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 suspect you could well be right, SingingLily ,but I wanted to ask rather than guess

And however unpleasant the DP's attitudes, A still had an element of choice in this - unless there's something else OP hasn't disclosed of course

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

Do you mean Ds children?*

Aha! Yup, I think we are getting to the crux of the matter.

D who earns £150K wants her less wealthy siblings to give up their inheritance to provide a place for A to look after her children. A place that she will then inherit.

I would absolutely not be paying for this if I was B or C.

D can provide for A if she so desires.

A and D sound lovely but the will says divide by 4.

A got to live in the house rent free. She can afford to buy a house, just not in this fancy area. Shes only in her 50s.

I'm sorry for the loss. I think it's fairest for parents to divide everything equally, it just causes hurt otherwise. I'm sorry if A thinks she wasted her life. It's all a bit sad.

The will is clear. Split equally and then any arrangements siblings want to make with each other, can be done properly, outside of the will.

Not impressed by B & C at all.

I agree B & C should contribute some of their inheritance to A but, obviously, can't be forced to. D is doing a great thing giving up her inheritance.

Have a look at retirement communities--they can be cheaper.

Has A literally never worked? Are there any other issues such as MH issues? It’s odd if she has never worked, she is only in her 50’s? Has she claimed benefits or did she live off her parents the whole time?

If the will says it should be split four ways, then it should be split four ways. I totally agree with B in that id not want to sacrifice my share if it would benefit my children and help them get on the property ladder. D can sacrifice her share of the money if he/she so wishes but needs to stop being pushy and interfering in what the others do with their share. It’s not D’s business.

You almost had me until the bit about the childcare. Whose kids is A watching? Can't be C's if they are in their 20s.

And if D is earning £150k plus a husband's income then she's being a bit unfair asking C & D who earn much less to give up their share. If D wants to give A her share then that's fair enough.

C’s kids are in their early 20s and at Uni, but regularly spend a large proportion of their holidays with A (and have done this since they were little). Childcare probably isn’t right word now, but they don’t contribute etc to household. She still wants them to be able to come stay with her.

A does babysit for D, but on occasion. Her husband is a teacher and does the nursery and school runs.

Why doesn't D buy a flat and let A live there rent free. Then D will still have an asset that she chooses what to do with i.e. not leave it to B and C.

I think it should be split 4 ways.

Unfortunately not doing so, as a general principle, opens the floodgates for treating siblings differently based on their own life choices. E.g. hardworking individual with financial security gets less than the homeless hapless sibling who drank away their security. Crude idea, but you see what I mean.

But I think D should have one last go talking to her brothers about the situation, and encourage them to gift a proportion of their inheritance to A because of everything she has saved them in care costs etc, the fact that there is an inheritance may be down to her. If they could even agree to give her 20 or 30k each, and you top this up as you see fit (obviously the same as them as a minimum) then hopefully everyone will come out of this situation feeling satisfied?

constantlyseekinghappiness perhaps. Or perhaps it was the fact that D is trying to arrange something meaning they will probably get a larger inheritance.

In all honesty, I am nor convinced that d wont benefit further from this. They could afford to rent or buy somewhere for A. Even in their own name. Using their own inheritance and their own massive salary.

It seems odd they think that other people should spend their money in the way she says.

It would be completely disrespectful to not fulfil the wish of the parents. That is why a will is put in place. Should be divided equally and then if B,C and/or D want to give a part of their share to A that is completely up to them.

Should follow wishes of deceased and will, three are grabby CF

What a sad story.
A (and her siblings) should have discussed the situation with the parents long before the father died. It was pretty clear that caring for their parents was going to limit A's opportunity to progress in a career etc. It's a shame that B & C aren't willing to do the decent thing because if parents had gone into care, there wouldn't be much left to divvy up.

In my family, we discussed the situation with the remaining parent because one of the 4 siblings A, has a long term disability.
Parent ensured wealthier D was gifted 50% so they could manage A's 25% so not affecting A's benefits and the rest divided equally between B & C.
D chose to use all his 50% to help out A.
B & C kept their 25% but gave about a quarter each in support to A by buying things A wanted.

However, total inheritance before being split was less than 50k.

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

True, she should have just taken a leaf out of her siblings book and cracked on with life leaving the folks to fester in their own piss

I think its a difficult one really. A decided to do the right thing ,and care for her younger sibling/family member in their hour of need.However Life isnt always very fair, and what is written into a will is the only thing to be taken into account .It would be nice to think they could come to some arrangement with A regarding her housing position ,but in reality they are not under any obligation to.It could be argued that A has lived rent free anyway and has not had to save up her own money for a deposit . Perhaps a family meeting may help?.All sit down and thrash out a settlement to suit everybody !

Agree that the will has to be followed, given that B and C are not prepared to agree to a variation, but I am very glad that D is looking out for her older sister.

There was a similar position in my family, but without the extra A bringing up D dynamic. My grandparents left their house to the A child, an unmarried daughter, who had lived with them and cared for them until they died in their mid 90s. In our case, Children B, C and D were all entirely happy with this arrangement.

In a similar position to A, had to care for dad whilst trying to look after a toddler, my mental health took a huge battering. Dad passed away and now its down to me to do all mum's needs as well as mine. I now have MS too. Neither of my siblings have stepped up to help, neither contact me unless mum is ill. Their will is quite clear that everything is split three ways. One sibling is a bachelor with no offspring and that's unlikely to change, they also have several properties. Really don't need the money.

I don't expect anything other than the house and contents split three equal ways, even though neither sibling need the money. I've decided that my share will need to be sold, despite property sibling wanting to keep the house to rent out. I don't expect once my share is gone to either them or to whomever buys the house, that I will ever talk to either of them again. Certainly don't know, so have no reason to expect anything to change.

In this case, although D is being noble wanting A to benefit more, I still think the will should be followed, D can either donate their share to A or a proportion. I really really feel for A, and feel C & D are pretty selfish, but that's often how some siblings are, my siblings certainly are too.

Or leave A in the house for the remainder of their days?

Sorry meant B & C are selfish

A & D should buy together as joint tenants so it automatically passes to D on A’s death

Crappy will. It's not unreasonable to expect a sibling get more putting in the work to and making sacrifices to look after their parents.

BUT

Unfortunately it says split equally so it should be split if B&C do not agree otherwise. Must feel very shitty if you gave up everything, with poorer future prospects in view, but on the other hand, such sacrifices should only be made out of love and sense of doing the good thing.

If you think you are going to feel bitter receiving no tangible thanks, good karma or reward in the form of assets or other, then sorry but do not do it.

It is not B&C who have ultimately let A down, it is the Parent and they have passed so it should be split.

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

Speaking as someone in her 50s, who got married back then - what a load of shite.

But that's an aside. OP - I feel desperately sorry for your friend's sister, she's in a terrible situation but I don't see any way out of it other than the proposed solution (D gifting her her share to buy a flat).

after putting in the work and making sacrifices. Bloody keyboard