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?

It starts with little things like a wife getting her husband's relatives' birthday cards because it's "easier" or he's forgetful,

You see this a lot on Mumsnet. I'm always a bit surprised at why women chose to do it. Well do they feel the need to get involved?

OhamIreally
"A PP asked if the family were from a culture which expected daughters to take on caring responsibilities and sons were more highly valued- I think the UK has just such a culture. Look around you and it's always the women doing the caring. I know various extended family where the daughters rally round and the sons do fuck all."

Well said! We have plenty of sexism in the UK. On mumsnet people often ask "are you from another culture"? and I think that the underlying implication is that "other" cultures are more sexist, and we need to be very careful about making that kind of racist assumption.

I just want to bookmark this thread and every time I see someone posting worried about an only child, copy the link to this thread.

I am still aghast at the number of posters who think that A and D are behaving underhandedly.

I think some posters need to have a bit more imagination & empathy to imagine a situation with a domineering, sexist father an ill mother, and a very responsible eldest female child. THe actions A took to stay home & look after her parents is typical of a female eldest child bearing family responsibility but without the power and entitlement that her father and brothers B & C have displayed.

It is NO coincidence that A & D are female, and that B& C are male, and that their father made such an unfair will which showed NO acknowledgement of what A has given up.

A's "free" board & lodging etc doesn't come near what she's sacrificed for her parents and siblings.

And yes @LazyDaisey

I just want to bookmark this thread and every time I see someone posting worried about an only child, copy the link to this thread

Having siblings guarantees nothing in terms of care and family support.

I think some posters need to have a bit more imagination & empathy to imagine a situation with a domineering, sexist father an ill mother, and a very responsible eldest female child. THe actions A took to stay home & look after her parents is typical of a female eldest child bearing family responsibility but without the power and entitlement that her father and brothers B & C have displayed

Agree. The number of posters who say that the will's division of the money must be carried out "because it's in the will" is bizarre too. Of course, this is true legally (unless a Deed of Variation is agreed) but morally there is no obligation to stick to what a will says - complete twunts make wills too. MN is full of endless complaints about parents and PIL being unreasonable yet, apparently, once their instructions are in a will, this is magically the word of god

In my family, we have twice agreed Deeds of Variation because we felt the terms of a will were outdated or unfair. So far, none of us has been struck by down by the wrath of a relative beyond the grave...

I am still aghast at the number of posters who think that A and D are behaving underhandedly.

Why?

We have no idea how much care was required. Especially for the father.

We dont know if there was absolutely no way she could not have worked. Especially when D was older. Perhaps B & C felt 24 hour care wasnt required and maybe they were right.

Given that the OP purposely tried to mislead the converstation, I am going to guess there is a reason she didnt give these details.

And why hasnr high earning D, who adores this woman put her hand in he pocket and helped out sooner, out of her own pocket? D is the one that wants her to have a 2 bed flat.

Theres so much info missing no one can say one side is definitely wrong.

We don’t know the dad was domineering and we don’t know that A really had to spend so many years not working outside the home. Many of us have children of our own and work too!

D earns twice as much as B and C and is much younger so no doubt thinks it’s easy for them to give up this cash but she is emotionally blackmailing them! If she cares so much she should pay.

Wills are made to be followed and they are important legal documents. A 4 way split is also fairest.

I think some posters need to have a bit more imagination & empathy to imagine a situation with a domineering, sexist father an ill mother, and a very responsible eldest female child.

I think some posters need to rein in their imagination and empathy, to be honest, because it's of no help whatsoever. Firstly, because it's based upon their own fiction (which may or may not be true), secondly, because it has no bearing on how B and C act.

PIL being unreasonable yet, apparently, once their instructions are in a will, this is magically the word of god

Nobody has said it should be the word of god
I think the will should be followed.
Do I think the parents were being unreasonable for splitting their money this way? Yes of course. But it is their money to do with as they choose. People do unreasonable things with their own money all the time. I really feel for A and for D... but it is what it is.

YABVU. This is what was written in the will and presumably their dad was of sound mind when he wrote it or it wouldn’t be valid. It would be an insult to the dad to not respect his wishes.

The Will should be adhered to.

The recipients can then decide how they wish to spend/save their respective inheritances.

It should go 4 ways by rights but I feel sorry for A. It’s a shame the parents didn’t think ahead and adapt the will. It’s up to the other siblings to decide if they are feeling charitable with their share.

The Will is the Will, so it should be split 4 ways. However, it is sad that A's caring has not been recognised and it would be nice for B and C to consider that and give up a small portion to A to help A get housing.

A seems like a good daughter/sister and D is very kind to want to help her sister and make sure she has a home since she is having to move out of the home she has.

One matter to check with A is whether the parents ever said to her that she would get the house when they died or anything similar, as that could give rise to a claim by A (I am guessing not though if the father just took for granted it was A's responsibility as the female). The only problem is that A would have to raise the claim and it would end up costing the estate in fees and reduce the 'pot' so can sometimes work out even worst. However, it is worth checking and then mentioning to B and C if there was.

It’s a shame the parents didn’t think ahead and adapt the will.

Another presumption.

Maybe they looked at the value of their property, and at each of their children (who they presumably loved as individuals), and thought, ok, A has lived rent etc free her entire life, B, C and D have worked and paid their way, and have dependents to support (grandchildren that they may also want to benefit), A will be able to set herself up somehow with the £125k she inherits.

It might not be a realistic understanding of As limited job prospects, but it's not uncommon for people to fall out of touch with the jobs market.

The other thing that no one has mentioned is love.

Love isn't transactional, or rational. It isn't related to how much someone does for someone. It isn't related to how kind or generous a person is. Perhaps the parents loved all four of their children equally and wanted to show that love in their will?

Doing anything but splitting a will equally does nothing but lead to resentment and ill feeling.

If D feels so strongly then they should give up their inheritance.

I can imagine what a wonderful world we'd have if the great majority of people were like A & D. I'm so proud of them and by equal measure ashamed of the B & C s of this world. Shame on them, really.

I can imagine what a wonderful world we'd have if the great majority of people were like A & D.

Do you really think D would be so virtuous if they weren't themselves very comfortably off with more job security then most? If they feel strongly then quietly give A their share of the inheritance but stop the self righteous virtual signalling.

give A their share of the inheritance

They are

The will has to be followed.

What each person then wants to do with their share of the money is a separate issue

I rarely post but feel strongly about this one.
Think w trad families the eldest daughter offer was expected to help at home. Don’t think A had huge choice and this all started before she was able to establish herself (identity, financially, life) separately as an adult. She’s lovely to have done it as caring for people is v hard work!
I think the fairest solution now that B&C don’t want to give up their inheritance would be to point out how much they have benefited financially by A caring for their parents. Based on that I’d suggest:
A: gets A & D’s share
B & C: loan £50k each so A can buy a 2 bdrm flat; A puts in her will (or some form legal obligation) that B & C get this repaid from her estate.

1. A’s prospects are hugely limited by having looked after her parents, a second bedroom would allow for income from a lodger. Kind siblings would want to acknowledge the help A has given and the financial benefit B&C have reaped. A did not swan about like a footballer’s housewife she worked as a carer, a very different lifestyle!
2. B&C will be repaid and as it’s an inheritance it’s money that they could have been counting on at any particular moment so they can wait for £50k to be paid later. Money is terrible at revealing the worst side of people. I’d hope the siblings were generous enough to recognise what A has done for all of them.