Brother stealing my inheritance - so upset can hardly think straight

[helpmecanhardlybreathe]

I'm the youngest of 4 dcs, with 3 older dbs.

My df passed away a few years ago, my dm about a year and a half ago. My df left most stuff, including the house, far and away the biggest asset, to my dm. She originally wrote a will that left everything to her 4 dcs equally. However, as my 3 much older dbs all own their own (very expensive) property, and only the oldest db has a dc, who's a doctor, so not likely to be short of cash either, my dm decided to change her will, to leave the house to me, as I have 3 dcs and we still rent, and have never been able to afford to buy a place of our own, due to house prices shooting up in recent years.

I know she was very worried about our financial security. I think she also wanted to leave the house to me, as it was me and my youngest db (who is a millionaire and doesn't need the money at all) who looked after her and my df in their old age. My eldest db, who lives in the US, didn't bother to visit at all in the last decade or so, and would only agree to come if my dps agreed to pay for him to fly first class (yes, really). He never called on the phone either - she called him and spoke to him maybe twice a year.

Anyway, she made the mistake of telling db1 she wanted to change her will and he kicked off. So she changed her will instead to leaving everything to be split equally between her 4 grandchildren, assuming he'd be ok with that, as his family would still get a quarter share. But he was furious, and basically blackmailed her into changing her will back again to leave it to all 4 of her dcs equally - he told her if she didn't, he would not attend her funeral or say the prayers for the dead that are crucial in my religion.

She was incredibly upset by this - she told literally everyone, must have heard her say this hundreds of times. It's like she wanted to apologise to me for not leaving me the house, and make it clear that she wanted to leave it to me, but was too scared of my db to change her will again. She did resist when he demanded to be made an executor - that was given to db3. I should add that db2 keeps out of all this, not particularly materialistic, no dcs, financially comfortable.

Anyway, when my dm passed away, it was lockdown, so in practice it would have been very difficult for db1 to attend the funeral (not that he tried). A year later, in my religion, is the stonesetting, which is also a very important religious event. Despite having blackmailed my dm into rewriting her will or he wouldn't attend the funeral, not only did he not attend the funeral or stonesetting, which he could have attended, he couldn't even be bothered to dial in via Zoom to attend it that way. He was going on holiday somewhere else instead.

He's now finally bothered to fly with his family over to the UK - which he couldn't be bothered to do when my dm was alive, or to attend her funeral or stonesetting - to take stuff he wants from the house before it's sold.

I just heard he's wrapped up to take a picture that wasn't left in my dps' wills, it belongs jointly to me and my 3 dbs as it was left to us by my grandma. It's painted by my great-grandpa (my dm's grandpa), who my ds is named after. Again, it's something that my dm said hundreds of times she wanted me to have, knowing how important this great-grandpa is in my family. My db1 claims he should have it because he likes it and it used to hang in 'his' room (we only inherited it a decade after he moved to the US!). He has so little interest in our family history he couldn't be bothered to see his dps, or attend my dm's funeral or stonesetting.

I'm just so upset - it's not enough that he blackmailed my poor dm into changing her will, he's now walking off with precious family heirlooms that are shared by all my siblings! I've said he has no right to take it as it belongs to all of us, and his answer is basically, 'Tough, I want it. I don't to discuss it further. I'm taking it.'

He'll be flying back to the US with it in a few days and I feel like I'm being stabbed - so upset. Is there anything I can do? He's just ignoring everyone's wishes except his own. I know db3 thinks I should have the picture but will almost certainly want to avoid a family row. Db2 will likewise want to keep out of it. I'm just so angry and upset.

If anyone has any suggestions of anything I can do, or can just calm me down so I'm not hurting so much, that would be appreciated. Just can't believe anyone would behave like this. So upset that my dm's wishes are being ridden roughshod over again. So sad that this precious heirloom will go to the US, to people who care nothing about it, and we'll never see it again.

@WeDontShutUpAboutBruno
A very irresponsible comment.
Call the police?
Stolen good being taken out of the country?
You don't even know the other 3 sides of the story.

Forgive me if this has already been said, but it's URGENT I explain.

Re THE PAINTING. If you want to have the painting then you need to STOP it LEAVING THE COUNTRY. This would mean seeing a solicitor URGENTLY, BEFORE the brother leaves the country and takes it with him. If you can show that it's not his then you can get a court to make an ORDER preventing him from taking the painting out of the jurisdiction of the court (stays in the country). (I feel sure a temporary order will be sufficient. Just enough to stop him taking it away.) But obviously you'll need to ACT FAST. If you don't it'll be gone and probably the only thing you'll be able to do is ensure that brother's share of the settlement is reduced by three quarters of the value of the painting. (Which is bound to be less than you value it yourself.)

If your older brother genuinely coerced your mother into changing her will from her preferred choice, then it's POSSIBLE that you can get it changed, or at least partly changed, and I would advise you to see a solicitor about that, too. I imagine this is less urgent, unless this unpleasant brother has already been given the money, in which case you may NEED TO ACT BEFORE HE LEAVES THE UK.)

I can't believe some of the messages on here, although glad to see some are sympathetic.
If none of your attempts to get legal help to prevent your brother from taking this painting are successful, then I think you'd be well advised to look for a way to "move on" so that this doesn't tear your heart out. It looks as though you wanted some kind of joint family "event" (discussion) that might bring you closer together and help you all to grieve for your parents. Obviously that wasn't on offer. But if your heart is in the right place, then that matters more. And it sounds as though you have a close enough relationship with your other brothers.
So let him behave like a .... and make sure you keep your own integrity.

I hope you have a good photo of the painting, and maybe one day one of your children can paint a "copy" of it, so that you can have something that means even more to you.

Meanwhile, I think you might enjoy doing some kind of activity/quest (a holiday, a walk, a party, learn a new subject) in your mother's name, and let that help you to come to terms with the way things have turned out.

OP, I think you need to hide this thread. This is really unpleasant and you must be quite emotionally raw.

I am astonished at the level of viciousness and nastiness on this thread. I hope the posters here are proud of themselves, accusing the OP of lying, blackmail, grabbiness, greed, elder abuse. Nothing the OP has said has suggested this, it's all fantastical assumptions and ridiculous extrapolations. And now there's some cruel pile in going on.

I know this AIBU but a little kindness and compassion would go a long way.

If your older brother genuinely coerced your mother into changing her will from her preferred choice, then it's POSSIBLE that you can get it changed, or at least partly changed, and I would advise you to see a solicitor about that, too. I imagine this is less urgent, unless this unpleasant brother has already been given the money, in which case you may NEED TO ACT BEFORE HE LEAVES THE UK.)

You want the op to go see a solicitor and say her brother forced the mother to change the will so it was shared equally and should be all hers? Its costs a fortune. I might need wrong, but I can't see a judge deciding to disinherit the other 3.

I hope the posters here are proud of themselves, accusing the OP of lying, blackmail, grabbiness, greed, elder abuse

I don't think that's quite right tbh. That's what she is accusing her brother of. People pointed out that what he actually wanted was it to be equal. He didn't gain between will 2 and 3. He wasn't pushing for him, he was pushing for it to be equal.

People pointed out that he could easily say the same as her. But in her case she wanted only her to Inherit. While op says that she told her mother not to leave it all to her, she also considers that he stole her Inheritance. She does see it as hers, despite saying she didn't.

People pointed out that she was saying he abused the mother into sharing it equally. He could say she abused her into trying to give it all to her. And at the end of it, there was only her who gains in her ideal outcome.

The house should have been left in equal parts to all siblings to avoid favouritism which can cut to the core. Even bypassing the siblings can be very hurtful. The Will is a last official statement from the dead person and so a child who feels less loved or judged through their life Will really feel it if the Will is unequal or skips a generation. You’re very judgmental about your brothers and their finances and behaviour but you dont know the complexities of your brothers and parents relationship and personally I wouldn’t bother trying to understand. There must have been a reason he struggled to return, historic or present day. It seems to me he is the black sheep or scape goat of the family, a title nobody should hold.

You both feel equally connected to the painting, which makes things difficult. For him it’s the one reminder of his childhood and symbolic.I’m not sure what the solution is, your parents really should have written something down so that their wishes were in black and white.

I blame your parents for how messy this has been.

@Saltyquiche the painting isn't part of the inheritence from the mother.

Op and her brothers inherited it from their grandparent.

Its the grandparent that made this messy. And then the fact that the executor hasn't done anything about it for 18 months. Just left this much loved piece of artwork hanging in an empty house.

Although, to be fair I suspect the executor has put it off as they dont want to be in the middle of it. And seems to have set out 'whoever grabs it first can have it'. I say that because op said she was alerted that DB1 was taking it and DB3 encouraged her to get it first. But didn't attempt to stop the brother. That's why I think as far as DB3 is concerned, its whoever gets to it first. He gave them an equal shot at grabbing it.

I blame your parents for how messy this has been.

Yes, it seems like this could have been avoided by the mother not deciding to favour one child in the first place, not painting her son’s repeated requests for a fair division as “blackmail”, not being apparently more concerned about getting the right prayers said after her death than her supposed desire to favour her daughter in her will and not broadcasting the whole drama to everyone including the milkman.

The absconding son seems like a jerk but he could just be quite fed up with his mother’s irrationality and histrionic tendencies.

@Turningpurple

If your older brother genuinely coerced your mother into changing her will from her preferred choice, then it's POSSIBLE that you can get it changed, or at least partly changed, and I would advise you to see a solicitor about that, too. I imagine this is less urgent, unless this unpleasant brother has already been given the money, in which case you may NEED TO ACT BEFORE HE LEAVES THE UK.)

You want the op to go see a solicitor and say her brother forced the mother to change the will so it was shared equally and should be all hers? Its costs a fortune. I might need wrong, but I can't see a judge deciding to disinherit the other 3.

I hope the posters here are proud of themselves, accusing the OP of lying, blackmail, grabbiness, greed, elder abuse

I don't think that's quite right tbh. That's what she is accusing her brother of. People pointed out that what he actually wanted was it to be equal. He didn't gain between will 2 and 3. He wasn't pushing for him, he was pushing for it to be equal.

People pointed out that he could easily say the same as her. But in her case she wanted only her to Inherit. While op says that she told her mother not to leave it all to her, she also considers that he stole her Inheritance. She does see it as hers, despite saying she didn't.

People pointed out that she was saying he abused the mother into sharing it equally. He could say she abused her into trying to give it all to her. And at the end of it, there was only her who gains in her ideal outcome.

The brother could potentially say many things, it's all conjencture. But we only have what the OP has told us. She's said that what has bothered her is her mother's distress. But that's being scorned and mocked. She may be lying, of course, but the point of departure should be that she's telling the truth. People on here are just being cruel, it's nasty

A painting left jointly between several beneficiaries is always going to cause problems; it's unfortunate the OPs mother did that.

Aside from that I think it's absolutely right that a parent should split their estate equally among their children. The only scenario where I would say any different is a really exceptional case where one child has very specific medical/ SEN which requires exceptional support.

It's all very well to say that one child is financially more 'needy' than another but that's simply a snapshot in time, it doesn't take into account countless variables. One of my adult children is (at the moment) significantly better off than another because of life choices: she has worked extremely hard to enter her career, foregoing some of the things her younger sibling chose to do (travelling etc) - I would consider myself a terrible parent if I decided to penalise her because at this moment in time she's 'better off.'

Likewise if a parent gives more to the kids who have their own children - why would you 'reward' someone for having popped a kid out? And what about other adult kids who haven't procreated yet but might in the future.

Same for leaving more to a child who visits more frequently. Why would you penalise a child who might have moved hundreds or miles away or even to another country because they're being an independent adult and working somewhere else?

Slagging off the OP isn't helpful but I'll just say this: no one knows all the nuances of family relationships. As I said unless there is a very clear unequivocal reason why one adult child needs very specific support (such as having a disability which means they'll never live independently) then it's fucking awful for a parent to show favouritism through leaving more to one child than another

Actually If you think about it what the oldest brother was furious about and apparently blackmailed his mother over was his ownson taking one quarter and the ops kids taking three quarters. The other two brothers were the ones being cut out. Not the eldest brother and his family.

By doing what he did, him and his family didn’t get a penny more.
They were always getting a quarter. So him and his family didn’t benefit in any way shape nor form from this apparent blackmail.

What did happen is he stopped his two brothers being cut out the will totally and the op and her children taking those brothers share of the inheritance. Those two brothers have no kids and the will she said was one quarter to her eldest brothers son and three quarters to her kids.

So he actually did a lovely thing for his brothers and his family didn’t get a penny more from his actions in any way,

The two brothers and their families were the ones being cut out. Not the eldest son she’s raging with and his family. They didn’t get a penny more from it. What happened was the op and her family were pocketing their share and he put a stop to it and made sure the other two brothers got their share.

The brother could potentially say many things, it's all conjencture. But we only have what the OP has told us.

In the same vein, op is just conjecture. She has no clue about his point of view. Only her own of 'I should get it all'.

I wasn't arguing for or against I was pointing out that people were not calling her an abuser, they were saying that while she thinks he is its possible he could level the same at her. Trying to get her to see a different perspective.

She's said that what has bothered her is her mother's distress. But that's being scorned and mocked. She may be lying, of course, but the point of departure should be that she's telling the truth.

However, she still thinks he stole the house from her. The painting is nothing to do with the house. It's from 2 different estates.

I am sure her mothers upset did upset op. But she doesn't really know the converstation. She is even holding it against him that he didn't travel to the UK for the funeral. In the height of a pandemic. The funeral would have been very soon after death. Flying from the US to UK, possibly having to quarantine would not have been easy 18 months ago. Alot of her hurt and distress is actually down to herself, not anything her brother has done. Its ok saying we should believe her, but her point of view doesn't hold up. That's not to say she is lying as such, but that she is spinning this into a whole different story in her head to justify her stance.

Its very difficult to believe 'I told mum to split it equally I was just bothered about her' and then 'the house should have been mine, he stole it. It should have been mine'

And also op isn't seemingly bothered that he stood to gain nothing between will 2 & 3. He got the same. Its glaring obvious his goal was for it to be equal. Op doesn't wants equal. She wants the whole house and the painting.

I can see why people are struggling to believe this is only about her mothers distress. Also the op was the one that started throwing around elder abuse. She accused posters of condoning elder abuse, when they were saying that he could have a very different point of view.

As it stands she wants it all, he wanted it shared equally. And it appears neither have covered themselves in glory. But while she can claim elder abuse, that could be thrown back at her. That she was using cohersion and elder abuse to get her mother to disinherit the brothers. Which is just as likely as him abusing the mother. What's more likey one sibling abusing the mother to get her to share it equally, even when he gains nothing. Or another sibling doing the same to get it all.

If the other 2 brothers support op like she said they do, she would have the painting and they will be giving her their portion. But it appears they didn't and won't be.

I agree op shouldn't be mocked. But it's disingenuous to not notice there are huge gaps here and pretend the story makes sense. Its also not helpful to pretend the other person in this couldn't have a completely different point of view.

@Turningpurple excellent post.

The OP says several times in the thread that 'it's not an inheritance, it's simply my mother's belongings/ property to do with as she wishes' and 'nobody is entitled to an inheritance.'

But look at her thread title!! Clearly she does think she's entitled to an inheritance, and one that gives her pretty much everything and excludes her siblings

Oh you masters of logic, you think you know better than anyone else! But while nothing in this sorry tale holds up completely, that includes the actions of the older brother.
And you who think it's up to you to decide who anyone should leave their money to when they die! The fact is that some choose The Cats' Home, some choose every relative however close or distant, some choose equal shares and others unequal shares. Some choose to give to a child in their lifetime, on the understanding they'll have nothing in the will. Some choose to omit a child who failed to obey their every whim. It's entirely up to the person whose money it is! If there was a "by rights" situation, there would be no need for wills!
And you who are maligning and judging the OP! While she's asking us "or can just calm me down so I'm not hurting so much". Really, is telling her you disapprove of her actions, because they don't match your own standards or beliefs going to help? Compassion please.

my brother took all my dad's things he was greatly inyo playing music and lived his guitars 🎸 he loved DIY too and my brother took everything thst belonged to him , my brother passed away from cancer 4 years after my dad and now his girlfriend has it all, I've asked if I could have some bits of my dad but she's blocked all contact, she's probably sold his guitars as they were expensive but sentimental to me

The fact is that some choose The Cats' Home, some choose every relative however close or distant, some choose equal shares and others unequal shares. Some choose to give to a child in their lifetime, on the understanding they'll have nothing in the will. Some choose to omit a child who failed to obey their every whim.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that a person can write their will however they like. It's their estate, their choice.

What many of us are saying is that it beggars belief that a loving parent would do anything other than treat their children equitably. Leaving one's estate to The Cats' Home might be bizarre - but at least it doesn't favour one child over another. To treat one's own children differently because of their life choices or circumstances - having children/ being childless/ living near/ living abroad/ earning/ not earning etc is just awful. Particularly as it's making a snapshot judgement in a moment of time. Circumstances change... the childless person could have a family further down the line; the high earner might be made redundant; the person who appears to have it all might get seriously ill, or their husband/ wife might leave them... there are so many nuances and variables.

@yzed

Oh you masters of logic, you think you know better than anyone else! But while nothing in this sorry tale holds up completely, that includes the actions of the older brother. And you who think it's up to you to decide who anyone should leave their money to when they die! The fact is that some choose The Cats' Home, some choose every relative however close or distant, some choose equal shares and others unequal shares. Some choose to give to a child in their lifetime, on the understanding they'll have nothing in the will. Some choose to omit a child who failed to obey their every whim. It's entirely up to the person whose money it is! If there was a "by rights" situation, there would be no need for wills! And you who are maligning and judging the OP! While she's asking us "or can just calm me down so I'm not hurting so much". Really, is telling her you disapprove of her actions, because they don't match your own standards or beliefs going to help? Compassion please.

I think you’ve maybe misunderstood what’s being said?

No one is saying it’s not up to the person, people are saying they feel it’s fair to leave to all children equally as the mother has chosen to do, and pointing out the eldest brother gained nothing here, not one penny, his family was getting a quarter in the will he disputed.

The op is accusing her brother of robbing her, when she was never entitled to the full estate, it’s her mothers choice of what to do, and at worst, if the op is to be believed as read, then he’s just ensured his brothers get their share and isn’t cut out.

Sure she’s lost out, likely because of his actions, but those actions didn’t benefit him and his family they only benefitted his two brothers who were being cut out totally in favour of the ops family.

@yzed

Oh you masters of logic, you think you know better than anyone else! But while nothing in this sorry tale holds up completely, that includes the actions of the older brother. And you who think it's up to you to decide who anyone should leave their money to when they die! The fact is that some choose The Cats' Home, some choose every relative however close or distant, some choose equal shares and others unequal shares. Some choose to give to a child in their lifetime, on the understanding they'll have nothing in the will. Some choose to omit a child who failed to obey their every whim. It's entirely up to the person whose money it is! If there was a "by rights" situation, there would be no need for wills! And you who are maligning and judging the OP! While she's asking us "or can just calm me down so I'm not hurting so much". Really, is telling her you disapprove of her actions, because they don't match your own standards or beliefs going to help? Compassion please.

Not sure where people have said he hasn't done anything.

No one said who the money should go to. But that's its fair to be equal.

There's a huge difference between 'my brother abused our mother and stole my inhertience' and actually what op has described.

People can leave their money to whoever they want. But why people insist on pretending there's no emotion in that decision (either by the deceased or receiver), I just can't fathom.

I think backing ops position that she is a victim and her her brother is some villainous character thata destroying her life would be cruel.

I think telling her, her view of the situation and what actually happened are 2 completely different things will calm her down more. Pointing out that it's her interpretation of the facts thats causing her pain is more helpful.

Like stop framing it as 'he didn't come to her funeral because he is cruel' and 'he didn't attend the funeral be ause there was a pandemic and even if her had got here he would probably be too late and risked getting stuck here'

As I said before, neither are covering themselves in glory. However, even by ops version of what happened, its not narrative she has stuck in her head.

I think that we just have to accept the wishes in the will and with regards to possessions there is always items that more than one person wants.
It doesn’t give you any more rights to possess than him all you can do is negotiate.

OP, I tend to agree with you that parents would usually want to know that all their children are financially OK and if that means leaving more to one or the other, so be it.
But that is truly treacherous territory leaving ground for a lot of resentment between siblings.
For that kind of situation to well and truly work out, ALL siblings would have to have an amazing bond where they can overlook the 'Me first' attitude and have empathy and understanding for their sibling who is in need. I don't think there are many situations like that.

As for the painting, I understand you feel a connection with the artist because of your son's name. But that does not take away from the fact that your DB1 has the same right, as does DB2 and 3. But as you said, DB1 just snatching was very wrong!
At the end of the day, as a PP said, it is stuff. I know you have a lot of sentimentality wrapped around that but for your sake, try to let it go. I know some PPs have suggested contesting it legally, but wouldn't that somehow change the way you look at that painting even if you were to win it back?
My advice for you would be to let it go. It is a painting, it's stuff. Let the material thing go but keep the beautiful memories associated with it. If you take the higher road, DB1 will be the one who didn't and even if he doesn't now, will likely feel guilty some time down the line.

All the best to you

Also, as many PPs have mentioned, there are other sides to this story–your DB1,2, and 3. It may be difficult right now but I would try to see things from DB1's point of view and of course, DB2 and 3.
They lost their parents too.