Inheritance Drama: You Got Any? Stories Wanted.

[AMandM]

lexde, if you don't mind speculating publicly, what do you think would have happened to you if you had received the multi-millions back when you were 18?  It sounds like it could have been close to $20M between your grandfather and your great-uncle. Were you already financially wise, or would it have led you to  waste your twenties in frivolous spending?

[Pooperman]

Thanks for all the best wishes and advice. Reading your replies and feeling your empathy, I have a better sense of how skewed my own view has become. I've heard of NPD (narcissistic personality disorder) and the relevant subreddits, though I've largely avoided them, due to how similar their experiences are to my own. It can sometimes be hard to read. I strongly suspect my mother has some form of this, which was left to fester, as she never sought out any means of bettering herself. As for therapy, I'm working through CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) and DBT (Dialectical behavior therapy, to learn healthy coping mechanisms,) on my own. When I have more in the way of funding, I'll likely pursue formal therapy. In the meantime, I'm fortunate enough to have a couple people in my life who are familiar enough with the kinds of problems someone like me typically develops. I have it on good authority that I'm likely to beat this in 3-5 years, so I'm fairly optimistic.

Going low to no contact will also likely be a relief. Also, the information for the IRS saved me a few clicks. Thanks. :)

I've made another (non-throwaway) account, that I'll use to discuss my adventures in mustachianism. (--> @JSalazar)

@Dicey I have enough information to infer most of the story. If you're curious: my parents were strongly influenced by my grandparents, who were self-made millionaires (quite mustachian, but outside of their business, nutsos.) The grandparents withheld affection, were physically abusive, etc., but my mother put up with it due to the significant financial aid my grandparents provided. To my grandparents, motherhood was expected. Unfortunately, motherhood turned out to be far more work than my mother was willing to do. Before I was born, she enjoyed a social life full of glittering parties & fancy dinners. I wasn't a healthy baby, when I was born. I don't believe I ever needed long-term hospitalization, but it was enough to effectively kill her social life. (I was the sort of baby with sensitivity to sound/light/certain textures/foods, etc.) This enraged her. She expected me to do everything perfectly the first time, to never be ill, to never need different food, etc. As I grew up, I was a frequent interruption in her routine, and she needs her routines like most people need water (severe OCD.) Eventually I learned better, but then she started seeking me out, demanding I act in the role of a therapist any time her own parents decided to belittle her parenting skills (or lack thereof.) It's funny, because I learned to treat my own issues through research/attempts to treat my mother. What made it worse was that my grandparents seemed to unconditionally love me, praising me as though I could do no wrong. My mother, on the other hand, could never do anything right. If you're familiar with NPD, it's a slight twist on the golden child / scapegoat dynamic. Once I began to see the dynamic for what it was, I started feeling uncomfortable around my grandparents, especially as I learned more about how they abused their daughter. I'm committed to breaking that chain.

I also suspect she thought she could relive her younger (best) years through me. She dressed me up as she had dressed, when she was younger. I was made to adopt her chosen hairstyle, hair color, the kinds of clothes she liked, friends she would've had, etc. This sort of thing is cute when done to babies (sort of?) but disturbing when done to a 16-25 year old. For example, I read much more than she did, which resulted in punishment. Basically, she wanted MomVer2.0. The abuse was mostly an extension of trying to fit me into this mold, even if it required using hair dye I was *very* allergic to, for example. I could be doubled over in front of her, and she'd just shrug and call it the "price of beauty." The whole situation is both hilarious and sad.

Something else to check: your credit. Someone who would steal from you like this may also have stolen from you another way.

[TexasRunner]

Something else to check: your credit. Someone who would steal from you like this may also have stolen from you another way.

Very much this, and you can run your credit report online for free.

(This is the ACTUAL free one, government sponsored:  https://www.annualcreditreport.com/.  FYI there are a ton of "Buy your credit report sites" that are really just trying to offer credit monitoring...)

[Just Joe]

I've written a couple long winded narratives here about this and then deleted them. I don't know what to make of recent events.

In short a relative I haven't seen in a very long time has popped up asking for DOB and address to add me to their will and possibly transfer unspecified property to me if I want it. This relative is from a messy part of the family that often feuded over money. Now this relative is one of the few left and has whatever is left of that money. There seems to be a genuine wish to gift me property in my town that i would then be free to sell or keep if I wanted.

Relative tells me I'm their favorite. Might even be true b/c I did happily spent time with them when I was younger and I've never said a mean word to them though they were part of the inheritance drama after my grandparents passed.

My parent was also part of the drama although myself and my other parent gently removed my parent from the drama to preserve their emotional stability. It left emotional scars.

In short my grandparents had a will which divided up things more or less equally but a now dead relative raided some of the accounts and walked away. Various papers went missing, some cash went missing, relative went mum, etc. As my parents didn't need the money, my attitude was that they should just retreat and make peace with it. We all cut ties and continued our lives.

That's my attitude now. If this relative were to get weird - or cause problems with their sibling/my parent - I'd rather just walk away from whatever the gift might be.

Its a different kind of FU money that DW and I have - the ability to avoid inheritance conflicts b/c we have our own comfortable life.

I'm worried both about some sort of identity theft risk and worried about the potential family drama time bomb this might create.

So should I be worried about giving over my DOB and address? Any risks that anyone can identify?

[jinga nation]

I've written a couple long winded narratives here about this and then deleted them. I don't know what to make of recent events.

In short a relative I haven't seen in a very long time has popped up asking for DOB and address to add me to their will and possibly transfer unspecified property to me if I want it. This relative is from a messy part of the family that often feuded over money. Now this relative is one of the few left and has whatever is left of that money. There seems to be a genuine wish to gift me property in my town that i would then be free to sell or keep if I wanted.

Relative tells me I'm their favorite. Might even be true b/c I did happily spent time with them when I was younger and I've never said a mean word to them though they were part of the inheritance drama after my grandparents passed.

My parent was also part of the drama although myself and my other parent gently removed my parent from the drama to preserve their emotional stability. It left emotional scars.

In short my grandparents had a will which divided up things more or less equally but a now dead relative raided some of the accounts and walked away. Various papers went missing, some cash went missing, relative went mum, etc. As my parents didn't need the money, my attitude was that they should just retreat and make peace with it. We all cut ties and continued our lives.

That's my attitude now. If this relative were to get weird - or cause problems with their sibling/my parent - I'd rather just walk away from whatever the gift might be.

Its a different kind of FU money that DW and I have - the ability to avoid inheritance conflicts b/c we have our own comfortable life.

I'm worried both about some sort of identity theft risk and worried about the potential family drama time bomb this might create.

So should I be worried about giving over my DOB and address? Any risks that anyone can identify?

Red flags all over this. you don't need the DOB and address for a will, at least not where I live. Identity theft happening 99.9% guaranteed if you give the info. That relative might be going around with the same story to other relatives too... you don't phish one person at a time.

To mess with them, give them a fake DOB like 6/9/69 and a UPS store address. That might cause follow-on issues, your call.

[six-car-habit]

 I would say visit the relative [uncle / aunt ?] and take them out for lunch.  They may have a different perspective on the previous drama you haven't heard, or may have had their own issues with deceased grabby relative - that they want to talk to someone about, but doesn't want to approach your parent seeking for a sympathetic ear.

  Bring them to the property in question, have a snack on the lawn, tree clearing, rooftop, sidewalk, whichever.  Ask what they would want done with the property and why you seem to them to be the best caretaker for it. I suppose they would like it kept in the family, at least a little longer ?

 Its a relative , they can figure out your address, and your birthday date can be found in some old calendar of their own, or Grandmas calendar/ datebook from when JustJoe was a cute 3 yr old , and Aunt/ Uncle went to your b-day party.. They can reason out the year of birth. I wouldn't stress on identity theft too much.

[partgypsy]

 I want to say dramathrowaway's story holy smokes is one of the worst family accounts I've read. So sorry you had to go through that.

In my family there was favoritism of the boys. Some examples the boys got allowances. When we asked for an allowance our Dad said, what do you need an allowance for? If you need something I can buy it. We had chores we had to do, but did not get paid for them (one of them was making all the beds, including our brothers' beds). However if our brothers did the exact same chore (shoveling snow, mowing lawn) they would be paid.

 On my mom's side, my mother was the first born, but then about 5, 7 years later her 2 little brothers came along. She was very bright (read every book in her branch library) and told that they would make sure she would go to college. When it came time to go to college my grandparents said of course she's not going to college, they were saving any money they had so her brothers could go, and she should just move back after high school and get a job to help support the family and her brothers. Maybe that's what would have happened. But my great grandmother said that was nonsense she was the smartest of the bunch, and paid the college costs. And while my Mom did inherit some significant assets from the great grandfather, I don't think she got anything of note when either of her parents passed away.

On my Dad's side, my grandmother was widowed young. Even though she was considered middle class, her husband both due to business losses occuring when he was sick, and from pride, made sure to pay all his debts before he died, leaving the family with nothing (not even a house). Raised two sons with great grandmother's help (who was also widowed young). She immigrated to the US, brought both of her sons over eventually and gave them all the money she had saved from working at a sweat shop for 5-10 years. Luckily the brothers were successful so she lived with us or our aunt and uncle the rest of her life. She still was so frugal that if she got a bar of soap as a gift, wouldn't use it, but display it on her dresser.

Anyways whenever there is a crisis our mother often wants us two girls to drop everything to help "the family". This has happened to my sister multiple times since she lives closer. I understand my mother was raised to feel that females have less value, or only value in regards to how they could help the family, but no, not going to keep that going. She has a number of jewelry pieces that were willed down to us from our great grandmother. She agrees they are ours, but also will not give them to us, because "she might need to sell for financial reasons". Financial reasons including making sure my deadbeat older brother, who lives off her, has cable, xbox, and cigarettes. I'm thinking the likelihood that my sister and I will inherit anything of value from either parent is slim to none. 

[Just Joe]

I would say visit the relative [uncle / aunt ?] and take them out for lunch.  They may have a different perspective on the previous drama you haven't heard, or may have had their own issues with deceased grabby relative - that they want to talk to someone about, but doesn't want to approach your parent seeking for a sympathetic ear.

  Bring them to the property in question, have a snack on the lawn, tree clearing, rooftop, sidewalk, whichever.  Ask what they would want done with the property and why you seem to them to be the best caretaker for it. I suppose they would like it kept in the family, at least a little longer ?

 Its a relative , they can figure out your address, and your birthday date can be found in some old calendar of their own, or Grandmas calendar/ datebook from when JustJoe was a cute 3 yr old , and Aunt/ Uncle went to your b-day party.. They can reason out the year of birth. I wouldn't stress on identity theft too much.

Don't know exactly where the relative lives. I know +/- 100 miles of where they live but only because of what they told me. Jinga: I agree on the DOB and address. I was able to find this relative's info this morn doing a basic background check. If I can find their's, they can find mine.

I think what I'll do is invite them to lunch the next time they are in my state, they do alot of miles a year apparently. Talk a little, as suggested. They did say they were using a local lawyer whose name I did not recognize. Maybe I'll get more info and talk to the lawyer. See if this is all real. Perhaps explore what financial liabilities I might be facing.

[AMandM]

Just Joe, I don't think ID theft is a big concern since the information they are asking for is easy to get--although, by the same token, the relative should be able to get them without contacting you. I agree that you should make friendly contact. Don't approach him/her with suspicion, just with caution.  Find out more about what is going on and what their goal is. Who knows, maybe part of the drama that your branch of the family subtracted themselves from included this relative trying to undo the damage done by the late thieving relative.

[ysette9]

I’d just like to chime in my support for @dramathrowaway. You are an amazing person who deserves access to your own money and a chance to thrive without your family dragging you down. I hope your lawyer gets the legal system to throw the book at your mother. What she is doing and has done is reprehensible.

Please do keep us posted. We are rooting for you. I wish there was something concrete I could do to help.

[bluebelle]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

[Just Joe]

That's the way to do it. I think I'm the executor of the will alone but will certainly bring in my sibling so they have 100% awareness and 50% of the property/money. I've witnessed a will where one of multiple siblings had all the knowledge and as soon as the last parent died - everything went to hell. Papers went missing, money went missing and there was no way to ever prove it b/c nobody but the executor had any awareness of the whole picture. Not good.

[Threshkin]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

Why keep it a secret?  Don't you want them to know they a getting a equal share?  Or are you trying to keep the will a secret? That might be harder.

[SwordGuy]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

Why keep it a secret?  Don't you want them to know they a getting a equal share?  Or are you trying to keep the will a secret? That might be harder.

I think the part they want to keep secret is that the parents didn't treat the kids equally.   They want all siblings to be treated equally and think the parents intended it that way.

[Alfred J Quack]

@dramathrowaway, you are certainly not a bad person. In a no-win situation, yes. In a very dificult spot, certainly. But always remember, you are responsible for your own actions and so is your mother. You made a choice with the lawyer and I applaud you for taking that long, stick with it and protect yourself!

As for my own "drama". My grandfather from the UK wasn't well a few years back. The last time I visited my father and uncles were openly discussing how the monies were going to be divided a after his passing. They knew his will and were not afraid about talking about it, though it was a businesslike conversation.
Fast forward a year, and he had passed away. The funeral was very well cared for, they had a speaker from the humanist society and it was all very familyal.

A month or 2 later I get a mail from my dad, the executor wanted my address so he could write me a cheque for the inheritance. I answered that I couldn't cash a check with my bank and that he'd have to wire it to my account (most banks in the Netherlands don't cash cheques anymore).
2 weeks later I have 2 cheques in the mail, one for me and one for my son. So I get pissed, mail my dad that I can't do anything with it and that he should take it out on the executor. He does, in a 5 week back and forth they work out the details and he sends it to my account.

As I understand it, my dad, uncles and aunt were going totally nuts over the executor. He'd send e-mails asking for partial information, then send a second and maybe e third after you respond that he needs more info. All the while charging 300 pounds an hour.
Also, part of the will was that the great-grandkids received a small sum at their 16th birthday. The executor would have to "check" every year whether one had reached this age and if so take action. They basically told him that they would pay out those cheques immediatly because their inheritance was dependent on the amount that would have been left over.


I mind it more that my kids never got to see their great-grandfather though... Especially my oldest son, he was already born but we just couldn't make the time for it. If anything, my drama is the remorse I feel about that...

[Just Joe]

Here's an odd question: if someone were to me gift a check - say $10K - and there is the potential for family drama, where would be the best place for me to put the money so I could either return the money or divide it at a later date?

In the bank and under the mattress doesn't really let it grow to keep up with inflation. Other methods might be too restrictive. I just don't know much about these things.

I was promised a gift of some amount but don't really expect to receive anything ever. Maybe it will go perfectly, no drama.

I can also imagine this being the focal point of a family dispute later if I was gifted something but no one else was. If it all goes sour I'd just rather give the money back rather than be in the middle of something. I have a low tolerance for all that sort of stuff. DW and I are doing just fine by ourselves.

[talltexan]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

Why keep it a secret?  Don't you want them to know they a getting a equal share?  Or are you trying to keep the will a secret? That might be harder.

It's two separate decisions:

1. DH decides that he will transfer whatever is necessary to make the estate end up 33-33-33.
2. DH asks his parents to explain why they're choosing the %'s they are.

[sherr]

Here's an odd question: if someone were to me gift a check - say $10K - and there is the potential for family drama, where would be the best place for me to put the money so I could either return the money or divide it at a later date?

In the bank and under the mattress doesn't really let it grow to keep up with inflation. Other methods might be too restrictive. I just don't know much about these things.

If you want something completely safe then the best you can do is probably look for online-only high-interest savings accounts. Or a CD, as long as it merely charges something like "last three months of interest" or similar as the early-withdrawal penalty. You probably won't quite keep up with inflation with either of those at the moment, but it's better than the 0.1% or whatever that regular savings accounts are paying these days.

[sherr]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right, but let me caution you against intentionally ignoring the will. An executor's job is to faithfully carry out the instructions in the will, not to change it to make it better. I don't know Canadian law (or USA law either for that matter) but it would not surprise me if you could be found personally liable if you ignore the will.

[ysette9]

You don’t ignore the will. You execute it as written. You then take part of your 50% and gift it to your sisters so the end result is that everyone gets 1/3. Once the inheritance is yours you can do anything you want with it, including distributing it to people you feel should have been left more initially.

[former player]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right, but let me caution you against intentionally ignoring the will. An executor's job is to faithfully carry out the instructions in the will, not to change it to make it better. I don't know Canadian law (or USA law either for that matter) but it would not surprise me if you could be found personally liable if you ignore the will.

Possibly, but 1) the only person who loses is OP, 2) who would have an interest in taking the case just to prove a point of principle? and 3) it is always open to someone to refuse to take all or part of an inheritance - which is effectively what OP is doing, with the result that the sisters' 25% shares become larger because more is in their side of the overall pot.

Personally, I'd say to the sisters "these wills are obviously 30 years out of date, I don't know what our parents were thinking but I have no doubt that the fair thing to do is for us to share everything equally and that's what I'm going to do."  I think that's better than trying to hide.  But OP knows their family best.

[sherr]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right, but let me caution you against intentionally ignoring the will. An executor's job is to faithfully carry out the instructions in the will, not to change it to make it better. I don't know Canadian law (or USA law either for that matter) but it would not surprise me if you could be found personally liable if you ignore the will.

Possibly, but 1) the only person who loses is OP, 2) who would have an interest in taking the case just to prove a point of principle? and 3) it is always open to someone to refuse to take all or part of an inheritance - which is effectively what OP is doing, with the result that the sisters' 25% shares become larger because more is in their side of the overall pot.

Personally, I'd say to the sisters "these wills are obviously 30 years out of date, I don't know what our parents were thinking but I have no doubt that the fair thing to do is for us to share everything equally and that's what I'm going to do."  I think that's better than trying to hide.  But OP knows their family best.

I was missing the fact that OP was both the executor and the party that would be missing out by splitting evenly. Thanks, objection withdrawn.

[bluebelle]

I'm hoping we can keep it from being 'drama' but I think there will be some hurt feelings......backstory, my in-laws wrote their will 30 years ago (before I was on the scene) and DH was in his early 20s (and not great with money).....fast forward 30 years, my MIL passed a few months ago after a lengthy illness.  Helping his dad with paperwork, DH is given a copy of his mother's will, he is named executor, he had no idea.  We're assuming his father's will is the same.  When my FIL passes, it will divide the assests as 50% to DH and 25% to each of his sisters.   The only rationale we can come up with is that it's because he has a penis.  One of the sisters is older than him, both sisters have been dedicated to the parents, both are sensible with money.  It can only be a cultural decision to favour the male born child.  DH and I have already decided that it will be a 33.3% split amongst the siblings, and we will keep his sisters from even knowing if we can.  I know when the time comes it will be me making the decsions and paperwork and DH will just sign as executor.  His family has been in Canada for over 50 years, how can they still think it's okay to short change daughters?  It boggles my mind.  My parents wanted things to be so fair that they made my brother and I join executors, they knew I'm better with money but didn't want to potentially offend my older brother.   And we're both so honest, we would never rip off the other.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right, but let me caution you against intentionally ignoring the will. An executor's job is to faithfully carry out the instructions in the will, not to change it to make it better. I don't know Canadian law (or USA law either for that matter) but it would not surprise me if you could be found personally liable if you ignore the will.

Possibly, but 1) the only person who loses is OP, 2) who would have an interest in taking the case just to prove a point of principle? and 3) it is always open to someone to refuse to take all or part of an inheritance - which is effectively what OP is doing, with the result that the sisters' 25% shares become larger because more is in their side of the overall pot.

Personally, I'd say to the sisters "these wills are obviously 30 years out of date, I don't know what our parents were thinking but I have no doubt that the fair thing to do is for us to share everything equally and that's what I'm going to do."  I think that's better than trying to hide.  But OP knows their family best.

I was missing the fact that OP was both the executor and the party that would be missing out by splitting evenly. Thanks, objection withdrawn.

thanks to all that clarified what I was saying.....DH will execute the will as written, he will just quietly try and gift money to his sisters so that each of them gets 33 1/3 %, our assumption is that his sisters won't question each of them getting a 1/3, and thus we can keep them from knowing the misogynistic nature of the original will.  They don't need to know that their parents valued them less because they were female.  (speaking as a woman I am offended, I can't say whether they'd be or not or not, since they grew up in the culture - but why risk offending them).  If they push to see the will, or make any kind of fuss, DH may choose to execute the will as written - his family, his choice.  I can only tell him how I would feel if it were me......I will encourage him to pay himself as an executor, since we'll probably be living 3 hours away by the time his father passes, and that's alot of extra travel/gas.

[Dancin'Dog]

Does anyone know what is a reasonable fee for an executor? 

[ysette9]

Does anyone know what is a reasonable fee for an executor?

The list of fiduciary executors that the laquer we are working with sent us all change 1% of the estate.
At first that seemed like a lot but then I realized that it would only be for a year to finalize our estate. I also decided it was a good use of money so our family member named as guardian for our littles cohoe focus on their well-being and not on paperwork.

[Wilson Hall]

Bumping this thread.

Elderly relative, widowed a decade-plus ago, marries elderly widow he met in grief counseling. Both are well-off financially, though her more so than him. After the wedding, she moves into his home, sells her big fancy house and distributes the sale proceeds to her grown children. The couple set up their money in a his/hers/theirs arrangement, complete with wills and possibly trusts. He dies, leaving his cash and ultimately the house (which his wife will continue to reside in until her death, per their arrangement) to his grown children. Now her kids are suing for a portion of his estate, claiming they're entitled to a share of it because the couple was married for ten years. While they may have the legal right, some of us are gobsmacked because they had already taken a decent amount of money from their mother years ago and were already quite wealthy. Now they want more.

[Hula Hoop]

Wilson - that is just nasty.  They were elderly with grown children.  I really hope her greedy children don't win this one.  Too bad about the legal fees though.

[Captain FIRE]

Now her kids are suing for a portion of his estate, claiming they're entitled to a share of it because the couple was married for ten years. While they may have the legal right, some of us are gobsmacked because they had already taken a decent amount of money from their mother years ago and were already quite wealthy. Now they want more.

I'm gobsmacked because I don't see what grounds they even have to sue.

[partgypsy]

Bumping this thread.

Elderly relative, widowed a decade-plus ago, marries elderly widow he met in grief counseling. Both are well-off financially, though her more so than him. After the wedding, she moves into his home, sells her big fancy house and distributes the sale proceeds to her grown children. The couple set up their money in a his/hers/theirs arrangement, complete with wills and possibly trusts. He dies, leaving his cash and ultimately the house (which his wife will continue to reside in until her death, per their arrangement) to his grown children. Now her kids are suing for a portion of his estate, claiming they're entitled to a share of it because the couple was married for ten years. While they may have the legal right, some of us are gobsmacked because they had already taken a decent amount of money from their mother years ago and were already quite wealthy. Now they want more.

Actually they do NOT have the legal right. Hopefully an attorney will explain this to them to avoid this nonsense. They were adult children. There is no evidence her children were adopted by her late husband. IF there was no will (and there was a will) it would go to his wife, then biological children. Stepchildren have no natural rights to inheritance. Sometimes I hate people. 

[Wilson Hall]

Bumping this thread.

Elderly relative, widowed a decade-plus ago, marries elderly widow he met in grief counseling. Both are well-off financially, though her more so than him. After the wedding, she moves into his home, sells her big fancy house and distributes the sale proceeds to her grown children. The couple set up their money in a his/hers/theirs arrangement, complete with wills and possibly trusts. He dies, leaving his cash and ultimately the house (which his wife will continue to reside in until her death, per their arrangement) to his grown children. Now her kids are suing for a portion of his estate, claiming they're entitled to a share of it because the couple was married for ten years. While they may have the legal right, some of us are gobsmacked because they had already taken a decent amount of money from their mother years ago and were already quite wealthy. Now they want more.

Actually they do NOT have the legal right. Hopefully an attorney will explain this to them to avoid this nonsense. They were adult children. There is no evidence her children were adopted by her late husband. IF there was no will (and there was a will) it would go to his wife, then biological children. Stepchildren have no natural rights to inheritance. Sometimes I hate people.

Yeah, I don't get it. They're apparently claiming there's a state law that allows this. During the past couple of years, several of the adult children used their mom's funds and/or their own (don't know which) to pay for in-home care for her; perhaps they presume they're entitled to some of his money because he benefited indirectly from an aide administering her meds and doing some housekeeping? If that's their rationale, they should've held onto the money she gifted them when she remarried, which might have been as much as high five to low six figures apiece: it was a damn big house. They could have stopped to consider how much more time and money they might be spending on her care if she hadn't had a new husband to provide a home and companionship for many years.

This is the pits for his kids, all of whom are working or middle class, at or near retirement themselves, and could put to good use whatever their dad left them. Instead, I'm sure the lawyers' fees are going to be eating up a chunk of whatever money there is.

I have no financial stake in this. It just makes me sad to see what greed can do to people, even (especially?) those who are upper-middle class or rich.

[partgypsy]

Bumping this thread.

Elderly relative, widowed a decade-plus ago, marries elderly widow he met in grief counseling. Both are well-off financially, though her more so than him. After the wedding, she moves into his home, sells her big fancy house and distributes the sale proceeds to her grown children. The couple set up their money in a his/hers/theirs arrangement, complete with wills and possibly trusts. He dies, leaving his cash and ultimately the house (which his wife will continue to reside in until her death, per their arrangement) to his grown children. Now her kids are suing for a portion of his estate, claiming they're entitled to a share of it because the couple was married for ten years. While they may have the legal right, some of us are gobsmacked because they had already taken a decent amount of money from their mother years ago and were already quite wealthy. Now they want more.

Actually they do NOT have the legal right. Hopefully an attorney will explain this to them to avoid this nonsense. They were adult children. There is no evidence her children were adopted by her late husband. IF there was no will (and there was a will) it would go to his wife, then biological children. Stepchildren have no natural rights to inheritance. Sometimes I hate people.

Yeah, I don't get it. They're apparently claiming there's a state law that allows this. During the past couple of years, several of the adult children used their mom's funds and/or their own (don't know which) to pay for in-home care for her; perhaps they presume they're entitled to some of his money because he benefited indirectly from an aide administering her meds and doing some housekeeping? If that's their rationale, they should've held onto the money she gifted them when she remarried, which might have been as much as high five to low six figures apiece: it was a damn big house. They could have stopped to consider how much more time and money they might be spending on her care if she hadn't had a new husband to provide a home and companionship for many years.

This is the pits for his kids, all of whom are working or middle class, at or near retirement themselves, and could put to good use whatever their dad left them. Instead, I'm sure the lawyers' fees are going to be eating up a chunk of whatever money there is.

I have no financial stake in this. It just makes me sad to see what greed can do to people, even (especially?) those who are upper-middle class or rich.

I just want the lawyer they hired to give them advice to give them the "you get nothing" speech in Willy Wonka. If not that, the presiding judge.

[Goldielocks]

Maybe there is more to the story, like they paid for a lot of renovations to make it wheelchair accessible, for mom and had an agreement to be repaid, and now just want it back. 

Totally correct that non-dependent step children have zero inheritance rights.  DH was adopted by his stepdad, (first dad died when he was 2) so ended up out of the will of his grandfather whom he had a life-long close relationship with....   No one realized that "all my grandchildren" would exclude a grandson that was adopted by someone else.

[mm1970]

Bumping this thread.

Elderly relative, widowed a decade-plus ago, marries elderly widow he met in grief counseling. Both are well-off financially, though her more so than him. After the wedding, she moves into his home, sells her big fancy house and distributes the sale proceeds to her grown children. The couple set up their money in a his/hers/theirs arrangement, complete with wills and possibly trusts. He dies, leaving his cash and ultimately the house (which his wife will continue to reside in until her death, per their arrangement) to his grown children. Now her kids are suing for a portion of his estate, claiming they're entitled to a share of it because the couple was married for ten years. While they may have the legal right, some of us are gobsmacked because they had already taken a decent amount of money from their mother years ago and were already quite wealthy. Now they want more.

Actually they do NOT have the legal right. Hopefully an attorney will explain this to them to avoid this nonsense. They were adult children. There is no evidence her children were adopted by her late husband. IF there was no will (and there was a will) it would go to his wife, then biological children. Stepchildren have no natural rights to inheritance. Sometimes I hate people.

Yeah, I don't get it. They're apparently claiming there's a state law that allows this. During the past couple of years, several of the adult children used their mom's funds and/or their own (don't know which) to pay for in-home care for her; perhaps they presume they're entitled to some of his money because he benefited indirectly from an aide administering her meds and doing some housekeeping? If that's their rationale, they should've held onto the money she gifted them when she remarried, which might have been as much as high five to low six figures apiece: it was a damn big house. They could have stopped to consider how much more time and money they might be spending on her care if she hadn't had a new husband to provide a home and companionship for many years.

This is the pits for his kids, all of whom are working or middle class, at or near retirement themselves, and could put to good use whatever their dad left them. Instead, I'm sure the lawyers' fees are going to be eating up a chunk of whatever money there is.

I have no financial stake in this. It just makes me sad to see what greed can do to people, even (especially?) those who are upper-middle class or rich.

Gosh this is worse than my story that started up on page 1 or 2!

[SwordGuy]

These stories are just sad...

I received a small inheritance recently (and unexpectedly).  But alas for you all: it was the utter opposite of dramatic.  The executor did everything 110% by the book and the inheritors all tripped over themselves making sure everyone else was OK with everything that was done.  And everything worked out as it was supposed to.  It reminded me how fortunate I am.

@Finances_With_Purpose ,
Yeah you , your living relatives, and those who raised them right!

[TVRodriguez]

Maybe there is more to the story, like they paid for a lot of renovations to make it wheelchair accessible, for mom and had an agreement to be repaid, and now just want it back. 

Totally correct that non-dependent step children have zero inheritance rights.  DH was adopted by his stepdad, (first dad died when he was 2) so ended up out of the will of his grandfather whom he had a life-long close relationship with....   No one realized that "all my grandchildren" would exclude a grandson that was adopted by someone else.

That's a shame.  Most of the estate plans I draft include a clause allowing someone in your husband's situation to inherit from his original grandparents.

[mustachepungoeshere]

Before my grandmother died a couple of years ago, my aunt had power of attorney.

My mother only told me last night that two of my cousins hit up my aunt (their mother) to "dip into" my grandmother's estate (which was funding her aged care) for them.

Thank god my aunt had the balls to tell them where to go.

[Gail2000]

Before my grandmother died a couple of years ago, my aunt had power of attorney.

My mother only told me last night that two of my cousins hit up my aunt (their mother) to "dip into" my grandmother's estate (which was funding her aged care) for them.

Thank god my aunt had the balls to tell them where to go.

Thank goodness for stories like this to restore faith in humanity.

[SwordGuy]

Before my grandmother died a couple of years ago, my aunt had power of attorney.

My mother only told me last night that two of my cousins hit up my aunt (their mother) to "dip into" my grandmother's estate (which was funding her aged care) for them.

Thank god my aunt had the balls to tell them where to go.

Thank goodness for stories like this to restore faith in one out of three members of humanity.

Fixed that for you...

[Dicey]

Many years ago, my grandparents passed away and as their two children had pre-deceased them, the estate was to be divided up among the five grandchildren per stirpes (equal amounts to each of their children then divided equally between that child's children).  I have one sister so we were to receive 25% each.  The other three grandchildren (all descended from my parent's only sibling) were to receive 16.6% each.

The very entitled, only boy in the group, insisted that it wasn't fair he would inherit less than my sister and I would.  He held up the distribution, threatened to sue and was generally an expensive pain in the process. 

Eventually I lost it during a whole family (both sides) meeting with the lawyers my grandparents had very sensibly assigned as executors.  I very loudly (ok, I was shouting) said that our parents and grandparents were all dead. If my sister was dead too I'd get 50%.  My sister is well worth 25% to me.

The three cousins had lost a fourth sibling.  If that cousin was still alive they'd all be receiving 12.5% each.  Would they give 4.1% of the total to have that cousin back?  If the boy cousin wants 25% so badly, which of his living sisters was he willing to bump off to get the 8.4% difference?

There was a long awkward silence. 

The lawyers contacted everyone a few days later to let us know the challenge to the will had been rescinded. I've remained friendly with the two girl cousins, but it was years before the boy cousin spoke to me again.

You are a total badass! Sorry it came to this, but hooray for you for standing your ground.

[Dragonswan]

Many years ago, my grandparents passed away and as their two children had pre-deceased them, the estate was to be divided up among the five grandchildren per stirpes (equal amounts to each of their children then divided equally between that child's children).  I have one sister so we were to receive 25% each.  The other three grandchildren (all descended from my parent's only sibling) were to receive 16.6% each.

The very entitled, only boy in the group, insisted that it wasn't fair he would inherit less than my sister and I would.  He held up the distribution, threatened to sue and was generally an expensive pain in the process. 

Eventually I lost it during a whole family (both sides) meeting with the lawyers my grandparents had very sensibly assigned as executors.  I very loudly (ok, I was shouting) said that our parents and grandparents were all dead. If my sister was dead too I'd get 50%.  My sister is well worth 25% to me.

The three cousins had lost a fourth sibling.  If that cousin was still alive they'd all be receiving 12.5% each.  Would they give 4.1% of the total to have that cousin back?  If the boy cousin wants 25% so badly, which of his living sisters was he willing to bump off to get the 8.4% difference?

There was a long awkward silence. 

The lawyers contacted everyone a few days later to let us know the challenge to the will had been rescinded. I've remained friendly with the two girl cousins, but it was years before the boy cousin spoke to me again.

That is one outstanding way to say STFU.  Well done.

[K-ice]

Many years ago, my grandparents passed away and as their two children had pre-deceased them, the estate was to be divided up among the five grandchildren per stirpes (equal amounts to each of their children then divided equally between that child's children).  I have one sister so we were to receive 25% each.  The other three grandchildren (all descended from my parent's only sibling) were to receive 16.6% each.

....

I do wonder about the fairness of these next generation distributions.  But if the Grandparents were really worried about it they would split it 20% to each Grandchild.  Didn't all the cousins know how things would be split before the grandparents passed?

[sherr]

Many years ago, my grandparents passed away and as their two children had pre-deceased them, the estate was to be divided up among the five grandchildren per stirpes (equal amounts to each of their children then divided equally between that child's children).  I have one sister so we were to receive 25% each.  The other three grandchildren (all descended from my parent's only sibling) were to receive 16.6% each.

I do wonder about the fairness of these next generation distributions.  But if the Grandparents were really worried about it they would split it 20% to each Grandchild.  Didn't all the cousins know how things would be split before the grandparents passed?

It's exactly the same as it would have been in the normal course of things if the parents had still been alive. Normally Grandparent's inheritance would have been split equally among the parents (50% each), and then when parents died their inheritance would be equally split amongst their children (50/2% each to the two siblings, 50/3% each to the three siblings).

[SwordGuy]

Many years ago, my grandparents passed away and as their two children had pre-deceased them, the estate was to be divided up among the five grandchildren per stirpes (equal amounts to each of their children then divided equally between that child's children).  I have one sister so we were to receive 25% each.  The other three grandchildren (all descended from my parent's only sibling) were to receive 16.6% each.

....

I do wonder about the fairness of these next generation distributions.  But if the Grandparents were really worried about it they would split it 20% to each Grandchild.  Didn't all the cousins know how things would be split before the grandparents passed?

First of all, @SheWhoWalksAtLunch , that was awesome!    Well done!

Second, "Fair"?    Fair doesn't apply.   It's was the grandparent's money, no one but them had any claim to it.   If they wanted to set up a trust for their cats that would have been their right to do so.

But if we wanted to talk fair, they gave each of their kids the same amount of money.  That's fair.
If their kids wanted to have a different number of kids, that's the kid's business, not the grandparents.

The grandkids have advantages and disadvantages from having more or fewer siblings.   This particular distribution falls into the disadvantage category for those with more siblings.   Having more siblings to help you out when things go wrong in life is an advantage.   Perhaps you could view the larger amount to those with fewer siblings as compensation for that... :)

[talltexan]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

[BabyShark]

It's also an argument for keeping your will updated as life events happen.  It's possible that the will was never updated when the children died so state law kicked in and said per stirpes for the grandkids rather than per capita.  The will can circumvent that but it has to be written in. 

Either way, @SheWhoWalksAtLunch, you're my hero for that.

[merula]

When my great-grandma died, she had been predeceased by one child and one grandchild, while leaving others in each of those generations living. (Three children, call them 1, 2 and 3. 1 had children 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D. 1D was the predeceased one, who left 1Di and 1Dii.)

Per stipes was therefore the only way to distribute with impacting the original "one third to each child" principle.

2 and 3 each got 1/3. 1A, 1B and 1C each got 1/12. 1Di and 1Dii each got 1/24.

Me? I'm 1Bi. I got nothing, but I have my mom, which neither she, her siblings nor niece/nephew can say.

[K-ice]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

Ooohh. I get to google some Latin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_stirpes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

"Primogeniture (English: /praɪməˈdʒɛnɪtʃər/) is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate son to inherit his parent's entire or main estate."

Primogeniture is your preference? Really?  I can see making the oldest child the executor (if they were responsible) but giving them everything?  The way you said "put them in charge" is OK with me but it is hard to trust anyone would split things fairly.


Per capita sounds like a good idea to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_capita

I don't consider myself any more or less deserving than any of my cousins. 

My one grandparent clearly listed and named their grandchildren who then all received the same generous gift. In that list even non-blood descendants were named to make things clear. 

However, a gift is a bit different than a % of the remaining estate.

Has anyone ever seen gifts of a certain amount upto a certain percentage?   I have heard of cases where the gifts were so generous that there was almost nothing left for the heirs.

[DadJokes]

First of all, @SheWhoWalksAtLunch , that was awesome!    Well done!

Second, "Fair"?    Fair doesn't apply.   It's was the grandparent's money, no one but them had any claim to it.   If they wanted to set up a trust for their cats that would have been their right to do so.

But if we wanted to talk fair, they gave each of their kids the same amount of money.  That's fair.
If their kids wanted to have a different number of kids, that's the kid's business, not the grandparents.

The grandkids have advantages and disadvantages from having more or fewer siblings.   This particular distribution falls into the disadvantage category for those with more siblings.   Having more siblings to help you out when things go wrong in life is an advantage.   Perhaps you could view the larger amount to those with fewer siblings as compensation for that... :)

Agreed. Receiving even 1% is usually more than those receiving the inheritance have earned. It's entirely the prerogative of those bequeathing the inheritance to decide what to do with their money. If they chose to give 99% to one grandchild and make the others split the last 1%, they certainly have the right to do so. And I'm sure if they saw that grandson behaving that way, they might have written him out altogether.

[geekette]

My DH got a "per stirpes" inheritance a couple years ago, and it was interesting to see how things got divided since it went back pretty far.

DH's grandmother's sister and her husband left their estate in some sort of trust to their one child, who had suffered brain damage at birth. I think this was back in the 70's.  Their son, despite his disability, had a great life in their small town, but when he died in his 80's in 2016, the remaining estate was divvied in two, then that portion was divvied equally between each parent's many siblings (all of whom were long gone by then), then further divided amongst their progeny and so on.  DH ended up with a little over 1% (he didn't expect any). 

[talltexan]

Grandparents may not have known how many children their kids would have. Per Stirpes is a nice contingency, but it produces really weird outcomes if--say--one side has a single child, and the other side has seven.

As for me, I prefer primogeniture. Make damn sure your oldest can manage things, then put them in charge.

Ooohh. I get to google some Latin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_stirpes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

"Primogeniture (English: /praɪməˈdʒɛnɪtʃər/) is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate son to inherit his parent's entire or main estate."

Primogeniture is your preference? Really?  I can see making the oldest child the executor (if they were responsible) but giving them everything?  The way you said "put them in charge" is OK with me but it is hard to trust anyone would split things fairly.


Per capita sounds like a good idea to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_capita

I don't consider myself any more or less deserving than any of my cousins. 

My one grandparent clearly listed and named their grandchildren who then all received the same generous gift. In that list even non-blood descendants were named to make things clear. 

However, a gift is a bit different than a % of the remaining estate.

Has anyone ever seen gifts of a certain amount upto a certain percentage?   I have heard of cases where the gifts were so generous that there was almost nothing left for the heirs.

Disclaimer: I cannot imagine actually doing Primogeniture: the other night, my two kids helped me pick up the play room, and I paid my daughter--who did it with energy and vigor--$1, while my son--who did it with reluctance--received $.50. The latter thought it was so unfair.