No inheritance because of pilot training

[Poily]

My brother is a pilot for a major airline in the UK. My parents were not able to borrow against their house to fund it so had to use pretty much all their savings. £150k was roughly what was spent.

Due to their failed business (folded just after Covid) they racked up massive loans trying to save their hospitality-related business. When they sell their house they won’t end up with much.

So I don’t know exactly how it works but some of that £150k ends up in a bond which the airline then pays out to my brother every month in his pay packet. But if my brother walks away from the airline he walks away from this bond also. It’s a lot of money. Gets paid over 7 years I think.

AIBU to think my brother should not quit his job and move to the Middle East (stupid salary) as he plans to do? He way paying that bond money to my parents.

Brother has said he will cover my parents bills. Great. Thats the right thing to do. But that cuts me out. As my parents were transferring the bond
money into a savings account for my kids.

AIBU?

Airlines rarely fund pilot training. I heard minimum of 100k for training. So it isn’t a carer to consider unless you have rich parents!

@Yalta
Now the ds wants to jack it all in and forget about paying anything else back to his parents.....

If your brother has only repaid around £34000 when is he going to repay the rest

The brother has told the parents he's going to pay their rent and bills, he's actually going to be paying more back per month than he has been paying!

Previously the parents put the amount in the savings account for the OPs kids.
Now they're accepting it back for themselves for their own bills.

So this is nothing to do with the brother. Even if he was staying at the airline the parents could have stopped putting the money into the kids savings accounts and used it for rent and bills.

I would be pretty upset too

All those saying that the ds is helping his parents through a horrible time

Would you feel helped if you gave someone £150,000 and they helped you by repaying you £700 per month for the next 4 years and then they wanted to forget about repaying the balance but will pay your rent and bills of around £700 per month until you move into a lovely little annexe attached to their big house and you get to go on weekends away to view lovely properties and dream about where you could live .... one day

But he's going to pay them back more from his new job.

He used to pay £700 a month, he's now going to pay more than that.

Presumably the brother thinks the current situation wasn't fair..
He must have wanted the parents to have their own money back but for whatever reason it was going straight to the OPs kids savings,

Maybe he thought the OP was a cheeky fucker for allowing this and not saying look don't pay that into the kids savings seeing as you have no savings left of your own!

So because the parents or the brother didn't want to say that to the OP they just told them about the new arrangement where he was going to pay their rent and bills instead.

If he's paying their rent and bills then presumably they still have money they could transfer to the kids savings if they wanted to, but they haven't offered that so it sounds like they've just done it this way to avoid an awkward conversation.

There's no suggestion that the brother isn't going to pay the parents back the balance at all. The only issue the OP has with it is that the payment has stopped being transferred to her kids.

Why do you think the repayment should go to your kids accounts when your parents need the money?

My guess is that your brother thinks the money should have been going to the parents and for some reason they felt unable to tell you they wanted to stop sending the money to your kids accounts so they agreed to do it this way.

Your thread title is very misleading.

@Wherearemymarbles *I am a bit confused.
It costs around £100,000 to get an ATPL and around 2 years.
so if your parents loaned him £150,000 then he should not be in hoc to any airline so I dont really understand this bond thing at all as it only applies if the airline paid for his training. Which they didnt….

ergo they need to do some digging*

It’s not confusing. It seems normal now for many airlines. Pilot has to fund qualifications (let’s say 150K). Airline employs a qualified pilot they have not had to fund through quals. However, the deal is made that the airline will reimburse the training fee over a period of time, say 7 years, providing the pilot stays with them for this 7 years.

The other option I know of is that airlines take pilots who qualify via Air Force once they retire from service (they are young when they retire). So, they are already qualified pilots, and airlines just have to train them on their specific aircraft. Then they start on higher salary as they are already experienced pilots (so airline not reimbursing them as have nothing to reimburse for as Air Force was out of pocket for training so to speak, but they get more $$ as opposed to being reimbursed). Thats the way it was explained to me anyway.

Anyway, the whole thing is just a maths issue and OP doesn’t understand maths.

*Brother borrows 150K
*Brothers employer will repay this 150K over 7 years.
*Brother agrees to repay parents at $700/month over 17-20 years (as OP seemed to think his loan repayments were 700/month).
*Parents choosing to give grandkids 700/month as a gift, now around 30/40K total.
*Parents go bust, no $$ left from business, debt, house sold, no equity. This leaves them no spare $$ to gift to grandkids as savings as they have been doing.
*Brother will now be paying 700/month as rent/bills on behalf of parents instead of directly to parents who will pay it as rent/bills. Smart move as parents unlikely to get rental in own names due to debt plus otherwise it would be see as income that may effect pension/entitlements.
*If brother pays 700/month rent/bills for next 15 years the initial debt is repaid. At this point the only people ‘ahead’ is OP’s kids who have a 30/40 K gift sitting there.
*Brother may go work in ME for 5 or so years. Higher salary means more than current salary including reimbursement (or they wouldn’t do it). They are still repaying 700/month to parents in form of covering rent/bills during this time.
*When the come home from ME they can either keep repaying 700/month to parents in form of covering rent/bills for 10 years and be even (debt repaid), OR can provide an annex for parents in lieu of rent/bills for this time and also be even.
*If parents pass away after 15 years, brothers debt has been repaid but OP’s kids still have gift of 30/40K. So at that point brother is the one out of pocket with inheritance and if OP is so concerned about being fair, should have her kids hand over 15/20K. Doubt that would be offered or requested.

Whole thing seems to be odd storm in a teacup by someone who can’t do maths, and has weird ideas about what/when inheritance even is!

Also an ethical dilemma. Should op return the £700/month as her parents are out of cash?

A bond is usually when your employer pays for some specified training and you pay them back over a period of time (from your wages) or you agree to be based somewhere for a period. If you leave, employee pays the employer the outstanding amount. You don’t pay the amount up front and then have to pay back as well. So, I’m confused as to how any bond fits into this scenario. However, if your parents’ business failed and they (presumably) are in a more precarious financial position, why would you take money from them for your children? And you mentioned 700 being paid to a landlord but refer to your parents selling their house?
in any case, I think both of you are grabby. The parents may give freely, but they’re potentially running themselves into penury - and you both seem to be ok with that.

@Frozensun A bond is usually when your employer pays for some specified training and you pay them back over a period of time (from your wages) or you agree to be based somewhere for a period. If you leave, employee pays the employer the outstanding amount. You don’t pay the amount up front and then have to pay back as well. So, I’m confused as to how any bond fits into this scenario

I think OP used incorrect terminology. I don’t think it was a bond per se, but rather he was bonded if he wanted reimbursement. It’s not uncommon.

One of my kids is in this scenario. They funded expensive quals up front as easier to get a job once qualified as opposed to sitting in huge pile of unqualified applicants wanting the job with employer forking out for quals and taking a chance on you passing, not failing, having to re-take etc. Because they have hired you as fully qualified but first role post quals (in that position), you are worth more to them instantly so they are happy to agree to reimburse you the cost of your quals providing you agree to be bonded. In my kids case, they reimbursed monthly over 2 years on the basis they are bonded for 5 years. If they leave anytime from day 1 right through to 1 day short of 5 years, they have to re-pay the employer their reimbursement for the quals. Nothing pro-rata about it. If they left 1 year into it, they can’t say the employer has received 1/5 and they shouldn’t repay this aspect of the reimbursement.

It seems to be common in roles across many industries now.

Thanks. I’ve heard of that in relation to teacher and doctor qual where the employer wants the person to work in a more rural/remote area (not in England). But, how could the parents be out of pocket to the tune of $150k at the same time?

But, how could the parents be out of pocket to the tune of $150k at the same time

They are not. In OP’s case, the parents loaned their son 150K to get the qual up front. The son’s employer agrees to reimburse the cost of quals but spread over 7 years, paying an even spread monthly (as 84 payments). The son then repays the parents an agreed amount each month from that - may not necessarily be the whole amount the employer reimburses per month, they may agree to a lower amount and longer term. It would seem a few years in and the son has repaid parents around 30/40K so parents are not out of pocket 150K but 110/120K at this point. The son continues to pay it down as he gets reimbursed and if agreed lower amount, longer term would keep doing so after 7 years until balance reaches $0.

Looks like the brother will jump ship. But lack of reimbursement will be offset by higher salary so he will still make monthly repayments to parents (in whatever form is agreed).

I dont actually think it is as unfair as you think.

As I understand it your parents paid £150k for his training but he was paying this back. So once he has paid it all back he would in effect have had no money off of them to keep, just the benefit of a loan.

He is intending to pay their rent/bills. This, if continued for long enough, would mean that in effect he will still be paying them back the £150k.

They are happy with the arrangement and it was their money.

You seem to be unhappy because you won't get any inheritance. But I dont understand how this situation is relevant to that as that was never guaranteed anyway given that your parents could have done whatever they liked with their own money, inheritance isn't guaranteed, and as the plan is that he will be paying their rent/bills that suggests that they do need those expenses covered so even if he was instead giving them cash by staying in his current role they may have chosen to use it for that purpose.

I'm a bit confused as you mentioned that they had been paying the money that they were getting into an account for your kids. If it is that which is stopping then surely you wouldn't have been expecting an inheritance anyway as the money was going to them not you.

It also seems odd to me that you think it is fairer for your brother to pay back the whole 150k and in effect have £0 but your parents to pay the money theyre receiving from him into your kids accounts meaning your family in effect has a large cash sum to keep. Could your brother not then think that you're actually the one being unfairly benefited instead?

The only thing I would understand is if you were annoyed you didn't get the benefit of the same level of loan as that it what would make things equal. I'm assuming you didn't have anything similar you wanted to do career wise/to better your prospects which wouldve required this sort of loan else you'd have mentioned it in your OP?

Unlike your brother, you don't seem to want to get the benefit of a loan that you'll pay back fully but work very hard using to better yourself so that you can pay your own way. Instead you want to just be able to sit back and get money given to you for nothing.

Can you see how this could all be seen from a different perspective OP?

If I was in a horrendous financial position meaning I was unlikely to be able to rent a property I would be exceptionally happy with the situation!

it is taking a weight off their shoulders while still giving them back the money just in a different, more helpful, way.

Your kids get £700 a month!!!! Wow... (DP give their 4 DGC £10 a month each, and I think this is generous!)

I seriously think that you are quite entitled. This is none of your business and you say yourself that your brother is a good guy so you have no concerns beyond how much you will inherit of your parents money.

You are being v unreasonable. How your brother repays your parents is between them and him. If they have had a failed business and are having to sell their house why are you still expecting them to top up your children’s savings account. You sound so greedy.

But he will now be paying significantly more than the £700 a month in rent and bills. It makes no sense to me why this means he is being treated favourably, he will end up paying them way more than his original debt.

Also, they gave him £150k which he is paying back in one way or another, the op is getting an inheritance, where is the brothers inheritance? Sounds like he is paying for everything but on their deaths will get nothing and ops kids will have the lot.

OP why have you said they pay £700 rent but then talk about selling their mortgage free house?

If they are completely destitute as you suggest how and why were they putting £700 a month into an account for your dc?

Your brother IS paying back the money. No load has been forgotten. However he pays - cash, their rent, their bills... it's all him paying so it's the same thing.

None of this makes any sense.

Your parents can do what they like with their money. They might want your brother to have it all anyway. It’s their choice.

My DP bought my sibling a house yet I got nothing. I couldn’t care less.

My MIL pretty much brought up my DH’s nephew. She won’t even do a day of childcare for my DC. Again I’m not bothered.

Look after yourself and stop worrying about perceived fairness or being reliant on others.

I don’t think you are being unreasonable. It is their money ra ra but to give so generously to one child and not the other would change the way I felt about my parents. I have a similar more minor issue where two siblings are constantly given money. One of them is also trying to pull the come and live with me and put your money into my big new house. I’ve not had a penny apart from 2k to help out with my house purchase. When one of my parents was dying the other rang and said they needed that 2k back (from about 7 years ago) as they didn’t have enough money for a funeral (complete lie and whilst
still giving large amounts of cash to siblings. They are so grabby and it just changes the way I feel about my family. At least you and I won’t be saddled with elder care

OP said their business collapsed and they've got at least one CCJ against them. Sounds like the house has to be sold to clear their debts.

But ops brother has paid a chunk of the loan already with the bond and is now going to be paying all their living expenses indefinitely. He will have paid thousands more than the loan by the time of their deaths, how on earth is he being treated favourably financially?

What gets me is your parents have had to sell their family home, and live in rented accommodation paid by your brother, and you’re more wore worried about your kids inheritance. They’ve gone through a lot over the last few years. I hope they use that money to have a nice retirement.