AIBU to be fuming over my mums will.

[navada]

My mum lives in a house worth over 700k. I always assumed that on her death the house would be sold & split between me & my 3 siblings. ( I'd never been told otherwise! )
Anyway, about 5 years ago my brother moved back in with my mum when his marriage broke up, it was only supposed to be a temporary measure until he sorted himself out - he never quite got around to sorting himself out & still lives there. I found out a few months ago that my mum has made a will leaving the house to all of us, but with a stipulation that my brother can say in the house for as long as he wants. He's fully intending to take up that offer.

Right now I hate both of them. how bloody unfair!

Sadly in situations like this the 'favoured' one loses out as well. Having lost any incentive to move away and live his own life, he will end up in this huge house forever and poor relationships with his family.

If he has his own family, they will discover on his death that the house must then be sold and his widow/children will have only 1/4 of the value to buy somewhere else.

Custardo
if the house holds sentimental value, then he can re-mortgage it and give the fair share to the sisters, he would have a third of the mortgage as a deposit

He would have one quarter of house value = 175, 000, minus his 37, 500 share of IHT = 137, 500

He would need a mortgage of £562, 500

YANBU. I'm normally kind of against people expecting to inherit, but in this case im astonished at the number of posters criticising you but not your entitled spoilt brat of a brother.

I take it he is a healthy adult male? IMHO he's on the make, and is deliberately not buying his own place and hanging on in the family home to ensure his inheritance. Treating children unequally is terribly unfair and almost guaranteed to breed resentment.

Id personally be tempted to write your mother a letter saying how you feel. Yes, she can leave her home to whom she pleases, but equally you are entitled to feel as you please about it.

And your DB is also going to have to sell the house as soon as she dies, as its over the IHT threshold. It makes more sense for her to downsize now and pay you all lump sums, many families do this to plan ahead. At the very least, can you suggest she takes independent legal advice on the matter?

I can understand the hurt, really I can. I also understand the complications because my father left his house between 4 of us inc stepmother (we fell out with her after his death -long story) who had the rights to live there as long as she wanted to. She also let it fall into quite bad disrepair which was a problem as it had to be sold so her share could be used for care. And it was my late mother's house - they (in our opinion) should have moved to another one. But - hey ho. Water long under the bridge now.

But it is the manner in which the OP has come across that is the problem here -almost as though she is wishing her mum's life away. She has sounded very cold about her mother and I think that is what most people are objecting to.

The point I am struggling with is that the estate actually has been left equally to all the siblings. No-one has been disinherited here .
I could fully understand the upset if there had been an exclusion, but there hasn't.
This is purely about whether the inheritance arrives immediately probate is granted or at some point in the future when the house is eventually sold.
The only favouritism shown is that the person with a right to remain is allowed to stay in the home that he currently lives in for as long as he wishes. I repeat, that this is a very standard thing for people to do when someone lives in the home. It is not unusual in any way.

Personally, I would be spending my energy in trying to resolve the sibling rivalry, which has developed in your mothers lifetime, and building better bonds with your brother.

Rarely have I seen as many irrelevant and idiotic posts on one thread (from the yabus).

I would love to see them being as sanguine and self righteous about it all if they were in the same position. All of their posts demonstrate a complete and utter lack of empathy.

I don't understand how some posters are so spectacularly missing the point.

Op will have to pay a huge sum in inheritance tax which she may well not be able to raise anyway, for a house which her brother will likely live in for the rest of his life. She will never get the tax money back and will never benefit from the house in any way. On top of that her mum is showing clear favoritism towards one child in a way which is going to leave the others in debt.

Why can't some people see how awful that is?

All i can think of the posters shouting how ungrateful and greedy the op is and how she should just be grateful to have a mum, is that they either can not read, process information, are incredibly stupid or are being deliberately nasty.

The point I am struggling with is that the estate actually has been left equally to all the siblings.No-one has been disinherited here. I could fully understand the upset if there had been an exclusion, but there hasn't. This is purely about whether the inheritance arrives immediately probate is granted or at some point in the future when the house is eventually sold.

No it hasn't for fuck sake! He has made it clear to op that he will stay in the house . . . likely forever! So op is excluded and has been disinherited. The some time in the future will probably be when the op is 95 or dead.

FestiveEdition-the OP might as well have been disinherited though as if the brother is young and healthy he could stay in the house rent free until he dies which may well be after the OP dies.

I don't agree that this would be the "standard thing to do" in the OP's situation. The brother has only lived there for five years and it was only a temporary measure after the break up of his marriage. It's not as if he has lived there all his life until middle age, contributing to all the bills and looking after his parent as etc.

Totally agree with Ahole.

Mintyy - sadly DH and I were in that same position. As I said, DH's Bro was living in his mums house with her when she died and he remained there until his death....the IHT was split and sorted and yet he remained in the house and the only one who made noises about the fact that he should move out funnily enough was his sister who has more money than she knows what to do with.

It's a sad situation for sure and very hurtful (DH was cut of out of some of the stuff when his dad died) but at the end of the day it really is down to the mother what she wants to do with her property.

ahole Op will have to pay a huge sum in inheritance tax which she may well not be able to raise anyway

no - its the estate that will pay the inheritance tax. nothing will be handed over to the beneficiaries until this money has been paid to HMRC.

OP - You should get good legal advice regarding IHT responsibilities etc.

I think that if the house is the total of the estate, IHT would be £150, ,000. You need to find out if you would be responsible for paying £37, 500 (1/4) of this.

Though I believe that if inheritance is tied up in property you can pay over ten years. Which would suit your brother, It would be like Rent of £3750 a year for him. Very cheap in London.

This is probably not the way it all works though, so get legal advice, then you could explain the facts to your mother who may not realise all the difficulties her Will could cause. If you were left with a bill of £37, 500 could you pay it? Or would you have to give up your share of inheritence? Your mother may not have thought of this.

I wouldn't be to harsh on your mother. A friend of mine was leaving a very similar Will, she thought she was being very fair and helping all her children according to their needs. When a solicitor pointed out possible legal problems and other friends pointed out how it could be seen from all her children's point of view, she changed her mind.
Your mother may also think she is doing the right and fair thing, but may not have looked at it from another viewpoint.

Is there perhaps a close friend or family member, who is not a beneficiary, who could have a quiet discussion with her in case she hasn't seen the full picture?

I'd be incredibly upset and hurt, OP. You're not being unreasonable, at all. It is unfair. I don't see how anyone could view it as being fair, even if people are entitled to bequeath their assets as they see fit.

Just seen that someone has pointed out that IHT threshold could be double in this case, giving a total IHT of £20, 000

That makes a big difference.

OP, what is your relationship like with your mum? Are you close?

Yes, I think it is the estates resposibility to pay IHT. No one gets anything until this is paid.

However IHT could be as low as £20, 000. Brother could choose to pay all of this himself. So he would not necessarily be forced to sell house as some people are insisting.

Amazed at some of the nastiness on this thread. Some of the YABUs are being spectacularly obtuse, spiteful and self-righteous - what a lovely combination of qualities for people who profess to be so morally irreproachable . I'd love to see what some of them would genuinely feel if put in the same position, especially after a lifetime of unfair treatment relative to their sibling.

Brother could choose to pay all of this himself if I were the OP, I would not let him know this was coming so when the IHT bill comes he is on the back foot and realises selling the house and dividing up is the solution.

I CBA to read the whole thread but if the house is worth £700k presumably there will be inheritance tax to pay which might mean the house has to be sold anyway.

Actually, I have been in this position - with a narc mother who married a much younger gold digger man, and put the same protection in place.
There are two choices. You either spend your life feeling deprived, resentful and angry.
Or you say that there is no 'right' to inherit anything in this country (it is different in many other countries) and what you have never had you can't miss. Personally, I took the view that she gave me sod all in life, so no change there then!

That said, there are some serious assumptions being made here - about whether or not the house will need to be sold anyway (in which case they all get the money which is left, anyway; about the brothers behaviour in the future, which is pure speculation.; about how long anyone may live ...........including the woman who hasn't yet died.
At the moment, most of this is pure speculation rooted in knowing about one clause of a Will. What is happening to the contents? to cash and assets?

If its about a rant ....fine. Rant away, feel emotional and enjoy support.
If its about what will actually happen, at the moment its speculation minus several salient facts, and therefore pointless for anyone to get their knickers in a twist.

Spot on festive!

"This is another subject that MN and RL don't converge"

Completely agree. In RL, most people would be hurt if they weren't treated equally with their siblings inheritance wise - unless there is a very good reason why one child needs favourable inheritance treatment ie. disabilities. Fecklessness isn't a good reason.

OP YANBU.

There may be some cash left by DM, I wonder what would happen to that, would it go to cover IHT? or would it not be part of the house arrangements, which has all family getting a share (albeit in the future), In the first case DB could sit tight as IHT will be covered.

It's worth thinking about care home fees too. If DB is idle and selfish then he won't be willing to care for DM, in fact she could end up living with a DD whilst DB carries on in comfort in the house. In fact hinting that DB will find caring for his ageing DM embarrassing or that DM will find it embarrassing(which chances are she will) if her fitness deteriorates might be a way of scuppering this arrangement

Would you be responsible for paying to maintain house?