About Inheritance

[Sunshinelollipops1]

4 siblings A, B, C and D. 3 eldest are in their 50s. Youngest was “a happy accident” and is in 30s.

After D was born the Mum of the family developed serious illness and A who had just finished university came Home and basically brought up A and looked after Mum while the Dad worked. A has spent her entire life as Carer for Mum who died 5 years ago. A couple of years after this Dad became ill. A cared for him and he has now died.

Only real asset is House. Worth about 500k. Will says divide by 4.

B and C have good jobs (probably 50-60k per annum), houses and families. C has a huge mortgage as they have pulled out equity to fund holidays, cars etc. Both have kids in their 20s.

D is a professional and earns 150k. Married and young children.

2 bed flat in area of House will cost 350k (SE). D says A should get enough of will to buy flat and rest can be split between 3. (This means B, C and D will get about 40k each rather then 125k).

B says while he would like to do that he needs to help his kids on property ladder and that 40k won’t be sufficient (3 kids).

C says the will is clear and should be shared equally. He also adds D is only suggesting this as they will end up sole beneficiary of As will (A and D being incredibly close).

D has offered to give B and C their proportion of money so they would get 60k each. Both have said no.

A doesn’t want anyone to fall out, says the money should be shared in 4 and says it’s fine, they’ll find work and use the equity as rent (they won’t get mortgage).

D thinks B and C are being selfish. C thinks D is (and ultimately doing this to get all the money).

Who is AIBU and what should be done?

Would they have a case?

It's not my area but it seems arguable enough to be worth seeking legal advice from someone experienced in the area.

Obviously if A doesn't want to pursue it then she won't and the assets will be divided equally, but it's a possibility.

Moral of the story is, don't expect to be rewarded for your good deeds....

I don't think so. We really don't know enough to judge. I think it is immoral to expect to be financially rewarded for something without discussing this with the people who will be out of pocket. It's like mowing someone's lawn without them asking them popping a bill through their letterbox.

It's a tricky one and I can fully understand the reason why D thinks the suggestion is fair. But the will says split 4 ways so that should be done. D seems financially stable and will benefit from A upon death. If I was D I would give my share to A, will likely get it back anyway.

I do appreciate that £50K is a decent salary, but it isn't megabucks

Yes, especially in a place where a 2 bed flat is 350 K. I'm guessing probably London? And it was only 'probably' 50K. On that note, my OH earns 25K. A friend of his was assuming that his job (translation) was really well paid and that he 'probably' earned about 45K - if only!. It is very hard to judge other's incomes.

Would they have a case? I don’t think so. The courts are keen to see the terms of any will granted. This is why people make a will. The idea that two siblings - A and D - would cook up a plan to disadvantage two others - B and C - would not be looked upon favourably. If A is such a saint she did this out of the goodness of her heart then she shouldn’t expect any financial reward. Were B and C ever consulted about A’s unilateral decision?

A has been short changed by parents but the will is very clear. The parents obviously wanted an even split so it makes sense for that to happen.
Honestly if I was A I would be pretty upset with parents but no good deed goes unpunished.

I would be surprise it’s clear at least 30 years passed between A moving home and the parents dying and the will never changed

Catspyjamas I don't think it's a particularly good idea to offer definitive legal advice on the basis of such limited information and so clearly coloured by your own moral judgment.

I think B and C have benefitted hugely from having their sister take on all care responsibilities.

They do have to honour the will - after all, it’s their parents’ choice of how to share out the assets - but decent people would make a donation of at least some of their share to the sister who did all the heavy lifting to her own detriment.

What if B and C had also stayed home instead of supporting themselves? A and D would then be receiving considerably less. The morality is not so clear. We don’t know how much caring A actually did. I have known adult children remain at home until middle age and never lift a finger then claim subsequently to be “carers”.

Proposal : A gets 50% (£250K) with B,C & D getting £80+K each.

D can lend A his share £80K (on very favourable terms if necessary), should be enough to buy somewhere. A then needs to retrain to get a job.

Agreed that the will is legal, but if there was never any animosity between A and parents then it's probably more fair to split it differently.

I think most parents try to split everything equally in the will so that they don't appear to favour one child over others (in terms of love) but in this case B&C could be the bigger people and give up more of their shares

4 way split

If A uses her £125,000 as rent , if rent is £1500 a month , that's only 6 and a half years, then what ?

D sounds lovely and frankly her brothers sound incredibly selfish.

Yes, legally they have every right to demand the will is honoured but morally I think their attitude is appalling.

They've benefited for years by knowing their parents were being cared for by A.

They are also benefitting now as the value of the estate has not been eroded by decades of paid care.

In truth it's unlikely there would be any inheritance to spilt without the actions of A in caring for the parents.

However, you can't force people to be decent or do the right thing.

As such I think the revised plan of D giving A her share and acting as a guarantor is the best one - and a very decent thing to do.

Well everyone has benefitted, haven't they?

It's true that without A there would likely be no inheritance, but what might she have done at the point that say her dad needed to go into a care home?

I think it's hard to judge the others without knowing for example how old they were when A began caring, whether the mother would have wanted her sons to care, did A at any point try to stop & was persuaded not to & the years w after her mum had died & before her dad needed care?

There's a lot of missing info imo.

Sunshinelollipops1

Interesting how the thread direction changed after the sexes where revealed but posters ignore -

and to a far lesser extent her.

So she did very little as well.

But I would suggest that enough money is pooled to buy A a flat outright but the flat is owned by all 4 people, to be sold and re split on the death of A.

A can provide historic invoices that are still an outstanding debt - minus the nominal amount of food and board per month. (easily forged on the current available technology)

As the current executor on 4 wills ( not a lawyer by training!) I have passed that thorny one to a lawyer who says the invoices stand as out standing debt against the estate. In this case A and D are wankers and B is being screwed!!

( moral of my issue is do not agree to be executor too often and if you do try not to co ordinate all of them dying within 4 months of each other!)

In truth it's unlikely there would be any inheritance to spilt without the actions of A in caring for the parents.

Thats very unlikely. Only the father would have had to pay for care. A wasnt caring for him for that long.

I feel for A ! This happened in my family - my aunt cares for her parents exactly like A has done and the will was split in her favour - she got half the rest was shared between the other siblings (who had careers and families)
It's a sham B and C can't see how much A has saved from inheritance. If they went into a care home - most round my area are around £1k a week! Wouldn't have been much left as inheritance !

To paraphrase that well-used warning from MNHQ: never give more, financially or emotionally, then you could afford to lose if things go wrong

It’s easy to say that, and we might think that this is what we’d do, but I think that family dynamics and emotional blackmail, with what sounds like a really toxic dose of sexism, can make this very hard in reality.

OP I hope you show your friend D some of the later answers and responses on this thread. I think she’s a good sister and that her plans to help A and recognise what A has done for all the family are admirable. A
s is A herself.

B and C are selfish arses.

I agree with the poster who said that people who have not been carers really don't understand the sacrifices that have to be made when looking after parents. I speak from experience. There is no 'choice'. Oh, actually there is. Be a heartless person like the rest of siblings.

My brothers made lots of promises, none materialised. Should I have walked away? Sorry, couldn't do that to my parents. Inheritance? Yes, they were 'entitled', but morally no.

One has gambled away what he inherited and the other is still unhappy that the inheritance wasn't more....

Do I have contact? No way. My morals are intact and I don't regret what I gave up - career, home life, friends. My parents were well looked after and I even overlooked that my Mother favoured 'her boys'. It was the daughters who were expected to stand up, not the boys.

What goes around, comes around.

It's hard not to see D as reasonable & B&C as selfish.

My dad is 2nd eldest of 6 (well 7, but that's another story) by his mother. My aunt was A. She got right to live in her mother's house until end of her life. And otherwise a fair share of the savings. The actual 2 actual eldest siblings (call them Y & Z) threw their share back in the pot for siblings A-D to share. The sibling group continue to be close into the future.

B&C are a pair of shits.

YeOldeTrout
It's hard not to see D as reasonable & B&C as selfish.

Cynically

Given that A appears to have no children or partner and D stands a good chance to inherit the lot.

Not so much.

Long thread I admit I'm too tired to read every post.

How Would D inherit the lot unless A, B & C all leave their money to D; why would they do that?

My aunt A has 4 children & 6 grandchildren, so my aunt A won't leave her share to D.