Our cousins took our inheritance and gave it to their mother, I feel I can't carry on acting as if nothing has happened

[NeshButUpNorth]

My deceased mother had brothers and a sister. One deceased brother and the surviving sister (i.e. our aunt) had kids. We used to go on shared holidays twice a year with our aunt's kids, we've always got on well.

Our bachelor uncle died 2 years ago, with no will. When we were chatting a few months later, my aunt's eldest told me that they were going to try to "so what my uncle would have wanted". I assumed my cousin would contact me and my sister in the future to discuss this, since they would need us to sign off anything that would change the legally defined distribution (which is 1/6 each to me and my sister), since it would be a criminal offence to do otherwise, which my cousin must know, since their spouse is a director of a legal company.

A few months after my uncle died, my sister was diagnosed with incurable cancer, with months, possibly a year or two to live. She had to go on sick leave for the chemo and radiation treatment, etc. After 6 months, her sick pay dropped to 50%, and after a year was due to end. She asked me what was happening with our uncle's estate, this being around 18 months after he died, with the house sold 6 months previously. I had received no updates, so she sent a facebook message to our cousin who was dealing with the estate, asking for an update and she described her health/finance situation. To our surprise, our cousin told us that they had given all the money to my aunt, rather than the 1/3 share the law defined.

I was baffled why they'd do this without getting legal documents with our consent first. Before I had a chance to form any further opinion, my cousins blocked my sister on messenger and unfriended her on Facebook. I assume that they think that she has done something so awful that she should be shunned and disowned.

Since then, my sister has had no birthday cards from them or my aunt, and no Christmas cards so far, whereas they've carried on liking my family updates on facebook, and have sent me cheery Christmas cards which arrived a couple of days ago. My sister is dwelling on the idea that they've lied on the probate forms, pretending that our mother never existed.

I just feel queasy and sick about it, how can I carry on as normal with them, or visit them at Christmas, even though my sister has told me she doesn't want this to oblige me to distance myself.
I want to explain to them how upsetting this has been, I've lost lots of sleep over this over the past few months, but now Christmas is coming, I feel I should say something, surely if I don't it will look like tacit agreement that I agree with their actions.

I was thinking of writing to my cousin, telling them how unhappy and sad this makes me feel. I feel that they have been so unfair in acting as if my sister has done something wrong, whereas they did not tell us what they planned (hence us having to ask for an update), whereas they have in fact committed a criminal offence (which I might not highlight). I had been wishfully imagining that my aunt might be unaware of all this, but then when I woke up too early again today fretting about this, I realised that if she hasn't sent my sister a Christmas card, then she must know all about it.

Initially I had been thinking for months to send a letter explaining how I feel to my cousin. Then after realising that my aunt must know about this, I've been trying to write a letter to send to my aunt this morning, to send with a Christmas card, since she asked how we are in the card she sent to me.
Surely that's the best option. Then I felt ill writing it, then decided to ask for advice here.

I definitely can't just carry on as normal, and I don't think I can say nothing.

So, your Aunt and cousins threw you, your sick Dad is and other relatives under a bus financially, they stole from your sister in her most time of need, and you are worried about upsetting them?

I’d go f*cking nuclear. I’d write them a letter via a solicitor asking for your share within x days or you’ll start legal proceedings.

It’s a totally crazy situation then tbh who would knowingly do this and think they’ d get away with it?

If there was no will how come there was an executer? I thought that was written into wills ?

I don't know why people are telling me there was no will and the brother died intestate. That's literally my first point on short list of points.

I did not understand that there was only one surviving sibling when the childless Uncle who is the subject of this thread died, so thanks for clearing that up.

If anyone can bear to link again, or point me to the posts where there are links, which clears up who inherits when someone dies intestate - then I'd be grateful and it saves me having to read the whole thread! Hopefully not too much to ask?

As a fan of the Heir Hunters TV programme, I'm surprised to hear that nieces and nephews inherit when there is a living sibling. That's all. Somehow I missed that fact despite watching many episodes.

Why are you not sueing them? Even out of principle.

I cant believe you are even considering seeing them at Christmas/ having a relationship with them.

You know what the legal split should be. So write to the administrator and ask for your share and for your sister to be given her share. Tell them that if they don't you will be seeking legal advice and that costs will ultimately be payable by them. If they refuse to do anything, make good on it and get that legal advice.

see page 2 for the links

Îd go down the ‘I think there’s been a mistake routé first while having to hand the relevant legislation to prove my point . Îd give them chance to sort it out immediately just because it would be quicker and less stressful than the legal route and sister needs the money now.

www.gov.uk/inherits-someone-dies-without-will @LindorDoubleChoc

Specifically

The estate is shared equally between the brothers or sisters (not including any step-brothers, step-sisters, half-brothers or half-sisters).
If a brother or sister died before the deceased, their children (nieces and nephews of the deceased) will inherit in their place.

People are telling you that there was no will because you then go on to say

"OP found out that everything in the late uncle's will went to his living sister."

An oversight in typing at speed no doubt, but you can't really blame the readers for thinking that you didn't understand that there wasn't a will.

I don't know why people are telling me there was no will and the brother died intestate. That's literally my first point on short list of points.

Look at your second bullet point. That's why people are correcting you about the will.

Fair enough, thanks. So how did they register their mother as NoK, then - as the term isn't used in that form? Or was somebody just using this phrase as short-form?

I'm currently in litigation with my brother (not my choice) over my late mum's estate, she died intestate having had my dad's share pass to her when he died 4 years earlier. My brother believes he owns a large piece of land that my parents bought 10 years ago.
He doesn't but that hasn't stopped him trying everything to thwart the process if applying for letters of administration. Under the law of intestacy the estate is split between us both. I've spent over 6k so far on legal fees just getting to the point of jointly Instructed Solicitors who will act for us both to apply for the grant and subsequent administration.

At this point the principle is worth more to me than any inheritance, I'll fight it so he knows that he can't just bully me hoping I'll give up and go away.

Any hope of a reconciliation has been napalmed, he didn't even turn up at my mum' s funeral.

I hope you pursue this OP, it sounds like they think you and your sister won't bother due to her illness, I'm sorry you are both going through this but please fight for what is rightfully yours x

People, the OP isn't asking whether it's fair that her aunt got everything.

She knows that she and her sister were entitled to inherit in their mother's place, as per the intestacy rules which have now been linked to about a meeeeeelllion times.

What she wants to know is whether she should pursue her cousin (as the administrator of the estate) for giving it all to his dear old mum rather than distributing it correctly in accordance with his legal obligations, or just let it go.

A cousin of my Dad's died a few years ago. She was a widow and had never had any children. She died intestate (and v elderly). Her one sibling had died young, unmarried, no children.

Therefore, the estate was referred upwards to her parents generation and all her parents siblings. There were 8 of them originally (my Dad's Mum included). Some had died in infancy, some others didn't have children. The estate was split equally amongst those of the siblings who had had children (living issue). I think it was one fifth each. Of course none of that generation (my Dad's Mum) were alive, so the estate was then divided amongst their offspring. (my Dad's generation and cousins of the deceased lady).

Some of Dad's cousins hadn't married or had children so those shares were taken back and resdistributed. My Dad was an only child so he woud have inherited one fifth of his cousin's estate, other cousins of his were in a family of 4 children so they each inherited a quarater of one fifth.

Unfortunately it all took so long that my Dad had also passed by the time any money came out, so my dsis and I got one tenth each.

However the real beneficiary was the solicitors dealing with it, they got the largest amount of money in fees, I think about one quarter of the whole estate, plus VAT.

Anyway, long story to share that @NeshButUpNorth is correct about how intestate estates are distributed. And even in complicated situations there are very clear rules for how the estate should be distributed.

I don't have personal experience, but from an observers point of view, I don't think you need to worry about ethics.

On the other hand, they have shown no ethics or morals.

It's funny how we're wired... to worry about the consequences or falling out. I would be the same. But again, observing, YOU don't need to worry about it. THEY have chosen to burn all bridges and they have chosen to risk whatever the consequences may be.

Definitely get to a solicitor asap.

Well I think she needs more information before she does anything because all she has it what the cousin told her sister before she blocked her on everything.

She still doesn't know if the other cousins have definitely been left out or not.

But I think if the children of the aunt have decided to take the whole estate then family relations are already damaged and she should proceed to get the money owed.

Ah yes I see! Sorry, I should have said estate not will.

I am not a lawyer but I believe the term 'next of kin' has no legal significance at all. It's useful when someone is ill in hospital or needs care or has lost mental capacity, to indicate who can reasonably step in and advocate for them and/or look after their affairs. It doesn't indicate who's going to inherit their worldly goods if they die intestate. 'Next of' here is a rather old-fashioned term to indicate nearest.

There may not have been an executor but in the absence of a will, someone would have to have been appointed administrator of the estate. It would seem the cousins volunteered for this because they knew what they were going to do.

Not according to English law. Has been clarified several times who inherits in a case like this.

As @Lassofnorth said, the brother didn't leave a will.

You correctly say in your first point "The uncle died intestate." but you then mention in the next point "the late uncle's will".

A person cannot die intestate and also leave a will. To die "intestate" means that you did not leave a will.

To respond to your other points. There were two brothers and two sisters. One sister (the OP's mum) and one brother had already died. That left the unmarried, childless brother without a will and the OP's aunt.
.

"Also, why does anyone in the generation below the deceased uncle's siblings think that anything is automatically going to come to them?"

When the brother without a will died intestate, who gets his estate is determined by the intestacy rules.

Many other posters here have already linked to the gov.uk website that shows the order in which people inherit in this situation which explicitly states that the generation below the deceased sibling inherits.

You might also want to look at HMRC who state in their tax manual that:

If the deceased had no surviving spouse or civil partner or issue others may benefit in the following order

• parents - equally if both living
• brothers and sisters of the whole blood - equally and their issue per stirpes

The relevant part here is the term "per stirpes". This refers to every person descending down a branch of a family tree.

So, if the sister (OP's mum) can inherit then her issue can also inherit "per stirpes"

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm12125
.

"Can anyone point me to the law on this?"

The Intestacy Rules come from Section 46 of the Administration of Estates Act 1925.

Then in Section 47(3) it says that children of deceased siblings etc are to be treated in the same way as grandchildren of deceased children mentioned in Section 47(1)(i).

That is "...of any [sibling] of the intestate who predeceases the intestate, such issue to take through all degrees, according to their stocks, in equal shares if more than one, the share which their parent would have taken if living at the death of the intestate, and so that (subject to section 46A) no issue shall take whose parent is living at the death of the intestate and so capable of taking;"

Yes, I know that. The post quoted was asking about why the aunt was not inheriting the lot given that she was the closest surviving relative, i.e. the next of kin in colloquial terms.

This thread is going to go round and round and round now, isn't it, probably for years.

You cannot "volunteer" to be administrator (generally speaking), there is a set order in which people can apply to be the administrator. In the OP's situation it was her aunt.

If there were two or more people in the same class of relatives (eg siblings) then one or more of them could choose to be the administrator, In this case, the aunt would either need to decline to act as administrator or appoint others to act in her place.