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?

I’m surprised she has any contact with with B&C given that it looks like they didn’t assist with the care of their parents. I can understand them not wanting to raise a younger sibling as it’s parental choice to have more children and they didn’t get a say.

The will is a legal document so has to be followed. It’s fair it’s split equally so as not to cause resentment amongst siblings. Presumably A chose to do the caring rather than outsource the care and was housed, bills paid etc during that time as she wasn’t working. I don’t think it should be split based on different life choices made by the siblings.

Then A needs to buy somewhere else

Yes, A should move away from the area she has known as home, where her friends and connections are, because that would be fair taking into account all thar she has saved her siblings. They will still get some inheritance, and likely more than they would have if their parents house had been sold to pay for care. But, yeah, fuck her and her sense of responsibility, eh?

A has benefited from never having to pay rent or a mortgage

Jesus wept. What a benefit! How wonderful her life has been...caring for a young sibling and two sick parents. But at least she didn’t have to pay rent.

I feel desperately sorry for A. She has sacrificed so much. People of MN take note, it is your fault if you earn less in taking on the responsibility of caring for elderly parents. Don’t bother, no one cares. Just put them in a home and don’t look back.

I hope A makes a Will and leaves everything to her sister and nothing to her brothers.

Of she was a carer by profession and paid for it she was probably working 24/7/365 - maybe with all that overtime she would have been able to afford it! She was probably doing 2.5-3 people's jobs

This sexist, selfish approach makes me so angry.

There are countless stories like this, where women are expected to make all the sacrifices and men just stroll in and collect the cheque.

I have heard many stories were he sister who becomes the carer inherits nothing if there are brothers.

Morally, the brothers should have made sure their sister would have a secure future, legally they can just take the money and run.

I think it's not as clear cut without knowing other things.

A gave up their earning potential, however, at the time it sounds like the other two couldn't have as easily done so.

You've also put mum died 5 years ago, and a couple of years ago dad needed caring.
That leaves at least couple of years for A to have looked at working. What did they do? Sit tight and not do anything? Look for work, but not get anywhere? Or did they get a job. Couldn't they have looked at getting a job when dad retired too? I presume he retired some time ago as they're in their 50s.
Yes, it wouldn't have been easy for them to get a job necessarily, but I can see if B and C feel that A had no intention of ever working, that does change how they feel.
A's also been living at home all that time and presumable rent/bill free and with dad most of the time able to support and help.

Did B and C offer to help care/pay for carers when they could and A refused?
Did mum actually need a full time carer for 30 years? I've certainly seen the situation where one sibling has decided that, and that they are doing it (and should be paid/supported for doing it) when the other siblings feel that full time is not just not needed, it really isn't appropriate and they can share between them the caring that does need doing.

A only needs a 1-bed flat too surely? Which makes me think that there is more to it than is put here. If A and D were genuinely being "just look out for A and make sure they've got a place to live" they'd be looking at a 1-bed, not wanting the money for 2-bed.

Also if D's on over two times the salary of B and C, and they feel strongly that A should get more, plus will ultimately get the money back anyway, I'm sure on that salary they could afford to fund the extra to get the flat needed.

Ultimately, without knowing too much more I would leave it as the 1/4 share each. If D wishes to give theirs to A, then that's up to them, but no, it shouldn't be expected the other two do, nor should they be made to feel mean for not offering it.

The blame is really on the parents who didn't sort the will properly, however what was A thinking when she gave up her career?

I don't think that the money will do A any good. She unfortunately has pretty much no earning potential due to no work history. She will never be able to pay off a mortgage or be able to afford to do anything to the house (like replace the washing machine if it breaks) and too much money in savings will limit her benefits entitlements.

If D is due to inherit off A anyway, would it be better if D bought a small flat (with some of A's inheritance and their own) and have A as a lifetime (or needs to go into a carehome) tenant?

Well D is clearly a decent human being. Could A not buy a smaller (1 bed) flat though - why does it have to be 2 beds? Also, whilst B is saying they need more than £40K to help their children (and that is not a wholly unreasonable stance to take) might B give something - say £20k to A leaving them with £100K for their own children?

Are all 4 children the executors? If A is an executor they can probably drag out the house-sale process.

D really just wants to see her sister looked after

Did D mention this to the parents at any point after the will was made?

For that matter, did A say anything herself?

A doesn’t need a 2 bed flat, but regularly provides (free) childcare to C’s children. The kids have regularly spent a large proportion of her holidays with them and A would like to continue doing this.

D has explained she should tell C to find his only solution, but A loves the children and really enjoys having them to stay. Again D doesn’t want to deprive her of this.

Follow the Will. Do with your own share what you will.

If that ends with you determining that your brothers are selfish disappointments, then that's probably an apt conclusion given the background.

I feel bad for your sister, but don't fall into a trap of falling out over a Will.

Wills bring up old jealousies, hurts and neglects. They heighten grief. Your DP tried to avoid this by making everything 'fair', so try to respect that.

Earning £150k in your 30s is fabulous. It's great you want to repay your sisters kindness to you and that you are in a position to do so.

Could D afford to buy a flat that A lives in rent free (or low rent if she gets work) and ultimately D still owns the flat?

I feel desperately sorry for A. She has sacrificed so much

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

Worth remembering for anyone in A's situation, though it's perhaps a bit late for her now

A should get more. Unless B to D paid them money to assume caring duties on their behalf.

If a large family home suitable to raise 4 children is worth £500k, then a studio/1 bed flat in the same area would easily be able to be bought for £250k (As share and Ds share).

I'm not sure why B & C are expected to give up their inheritance so that she can have a mortgage free 2 bed property, which is way beyond what she needs.

Whilst I understand D is trying to be kind it is D herself who most benefitted from A's sacrifice. She really doesn't have the right to try to spend someone else's money.

As an aside, if C & D earn £50-£60Kish, and have families and huge mortgages, they are unlikely to have much spare cash. It really is unfair of D to be expecting this of them. I suspect that D is much wealthier, and doesn't understand that her siblings cannot afford to give away such a life changing sum in the way that she obviously can.

A doesn’t need a 2 bed flat, but regularly provides (free) childcare to C’s children. The kids have regularly spent a large proportion of her holidays with them and A would like to continue doing this.

Jeez. C really is a bit of a shit bag isn't he.

Sorry but you should do as the will says .

A bought up D, and on the back of this help D now has a job that pays almost three times the brothers income, she is also married, so I bet that household has four times the income in reality.
A will get £125k, that is a lot .
Maybe she could do a rent to buy.
D can always hand over her share as a thank you for bringing her up, or buy a share in the house, which is what I would do to protect it from inheritance.

however what was A thinking when she gave up her career?

Well as A is now 50, probably that her seriously ill mother and baby sister needed someone to look after them. Also assuming the father did this instead of earning, then they would probably would have become homeless. Also women back then would have had not a great earning potential anyway and would have been expected to give up their careers if they got married so it would have made alot of sense to give up your career. A was just in a very unlucky situation.

Did D mention this to the parents at any point after the will was made?

Hmm, let me see...misogynistic father, disabled mother. This is a wild guess - money matters were not up for discussion in this family. The eldest daughter's career chances were expendable because she was "only a woman". The sons were never expected to help out much when they were living at home and after they left, there were no expectations of them at all. They would also have seen their elder sister's role as inevitable because she was a woman.

The youngest daughter, D, has an entirely different view of the situation because she is effectively a generation younger than her siblings and is not so bogged down by old-fashioned sexism. Plus she is a good and decent person.

As I say, just a wild guess.

A doesn’t need a 2 bed flat, but regularly provides (free) childcare to C’s children.

The children that in their 20s? That's what you said in the op?

Do you mean Ds children?

My friend says C regularly says “well she got to live rent free for 30 years and be a housewife...”

She also didn't get to have a career or earn any money of her own. And 30 years is a heck of a lot of your life to give up to someone else's needs, and then have to start from scratch on the housing and employment ladder. That makes A in her 50s, so much more difficult. especially with no work experience behind her.

Can D do some calculations? What A might realistically have been expected to earn after her degree, and how much the care home fees would have been if she hadn't cared for her parents? In effect, B and C's inheritance has come from A doing what she did.

Another thought - there's no mention of a partner for A. Did the caring responsibilities mean that she never had chance to form relationships?

However sadly I fear that whatever D does, B and C will insist on their share.

I think B and C are being incredibly selfish, but unfortunately the terms of the will can only be varied if all the beneficiaries agree.

Legally the profits split four ways. This was also the wishes of the parents. If any of the siblings feel guilty that A doesn't get enough they can gift her a portion of their own inheritance

Totally off topic but interesting to see so many posters assuming D was male before OPs update. At no point in the OP did it stage that D was male.

Is this because they were a high earner I wonder.

B and C sound like shits. Particularly C. They need to get their own bloody child care with their inheritance money... they can surely afford it now....

I think inheritances should nearly always be split equally between offspring. Rewarding children who have provided care for elderly parents is likely to be complicated and unfair. Did A really have to give up everything to care for her parents or did she chose to. You can’t know and you can’t know that D’s version of things is similar to her brothers.

Perhaps her brothers thought A spent her adult life freeloading off her parents only providing minimal ‘help’. Perhaps the parents were awful to them when they were kids. You just can’t know.
I think D was being a bit cheeky asking her brother to give money to A. If they have family and kids then £50-60k salary doesn’t mean they have spare cash about.

I find it really strange that D thinks that B and C should have challenged their Father and told him to let A have a life. Why would D not do it if she thought it needed doing.