his Dad passed away in his 60's. So 4 decades, give or take.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:52

Weepixie · 04/08/2025 05:39

Two sons estranged from the family, 3 sons divorced, everyone at each others throat. It very much appears that the family were/are dysfunctional with a capital D and the parents probably have a lot to answer for. Hopefully the eldest will have enough sense to stop answering the phone to anyone and do what he wants to with his inheritance.

Op, you need to just let them all get on with it.

The parents oh my god, they we're awful. Picked favourites and treated sons so poorly. Didn't attend weddings, spread gossip and just generally all around awful that half their kids went NC. The parents definitely played a part in the divorces, that's why eldest son keeps a distance. He doesn't want the same happening to him. They were using their Mums phone to ring, but she's blocked now.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:50

KingfisherAmmonite · 04/08/2025 05:30

He needs to stop picking up the phone.

If he hasn't sorted out his will already, he needs to.

Then refuse to engage whenever the topic comes up.

By continuing to get involved it's as if he also enjoys the drama.

Oh sorry if I wasn't clear, the brothers are blocked but they're using their Mums phone to ring which is most distressing. He's blocked her now too.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:50

Zanatdy · 04/08/2025 05:12

The family can protest all they like, but tough. He needs to keep them all blocked. He has every right to pass his inheritance onto his children.

I agree.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:49

99bottlesofkombucha · 04/08/2025 05:06

3rd son is a tosser and if I were his dad I’d have written him out of the will and given a share direct to any daughters he had. Eldest son should block (or record and send to police if they might listen) or say if you were a better son and looked after your mum this might not have happened. My share is going to my children. And I’d make sure that happens.

2 3 & 4 all sound pretty horrible people.

Eldest son denounced his inheritance in his 20's but made up because his Dad wanted to before he died. He and his wife took care of him, said let's leave what happened in the past and move on. He decided to leave equal share, which we didn't know until we saw the will. It was kept hidden.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:48

FluffykinsTheFerociousFeralFelineFury · 04/08/2025 04:47

Why is your husband taking the calls? Does he not understand how to use the block function, or cut off a call?

Show quote history

He blocked his brothers but they used their Mums phone to ring him, which was most upsetting.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:46

autienotnaughty · 04/08/2025 04:34

4 sons left 25% each. What they do with their 25% is upto them. If eldest son wants to keep his, give his back, give it to his kids or give it to charity it’s up to him.
The dad wanted them to have 25% each sons 2,3,4 need to respect that. It’s not grabby of son 1 to keep it, it is grabby of 2,3,4 to expect it.

He said he doesn't want the land himself, he'll just give it to his or charity but he's not letting them have it due to abusive phone calls and swearing. He has blocked them all now.

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:45

Ferrissia3 · 04/08/2025 03:29

I think his brothers should back off, respect the will, and just try to get over it. You sound like a pretty dysfunctional family, and making a decision to stop fighting with each other will probably help everyone.

Show quote history

It's so toxic and neglectful, that's why eldest son went non contact and was estranged. His children don't even recognise who their grandparents were!

OP posts:
Original poster
SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 12:44

LiquoriceAllsorts2 · 04/08/2025 02:42

It’s his to keep or transfer to his children as he wishes. The brothers should accept it and stop being so greedy and aggressive and back off.

I agree.

OP posts:
StrictlySequinsandStiIettos · 04/08/2025 11:38

Is the land in the UK or in India?
Your MIL now lives with her fourth son and his new wife?
Culturally, is new wife expected to be her carer?
What date was FIL's will written, how long ago?
Who were they living with when he was alive?
Who took care of him?
Why is there no provision for his wife? Who was expected to take care of her?
What are the long term plans for her?

I would be selling the land and, depending on how old your children are, passing the money to them or putting it into a trust.
Depending on how much £ there is, I would be potentially giving half (or your own share) to BIL4 (or his new wife) for the ongoing upkeep of your MIL which, cultural or not, is a massive undertaking.
If the land and extended family are all in the UK then I am amazed your MIL has not contested the will tbf. It should have all gone to her if a dependent. If she has to go into care, will it not be seen as deprivation of assets just passing down the whole inheritance to the next generation?

5128gap · 04/08/2025 08:33

No more greedy that the rest of his brothers who want him to give it up so they can have it. Personally I think that everyone who circles and moithers about the contents of a will is coming at it from a position of greed, because its always about getting their mitts on someone else's cash that they've not earned themselves. In this case the deceased was clear, so there isn't anything to fight about.

MyrrAgain · 04/08/2025 08:16

What someone said 40 years ago, maybe before they had children etc is not always relevant today.

The dad wanted it split 4 ways and also had 40 years to think about it and change things if he wanted to.

Maybe having children himself the 1st son sees things differently and wants to pass it on to his children so he’s doing so. Makes sense. Maybe the dad wanted this too which is why he left the 25%!

gannett · 04/08/2025 08:05

Third son is just going to have to get over himself, isn't he? Wild that he expected to get it all, even fourth son's share. But the will is what it is and first son can do whatever he wants with his share.

The "renouncement" of his inheritance which happened FORTY years ago and was never legally binding is irrelevant. If the dad had wanted to follow it through he would have done so in the will (the only document that actually matters).

She used to live with 2nd son but he kicked her out, 1st and 3rd son refused to have her so the 4th one took her in. She’s been kicked out by her 3 sons multiple times.

There's definitely a "nightmare MIL" back story here, isn't there...

beAsensible1 · 04/08/2025 08:01

Eldest should get the 25 for his kids. Forget the what the others say. He’s estranged anyway so the bad blood doesn’t matter.

Waterbaby41 · 04/08/2025 07:58

The will is quite clear. Whatever eldest son chooses to do with his 25% is his business alone. The next - and any further shouty sweary phone call should be answered very simply "Fuck off" and put the phone down. Every time.

curious79 · 04/08/2025 07:55

It doesn’t really matter who any of the characters are or however unsavoury or not. Under British law the will can’t be changed or changes made based on what the recipients want to do. It has to be executed as specified

Dangermoo · 04/08/2025 07:52

SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 00:12

What they want the eldest brother to do is transfer the land in his name to theirs, so their children can have it. The eldest brother will receive zero money and just wants to transfer it to his 3 kids, so it stayed in the family per say.

Show quote history

So he says thats why he wants it.

RosesAndHellebores · 04/08/2025 07:49

There is a legal will setting out how the estate will be split. The prevailing law is UK (I assume England). The father made a legitimate decision in relation to his estate and I assume there is a solicitor/executors.

The law is the law and the will mist be observed.

What is the relevance of the family's ethnicity and/or origin. It is the law that matters and they need to respect it.

YourJoyousDenimExpert · 04/08/2025 07:47

I don’t think you can renounce inheritance in advance - only after the person whose will it is has died. At that point, inheritance can be declined. So the missing ‘renouncement document’ that you already acknowledge was not notarised anyway is not relevant.
Block them all, don’t sign anything they ask about, get the transfer to the children sorted and leave them to rage.

HappilyUrbanTrimmer · 04/08/2025 07:46

SequinTheDay · 04/08/2025 01:00

It’s such a distressing situation because his Mum agrees with the 3rd son. She thinks he should have 100% of the estate. She doesn’t agree with the will either. But, everything was in her husbands name and not hers. So his to give.

Show quote history

Does the Will leave the mother destitute and dependent on her sons (and presumably only on sons 3&4 as 1&2 are so out of favour)? Although in general it is right for the Will to be respected, the mother's support fot son 3's claim mightbe more about this. She could have potentially challenged this distribution under the Inheritance (Provision For Family and Dependants) Act 1975 by making a claim to the court if she felt the will fails to make reasonable financial provision for her, but it's probably too late for that now (IANAL and I don't know what the time limits are) - best for sons1&2 that this didn't happen as a variation would have allowed her to favour her golden child in her own Will. Son 1 has every right to keep his inheritance for his children but if his mother has been left destitute then it woukd be the morally right thing to do to for all 4 brothers to assign a reasonable proportion of the income of the estate to the mother for her lifetime, while retaining its actual ownership. (Unnecessary if the mother has adequate assets in her name and isn't dependent on her sons)

The father sounds like a good man. He knew that the hotheaded denouncement of a 20yo was no good reason to actually cut off his son. He loved all his sons and didn't play favourites. That should be respected.

prelovedusername · 04/08/2025 07:44

The will is clear, 25% each. What I can’t understand is why you would want to expose your children to this nastiness by passing the inheritance to them.