Inheritance Drama: You Got Any? Stories Wanted.

[alcon835]

Any suggestions?

I have one, but you're not going to like it.

Stay out of this. It sucks. It's not healthy. long-term, it's bad for everyone. And yet, none of those things are yours to fix. Your mother and sister are unwilling to change and your brother is unwilling to make them change.

They are family, so you're not impartial or truly separated from the situation, but you are powerless. You can't do anything here and you shouldn't unless someone asks you too.

You offered advice to your mom and sister (schedule and consolidate errands/chores and pay sister for her time) and they both rejected it for their own reasons. Your brother, it seems, isn't forcing sister pay rent. So, legitimately, there is nothing you can do.

The real and only suggestion you should consider is "stay out of it" unless someone asks you for help down the road. You already did all you can do. Don't try to do any more. Let it go. This isn't your battle to fight.

You are right. It's just that then they individually bitch to me (esp my sister) so it is frustrating. But no one wants to change, so...

Yeah, I can only imagine how much that sucks :(

But I mean, if they start complaining you at least have an out, "Hey, I know you just want to complain, but it really wears me down. You know I'm willing to help you. Can we talk talk about something else?"

[Villanelle]

Any suggestions?

I have one, but you're not going to like it.

Stay out of this. It sucks. It's not healthy. long-term, it's bad for everyone. And yet, none of those things are yours to fix. Your mother and sister are unwilling to change and your brother is unwilling to make them change.

They are family, so you're not impartial or truly separated from the situation, but you are powerless. You can't do anything here and you shouldn't unless someone asks you too.

You offered advice to your mom and sister (schedule and consolidate errands/chores and pay sister for her time) and they both rejected it for their own reasons. Your brother, it seems, isn't forcing sister pay rent. So, legitimately, there is nothing you can do.

The real and only suggestion you should consider is "stay out of it" unless someone asks you for help down the road. You already did all you can do. Don't try to do any more. Let it go. This isn't your battle to fight.

You are right. It's just that then they individually bitch to me (esp my sister) so it is frustrating. But no one wants to change, so...

"We've talked about this and about how you have agency in the problem and in solving it.  You choose not to do so, so I ask that you please not come to me about it. I've offered all the input I have and it seems it doesn't work for you. So I don't want to discuss the mom/sister/brother situation with you anymore as it upsets me and makes me uncomfortable.  On another note, did you see that cute news story about the cat who put out a fire in the family home..." 

They bitch to you because you let them, just as mom and sister take advantage of brother because he lets them, and sister takes advantage of mom because she lets her.  If you don't want to hear about this, tell them that.  Set a boundary, and every. single. time they test it, remind them, "I told you I'm staying out of the situation and don't want to discuss it, remember?  is they anything else you want to talk about?"

[partgypsy]

Any suggestions?

I have one, but you're not going to like it.

Stay out of this. It sucks. It's not healthy. long-term, it's bad for everyone. And yet, none of those things are yours to fix. Your mother and sister are unwilling to change and your brother is unwilling to make them change.

They are family, so you're not impartial or truly separated from the situation, but you are powerless. You can't do anything here and you shouldn't unless someone asks you too.

You offered advice to your mom and sister (schedule and consolidate errands/chores and pay sister for her time) and they both rejected it for their own reasons. Your brother, it seems, isn't forcing sister pay rent. So, legitimately, there is nothing you can do.

The real and only suggestion you should consider is "stay out of it" unless someone asks you for help down the road. You already did all you can do. Don't try to do any more. Let it go. This isn't your battle to fight.

You are right. It's just that then they individually bitch to me (esp my sister) so it is frustrating. But no one wants to change, so...

"We've talked about this and about how you have agency in the problem and in solving it.  You choose not to do so, so I ask that you please not come to me about it. I've offered all the input I have and it seems it doesn't work for you. So I don't want to discuss the mom/sister/brother situation with you anymore as it upsets me and makes me uncomfortable.  On another note, did you see that cute news story about the cat who put out a fire in the family home..." 

They bitch to you because you let them, just as mom and sister take advantage of brother because he lets them, and sister takes advantage of mom because she lets her.  If you don't want to hear about this, tell them that.  Set a boundary, and every. single. time they test it, remind them, "I told you I'm staying out of the situation and don't want to discuss it, remember?  is they anything else you want to talk about?"

You are right. I listen because, I feel bad for them (brother, sister) and feel it's the least I can do (let them vent). So, I will still allow them to bitch, but let them know they have a 2/5 min; after that they need to change subject. I think might be a good approach for any of those long-standing, bitch sessions that esp my sister likes to do (same basic themes, over past 20, 30 years)

[shelivesthedream]

My husband gives me allocated bitching sessions on some topics and I love it. The last one was a colleague I used to work with. I can let rip for fifteen minutes when I come home and have his full attention, then my time's up and he doesn't have to spend all evening hearing "And another thing!"

[fredbear]

Having read all the posts, I see that @Villanelle had the exact same approach.  And @SwordGuy had a good approach as well.  All of our approaches involve setting some hard boundaries. 

...

Here are some I have used:

- on the third complaint about a wife, "Right.  I've heard that from you.  Now what I want to know is what your divorce attorney said.  Get back to me with that."

- on the third complaint about a nuthatch girlfriend, "Done listening.  Suppose we meet at your place at 4 and I'll help you change the locks." 

- on the second request for financial advice,  "A man always gives his best advice first.  You got that and you said, 'Oh, I could never do that.'  You need to specify what my role in this conversation is, or it can't continue."

[partgypsy]

Having read all the posts, I see that @Villanelle had the exact same approach.  And @SwordGuy had a good approach as well.  All of our approaches involve setting some hard boundaries. 

...

Here are some I have used:

- on the third complaint about a wife, "Right.  I've heard that from you.  Now what I want to know is what your divorce attorney said.  Get back to me with that."

- on the third complaint about a nuthatch girlfriend, "Done listening.  Suppose we meet at your place at 4 and I'll help you change the locks." 

- on the second request for financial advice,  "A man always gives his best advice first.  You got that and you said, 'Oh, I could never do that.'  You need to specify what my role in this conversation is, or it can't continue."

I especially love that third retort

[Reynold]

Edit: I see that I use "inheritance tax" as a synonym for "estate tax".  Sorry for any confusion, I'm not sure they mean the same thing in the US. :)

They do mean the same thing here. :)

They are not actually the same thing in the U.S.  The Estate tax is federal and most states follow the same formula and take a piece as well, in 2021 it has an $11.7M exemption, and it is paid by the estate.  Leave anyone, relative, friend, etc. $10M and nobody pays tax on it, leave anyone $15M and there is tax paid by the estate on the amount over $11.7M.  The person inheriting never pays anything.  There are trusts that can be set up to get around this to some extent, but they involve high end estate planning. 

The Inheritance tax exists only in a few states such as New Jersey.  That is a tax paid by the person getting the money, and depends on how much they specifically get, not the size of the total estate, though they do get the money first at least.  In New Jersey the exemption for a non-relative is around $25k, so if  you leave a non-relative $30k, they start paying taxes on anything above that $25k exemption.  Close relatives are exempt from the inheritance tax, so the inheritance tax depends a lot on who you are leaving a bequest to.  I'm not sure what the latest laws are regarding domestic partners, that is also very much state by state. 

Finally, in general in the U.S., you can disinherit anyone you want and make anyone the inheritor to your money and property.  I believe there are even cases of making pets the inheritors of estates.  If you want to disinherit a long time spouse or children, though, you had better have an air tight, witnessed will, and if it is big money there can still be a legal battle.  But anything involving big money in the U.S. usually results in a legal battle. :)

[Mighty Eyebrows]

They are not actually the same thing in the U.S. 

Interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

I am not a USian, but I do have an unhealthy interest in tax systems around the world.

[Capsu78]

They are not actually the same thing in the U.S. 

Interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

I am not a USian, but I do have an unhealthy interest in tax systems around the world.

Re:Tax Systems.   I was told a story by an Italian that the Italiian version of the IRS has an actual Police component in its ranks that have the authority to stop your vehicle.  If you happen to stand out by driving a Ferrari across the border from, say, Switerland they are dressed similar to traffic law enforcement and can pull out their little Stop lollipop and by the time you are pulling out your drivers license, they are running your plates against the tax data base.  "Sir, this expensive vehicle is registered to you, we can see... How can you manage such a vehicle on your reported $13,000 Euro income you have reported for the last 3 years?"

[Mighty Eyebrows]

"How can you manage such a vehicle on your reported $13,000 Euro income you have reported for the last 3 years?"

The CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) has started using neighbourhood land values to target people for audits, if the owners don't have a matching income to afford their $2m house.

See number 8 here:
https://gowlingwlg.com/en/insights-resources/articles/2013/top-ten-cra-audit-flags/

I am not sure how they can sort through all the odd cases, though. Inheritance, job loss, or mustachianism could all throw off the "usual" income/asset balance.

[SwordGuy]

"How can you manage such a vehicle on your reported $13,000 Euro income you have reported for the last 3 years?"

The CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) has started using neighbourhood land values to target people for audits, if the owners don't have a matching income to afford their $2m house.

See number 8 here:
https://gowlingwlg.com/en/insights-resources/articles/2013/top-ten-cra-audit-flags/

I am not sure how they can sort through all the odd cases, though. Inheritance, job loss, or mustachianism could all throw off the "usual" income/asset balance.

In the US, which also got its land system from the UK, the counties has a registrar of deeds and the history of the transactions.   I suspect Canada does also.

It's not usually too hard to see the difference between a purchase and an inheritance or gift.   

Death records of the grantor of the deed could be checked to weed out most inheritances from gifts.

As for income changes for job loss, presumably the revenue service knows the income reported in past years so that wouldn't be too hard to figure out either.

Shucks, you would be surprised at how much info I can get from the registrar of deeds.   I can find out how much your purchase price was, how much the mortgage was for (and thus calculate your down payment).   I know when that transaction happened.   I know when you took out a second mortgage against the property and how much it was for.   I know when you paid off your mortgages.

Since I know when, I can search for average mortgage interest rates for a month before that and using a mortgage calculator estimate your possible P&I payments on your mortgage.    The property tax office will tell me the amount of property tax you're paying.   

As people are added to or subtracted from a deed I can guess there was a divorce or marriage.    Don't think folks usually bother to remove a deceased person from the deed, but if they did, I would know it.

[markbike528CBX]

In the US, which also got its land system from the UK, the counties has a registrar of deeds and the history of the transactions.   I suspect Canada does also.

It's not usually too hard to see the difference between a purchase and an inheritance or gift.   

Death records of the grantor of the deed could be checked to weed out most inheritances from gifts.

As for income changes for job loss, presumably the revenue service knows the income reported in past years so that wouldn't be too hard to figure out either.

Shucks, you would be surprised at how much info I can get from the registrar of deeds.   I can find out how much your purchase price was, how much the mortgage was for (and thus calculate your down payment).   I know when that transaction happened.   I know when you took out a second mortgage against the property and how much it was for.   I know when you paid off your mortgages.

Since I know when, I can search for average mortgage interest rates for a month before that and using a mortgage calculator estimate your possible P&I payments on your mortgage.    The property tax office will tell me the amount of property tax you're paying.   

As people are added to or subtracted from a deed I can guess there was a divorce or marriage.    Don't think folks usually bother to remove a deceased person from the deed, but if they did, I would know it.

To be clear, Swordguy's information extraction is not a superpower as the registrar of deeds (County Auditor or similar) have public, internet searchable databases. 

I used this type of info to start my "History of My House" .  Unfortunately, the US Government owned my house from when it was built in 1944 to 1957 so no tenant records exist for that period.   

[SwordGuy]

In the US, which also got its land system from the UK, the counties has a registrar of deeds and the history of the transactions.   I suspect Canada does also.

It's not usually too hard to see the difference between a purchase and an inheritance or gift.   

Death records of the grantor of the deed could be checked to weed out most inheritances from gifts.

As for income changes for job loss, presumably the revenue service knows the income reported in past years so that wouldn't be too hard to figure out either.

Shucks, you would be surprised at how much info I can get from the registrar of deeds.   I can find out how much your purchase price was, how much the mortgage was for (and thus calculate your down payment).   I know when that transaction happened.   I know when you took out a second mortgage against the property and how much it was for.   I know when you paid off your mortgages.

Since I know when, I can search for average mortgage interest rates for a month before that and using a mortgage calculator estimate your possible P&I payments on your mortgage.    The property tax office will tell me the amount of property tax you're paying.   

As people are added to or subtracted from a deed I can guess there was a divorce or marriage.    Don't think folks usually bother to remove a deceased person from the deed, but if they did, I would know it.

To be clear, Swordguy's information extraction is not a superpower as the registrar of deeds (County Auditor or similar) have public, internet searchable databases. 

Absolutely!   Anyone can do it and now that many counties have online databases, it's even convenient to do so!

[Mighty Eyebrows]

In the US, which also got its land system from the UK, the counties has a registrar of deeds and the history of the transactions.   I suspect Canada does also.

BC uses a Torrens land title system, but not nearly so much information is publicly available.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title
https://ltsa.ca/about-ltsa/#

Charges on title can be searched for a fee, but sale prices and mortgage values are currently not available.

While I don't mind my country's tax man having access to the data, I am happy that it is not publicly available for identity theft by agents sitting in Beijing or St Petersburg.

[Dicey]

In the US, which also got its land system from the UK, the counties has a registrar of deeds and the history of the transactions.   I suspect Canada does also.

BC uses a Torrens land title system, but not nearly so much information is publicly available.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title
https://ltsa.ca/about-ltsa/#

Charges on title can be searched for a fee, but sale prices and mortgage values are currently not available.

While I don't mind my country's tax man having access to the data, I am happy that it is not publicly available for identity theft by agents sitting in Beijing or St Petersburg.

Ha! In my state, Zillow et al provide sale prices and tax history to all comers. I use it for reference it all the time. Heck, Redfin even provides photos from prior listings, which are a ton of (frugal) fun to pore through.

[20957]

Where I am the land records don't go back/aren't digitized (not sure which) before 1920, so lots and lots of houses were "built" in 1920 according to the system. But that actually just means "built in 1920 or earlier", it's a placeholder. I'm always surprised at how many real estate pros don't know this and will just post a house for sale with the wrong data on the listing. Mine is from 1906 (neighbor has the ad from the developer). I wish I could find out more about its early history!

[iris lily]

Where I am the land records don't go back/aren't digitized (not sure which) before 1920, so lots and lots of houses were "built" in 1920 according to the system. But that actually just means "built in 1920 or earlier", it's a placeholder. I'm always surprised at how many real estate pros don't know this and will just post a house for sale with the wrong data on the listing. Mine is from 1906 (neighbor has the ad from the developer). I wish I could find out more about its early history!

That is similar to records for houses in my neighborhood. Most all Reed built in 1885 but there are real life variances.  I think that was an arbitrary date the city assessors office chose for historic records.

[Goldielocks]

"How can you manage such a vehicle on your reported $13,000 Euro income you have reported for the last 3 years?"

The CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) has started using neighbourhood land values to target people for audits, if the owners don't have a matching income to afford their $2m house.

See number 8 here:
https://gowlingwlg.com/en/insights-resources/articles/2013/top-ten-cra-audit-flags/

I am not sure how they can sort through all the odd cases, though. Inheritance, job loss, or mustachianism could all throw off the "usual" income/asset balance.

It's the 80/20 rule, though-- 80% or more of the time, the home was bought with foreign assets and there is foreign income supporting the household.

The taxes at $20,000/yr on a $15k/yr income?  That's a red flag, even if the home is inherited.

It's pretty easy to look into the the 20% cases and realize what you have immediately -- e.g., a senior now retired or a person who used to make a lot and is now on disability, inheritances, etc.   

What they are trying to find -- Wife and kid(s) move to new country to get kids in high school, to live in a nice green area of the world with little pollution, get local graduation diploma and apply to local prestige university as residents.  Get citizenship / passports after about 5 years from the start of this, (security against chaotic political climate at home) meanwhile husband is working overseas, has lots of overseas assets.  So far nothing wrong with this and fully AOK all around as they did all the proper applications. 

BUT
Maybe (likely! 80% rule?) Family does not report family net world income, only Cdn sourced income and therefore receives a lot of subsidies, breaks on taxes, free base healthcare and payouts from the government.   They pay extremely little tax to the country they are living in, and don't really help support the local economy tax-wise other than buying things and driving up home prices.   The father now has moved back to original country, but Canada considers him to be substantially tied to and a deemed resident to Canada because his whole family is permanently residing there, therefore he needs to send in a tax return, too showing his income, taxes paid elsewhere to figure out net taxes owing to Canada.

Family meanwhile living in a $2m home and can easily afford the taxes each year, the nice car(s), etc all on a declared income of $15k for a household of 3 persons.

IMO, everyone who lives in a region should pay for their regional benefits through taxes, according to their actual incomes, up to a maximum.  Libraries, rec centres, roads, parks, schools, public landscaping, healthcare are all heavily subsidized by the government here, through taxes.

This is why I am hugely in favor of sales taxes (consumption taxes excluding essential items) and lower income taxes.  Pay as you go, according to what you can afford to actually spend.  It is an indirect tax on having huge assets, but only if/as you choose to spend.

Monthly sales tax rebates of a set amount per person will reduce the impact of sales taxes lower income situations, contrary to conventional arguments that sales taxes hit lower income people more.

[zolotiyeruki]

IMO, everyone who lives in a region should pay for their regional benefits through taxes, according to their actual incomes, up to a maximum.  Libraries, rec centres, roads, parks, schools, public landscaping, healthcare are all heavily subsidized by the government here, through taxes.

This is why I am hugely in favor of sales taxes (consumption taxes excluding essential items) and lower income taxes.  Pay as you go, according to what you can afford to actually spend.  It is an indirect tax on having huge assets, but only if/as you choose to spend.

Monthly sales tax rebates of a set amount per person will reduce the impact of sales taxes lower income situations, contrary to conventional arguments that sales taxes hit lower income people more.

What you're describing sounds a lot like the FAIRtax.  (That website is a mess, but the short version of the plan is "The only federal tax is a flat sales/consumption tax on everything. And everybody gets a check for $x every year." 

It definitely has its appeal, and I, for one, would not shed a single tear for the leeches at Intuit if their business model were made moot.

[Capsu78]

This story fits into this thread perfectly:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/parenting/my-sisters-one-of-whom-was-a-fortune-500-vp-emptied-my-mother-s-house-and-told-me-to-take-what-was-left/ar-AAKCm91?ocid=msedgdhp

[Dicey]

This story fits into this thread perfectly:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/parenting/my-sisters-one-of-whom-was-a-fortune-500-vp-emptied-my-mother-s-house-and-told-me-to-take-what-was-left/ar-AAKCm91?ocid=msedgdhp

Wise words from Quentin, "As you are aware, our possessions do not define us. Our actions define us. Guard your actions and words as they would guard your mother’s furniture."

[MilesTeg]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

[Imma]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

I'm not American, but in my country (NL) wills certainly have legal standing. Of course, people can contest it and if they do so on valid grounds the end result may be different than what's described in the will but in my country courts seem pretty careful about that. It's not easy to succesfully contest a will.

In my country, wills are only valid if they are written down by a solicitor and registered in a central register for wills. I can imagine that DIY wills can lead to more issues.

[former player]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

I suspect it's not a legal problem it's a people problem.  A legal problem approached with good will all around can be solved at a reasonable cost in people's time, money and emotions.  But if someone wants to make things difficult they can obstruct, they can lie, they can misdirect, they can steal, they can gaslight, they can turn other people against reality and justice and they can make any affordable settlement within a reasonable time scale impossible.    Sadly when they do that they often "win" because the price of fighting them is just too high for any reasonble person to do it.

[DadJokes]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

People can contest the will, but as long as the deceased followed state law in making the will, it will generally hold up in court.

This website notes four areas where a will might be contested:

1. Not signed in accordance with state law 
2. Lacks mental capacity
3. Influenced by others
4. Will acquired by fraud

People can waste the estate's money and contest a will all they want, but unless they can prove any of those things, it's not likely to change anything.

Edited to fix link - I was doing Reddit's formatting.

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

I suspect it's not a legal problem it's a people problem.  A legal problem approached with good will all around can be solved at a reasonable cost in people's time, money and emotions.  But if someone wants to make things difficult they can obstruct, they can lie, they can misdirect, they can steal, they can gaslight, they can turn other people against reality and justice and they can make any affordable settlement within a reasonable time scale impossible.    Sadly when they do that they often "win" because the price of fighting them is just too high for any reasonble person to do it.

Ok, that makes sense. My biggest concern was just that if a will wasn't good enough - then what would be? If the answer is nothing, it's just that people can be terrible to each other and draw out things by being jerks, suing, etc. then there's nothing I can do, so I won't worry about it. Thanks!

[former player]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

People can contest the will, but as long as the deceased followed state law in making the will, it will generally hold up in court.

[This website](https://www.thebalance.com/what-are-the-grounds-for-contesting-a-will-3505208) notes four areas where a will might be contested:

1. Not signed in accordance with state law 
2. Lacks mental capacity
3. Influenced by others
4. Will acquired by fraud

People can waste the estate's money and contest a will all they want, but unless they can prove any of those things, it's not likely to change anything.

And if in the meantime your nearest but not dearest have appropriated or trashed all the property left under the will, with the support of your other family members, what do you do?

[SwordGuy]

And if in the meantime your nearest but not dearest have appropriated or trashed all the property left under the will, with the support of your other family members, what do you do?

If you can prove it, enter a complaint with the police and have them arrested for theft.   No one needs thieves in their life even if they are family.   Actually, especially if they are family.   So burn those bridges and hope they go to jail.

Same with wife beaters or pedophiles.

[Villanelle]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

People can contest the will, but as long as the deceased followed state law in making the will, it will generally hold up in court.

[This website](https://www.thebalance.com/what-are-the-grounds-for-contesting-a-will-3505208) notes four areas where a will might be contested:

1. Not signed in accordance with state law 
2. Lacks mental capacity
3. Influenced by others
4. Will acquired by fraud

People can waste the estate's money and contest a will all they want, but unless they can prove any of those things, it's not likely to change anything.

And if in the meantime your nearest but not dearest have appropriated or trashed all the property left under the will, with the support of your other family members, what do you do?

You do the same thing you'd do if they did that while the person was alive (and against that person's wishes or without your consent).  In many cases, that would mean involving the police.  It doesn't matter, in most senses, whether someone goes in and takes grandma's jewelry and her antique armoire when she's alive or after she has died.  If they aren't legally entitled to those items, it is theft.  They stole from granny, or from granny's estate. 

Now, just as if granny was alive, you have to be able to prove it. 

[MilesTeg]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

I suspect it's not a legal problem it's a people problem.  A legal problem approached with good will all around can be solved at a reasonable cost in people's time, money and emotions.  But if someone wants to make things difficult they can obstruct, they can lie, they can misdirect, they can steal, they can gaslight, they can turn other people against reality and justice and they can make any affordable settlement within a reasonable time scale impossible.    Sadly when they do that they often "win" because the price of fighting them is just too high for any reasonble person to do it.

In trying to settle my father's affairs between my sister and I, we've spent 6 months fighting courts and banks and paying a crap ton of money to a lawyer. The will is very straight forward, done properly according to state law, and there's no disagreement of any kind between my sister and I, yet every step of the way we have had to pay out the nose to get it executed and in one case threaten legal action against banks who refused to hand over money despite a will and a court judgement/order.

The investment accounts and bank accounts that had a beneficiary were in our hands with exactly zero trouble, zero expense and no delay other than filling out paperwork and proving our identities.

Like I said: if you want your heirs to not go through hell and pay an absurd amount of money to inherit your assets, you want beneficiaries and/or a living trust on _everything_. Neither you nor your heirs are served by relying on a will.

[SwordGuy]

Interesting, because I had almost the opposite problem.

I was the executor of my last surviving parent's will.   I hired a lawyer to deal with getting the death certificates and me appointed as the executor by the court.   Cost me a couple hundred dollars.  I could have easily done that myself by driving to the county courthouse where my mom had lived, but that was 6 hours away. 

Once I had those documents I just contacted the relevant institutions and sent them a copy of the death certificate and the letters testamentary (that named me the executor).   With two exceptions, everything was that simple, other than there is no automated answering machine menu option for "Your account holder is dead, I am their legal executor." and sometimes it would take awhile to get a human being on the phone.

The two exceptions were savings bonds and one account I just didn't get to in a timely manner.   I had to get more copies of the letters testamentary with a stamped on date saying they were still in effect for one account.    The only bother on this was that they didn't explain what they wanted clearly and I was ignorant and too busy to deal with it for awhile.

The other was the savings bonds.  We decided to wait a year and a bit for them to mature before cashing them in, but the banks wouldn't cash them in at that point, I had to mail them in to the feds.  (I sent them certified mail, signature required by everyone handling them.)  The feds were the ones that explained what was meant by the other institution, once I understood, I was able to get those funds.

Other than a lot of time on the phone to talk to a human, and even more time to muddle thru the documents to figure out what money was where, the process was simple.

Now, since I was the only beneficiary I didn't have to deal with anyone else and I couldn't steal from myself.   The court has never asked for any documents from me and it's been 6 years.     It's possible they court realized that and saved themselves the bother.  Or it's possible that there just isn't enough supervision.

[lhamo]

Here is a pretty good discussion of where to put your will over on Bogleheads.

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=337890

My recent experience tells me wills aren't worth the paper they are printed on, so you might as well just store them in the circular.

The only way to make your inheritor's life not insane upon your death is to make sure *everything* you own has a beneficiary listed. Your bank accounts, your investments, your house, etc.

OR you need to take the time to put everything you own in a living trust and set the beneficiaries there.

A will is nothing more than a way for a deceased person to tell people what their wishes are, it has no legal standing at all as far as I can tell. It can be completely ignored by the courts and even if they are not you still have to get a lawyer and go through probate (which can be very costly).

Not trying to start an argument here - just genuinely curious. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've never heard of a will being held in such low regard. Are you meaning people can sue and rack up legal fees even with a will? If so, I guess that makes sense - you can sue anything and make a mess of it. If wills truly have "no legal standing" that's kind of an important thing to know.

I suspect it's not a legal problem it's a people problem.  A legal problem approached with good will all around can be solved at a reasonable cost in people's time, money and emotions.  But if someone wants to make things difficult they can obstruct, they can lie, they can misdirect, they can steal, they can gaslight, they can turn other people against reality and justice and they can make any affordable settlement within a reasonable time scale impossible.    Sadly when they do that they often "win" because the price of fighting them is just too high for any reasonble person to do it.

In trying to settle my father's affairs between my sister and I, we've spent 6 months fighting courts and banks and paying a crap ton of money to a lawyer. The will is very straight forward, done properly according to state law, and there's no disagreement of any kind between my sister and I, yet every step of the way we have had to pay out the nose to get it executed and in one case threaten legal action against banks who refused to hand over money despite a will and a court judgement/order.

The investment accounts and bank accounts that had a beneficiary were in our hands with exactly zero trouble, zero expense and no delay other than filling out paperwork and proving our identities.

Like I said: if you want your heirs to not go through hell and pay an absurd amount of money to inherit your assets, you want beneficiaries and/or a living trust on _everything_. Neither you nor your heirs are served by relying on a will.

If you are willing to disclose which state and/or which banks, that might be more helpful.  Certain states have much more complex processes, which may also give the banks more room to play games.

[MilesTeg]

If you are willing to disclose which state and/or which banks, that might be more helpful.  Certain states have much more complex processes, which may also give the banks more room to play games.

Colorado and US Bank.

To be clear, we got it taken care of, but only after threatening the bank manager with legal action. Apparently dispersing money to the executor of the estates with "only court documents and a will" is a "very non-standard practice" according to them. Obviously shady bullshit of course. I don't hold that as a knock against wills, but with us listed as beneficiaries on other accounts the process was pretty much "would you like that as cash, check or money order?" after showing them a death certificate and proof of identity. With investment accounts it was also very straightforward too with only a bit more paperwork due to the need to establish beneficiary accounts, etc.

[AMandM]

I suspect it's not a legal problem it's a people problem. 

I agree. From the opposite side, my grandmother died intestate, leaving me and my sisters as her only living close relatives. Under Ontario law, the estate was to be divided equally among us. Fine by us, and we agreed with each other that we'd reimburse our father for some expenses he had incurred on our grandmother's behalf. We found the process pretty simple and not expensive. One sister was appointed as the agent, got the money from the various banks, and wrote checks to the other two.

[SwordGuy]

If you are willing to disclose which state and/or which banks, that might be more helpful.  Certain states have much more complex processes, which may also give the banks more room to play games.

Colorado and US Bank.

To be clear, we got it taken care of, but only after threatening the bank manager with legal action. Apparently dispersing money to the executor of the estates with "only court documents and a will" is a "very non-standard practice" according to them. Obviously shady bullshit of course. I don't hold that as a knock against wills, but with us listed as beneficiaries on other accounts the process was pretty much "would you like that as cash, check or money order?" after showing them a death certificate and proof of identity. With investment accounts it was also very straightforward too with only a bit more paperwork due to the need to establish beneficiary accounts, etc.

And yet that's exactly what I did as executor with my Letters Testamentary and a Death Certificate.    Not a single concern from any person at multiple organizations that those weren't sufficient documents.

The only pushback I got was that for one account the Letters Testamentary were over a year old when I found that account and they wanted Letters with a later date on them.   Pain in the butt but reasonable.

[Dicey]

If you are willing to disclose which state and/or which banks, that might be more helpful.  Certain states have much more complex processes, which may also give the banks more room to play games.

Colorado and US Bank.

To be clear, we got it taken care of, but only after threatening the bank manager with legal action. Apparently dispersing money to the executor of the estates with "only court documents and a will" is a "very non-standard practice" according to them. Obviously shady bullshit of course. I don't hold that as a knock against wills, but with us listed as beneficiaries on other accounts the process was pretty much "would you like that as cash, check or money order?" after showing them a death certificate and proof of identity. With investment accounts it was also very straightforward too with only a bit more paperwork due to the need to establish beneficiary accounts, etc.

We had trouble with US Bank, too, and my parents had a trust. They had 401ks in four different institutions. We got bullshit from three and cooperation from Fidelity, after I paid a call on them with a CPA friend who used to work for the IRS. Once they cooperated, we moved everything, one by one, to Fidelity. Once that was done, we distributed the funds and called it done. It took over a year. Oh, and Fidelity has made their share of mistakes, so I'm not saying they're perfect, but they did help us settle the estate without the 50% tax haircut the others (including a hired, then fired, attorney) said had to be paid prior to distribution. No, no it did not.

Oh and the most difficult life insurance policy to cash was the smallest one, which netted us each about $150.00. Not kidding.

[PhilB]

If you are willing to disclose which state and/or which banks, that might be more helpful.  Certain states have much more complex processes, which may also give the banks more room to play games.

Colorado and US Bank.

To be clear, we got it taken care of, but only after threatening the bank manager with legal action. Apparently dispersing money to the executor of the estates with "only court documents and a will" is a "very non-standard practice" according to them. Obviously shady bullshit of course. I don't hold that as a knock against wills, but with us listed as beneficiaries on other accounts the process was pretty much "would you like that as cash, check or money order?" after showing them a death certificate and proof of identity. With investment accounts it was also very straightforward too with only a bit more paperwork due to the need to establish beneficiary accounts, etc.

And yet that's exactly what I did as executor with my Letters Testamentary and a Death Certificate.    Not a single concern from any person at multiple organizations that those weren't sufficient documents.

The only pushback I got was that for one account the Letters Testamentary were over a year old when I found that account and they wanted Letters with a later date on them.   Pain in the butt but reasonable.

"I hereby confirm that xyz is still dead"

[dcheesi]

If you are willing to disclose which state and/or which banks, that might be more helpful.  Certain states have much more complex processes, which may also give the banks more room to play games.

Colorado and US Bank.

To be clear, we got it taken care of, but only after threatening the bank manager with legal action. Apparently dispersing money to the executor of the estates with "only court documents and a will" is a "very non-standard practice" according to them. Obviously shady bullshit of course. I don't hold that as a knock against wills, but with us listed as beneficiaries on other accounts the process was pretty much "would you like that as cash, check or money order?" after showing them a death certificate and proof of identity. With investment accounts it was also very straightforward too with only a bit more paperwork due to the need to establish beneficiary accounts, etc.

And yet that's exactly what I did as executor with my Letters Testamentary and a Death Certificate.    Not a single concern from any person at multiple organizations that those weren't sufficient documents.

The only pushback I got was that for one account the Letters Testamentary were over a year old when I found that account and they wanted Letters with a later date on them.   Pain in the butt but reasonable.

"I hereby confirm that xyz is still dead"

I assume the issue is more about confirming that the estate is still active. If you've formally settled the estate, then find new money later on, you may need to re-qualify as executor/admin and re-open the estate/probate.

[SwordGuy]

They wanted to know that I was still the executor, which is not an unreasonable request.

[Car Jack]

DW is going through a fun one for her recently deceased aunt.  You see, the family believed in "Hide everything from the government and lie about it always".  As a result, we have savings bonds in the grandparents' names from as far back as 1943.  Every death omitted the existence of these bonds because....well....you don't tell the government nothin'.  So rather than the aunt dealing with these, DW has to.  This will be extra fun.  First, there does have to be a probate opened for the aunt.  Understandable and of course that costs lawyer time and money.  But because of the family shennanigans, probate has to be re-opened for the grandfather and a probate also has to be opened for the grandmother.  So three times the fun and three times the cost.  It may be worth it as the value today is about $75,000 for all the bonds.  Of course some of those bonds stopped earning interest before Jimmie Carter was elected president.

[Sibley]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

[SwordGuy]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

Some of our best museum holdings of ancient coins and jewelry come from hoards that people lost track of...

[dcheesi]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

"There's always money in the banana stand..."

[Dicey]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

Oof, after FIL died, we had to clean out  both of their homes and move MIL and her pal Al Z. Heimer in with us. We tackled the second home first, beginning with an estate sale. We found a couple thousand in a linen closet as we were preparing for the sale. Then I moved a nightstand and found a pouch of cash tucked underneath. It had ten grand in it. Finally, on Day 2 of the sale, I moved a floor lamp and found $800 underneath it. Grand total was about $13k. Who knows what else we missed?

[SwordGuy]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

Oof, after FIL died, we had to clean out  both of their homes and move MIL and her pal Al Z. Heimer in with us. We tackled the second home first, beginning with an estate sale. We found a couple thousand in a linen closet as we were preparing for the sale. Then I moved a nightstand and found a pouch of cash tucked underneath. It had ten grand in it. Finally, on Day 2 of the sale, I moved a floor lamp and found $800 underneath it. Grand total was about $13k. Who knows what else we missed?

Oh, so you didn't check the spare tire in the car that doesn't run in the garage for kruegerrands?    That's one of many places my wife's aunt put stuff.

[Dicey]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

Oof, after FIL died, we had to clean out  both of their homes and move MIL and her pal Al Z. Heimer in with us. We tackled the second home first, beginning with an estate sale. We found a couple thousand in a linen closet as we were preparing for the sale. Then I moved a nightstand and found a pouch of cash tucked underneath. It had ten grand in it. Finally, on Day 2 of the sale, I moved a floor lamp and found $800 underneath it. Grand total was about $13k. Who knows what else we missed?

Oh, so you didn't check the spare tire in the car that doesn't run in the garage for kruegerrands?    That's one of many places my wife's aunt put stuff.

We've heard that stashing money in light switches was also a popular hiding place, but couldn't be arsed to check them.

[SwordGuy]

We've heard that stashing money in light switches was also a popular hiding place, but couldn't be arsed to check them.

How illuminating!

[Dicey]

We've heard that stashing money in light switches was also a popular hiding place, but couldn't be arsed to check them.

How illuminating!

Or inflammatory ;-)

[Imma]

Not sure what the cause was of that family attitude, but I frequently wonder what the (now dead) people who buried their money, or hid it in mattresses or whatever, would think about the time and effort they have caused their descendants. Or how much got thrown out or lost because no one knew about the thousands stashed in the blue coffee can, amongst the pile of all the coffee cans.

Oof, after FIL died, we had to clean out  both of their homes and move MIL and her pal Al Z. Heimer in with us. We tackled the second home first, beginning with an estate sale. We found a couple thousand in a linen closet as we were preparing for the sale. Then I moved a nightstand and found a pouch of cash tucked underneath. It had ten grand in it. Finally, on Day 2 of the sale, I moved a floor lamp and found $800 underneath it. Grand total was about $13k. Who knows what else we missed?

Oh, so you didn't check the spare tire in the car that doesn't run in the garage for kruegerrands?    That's one of many places my wife's aunt put stuff.

We've heard that stashing money in light switches was also a popular hiding place, but couldn't be arsed to check them.

My greataunt and uncle never threw away any clothing they didn't wear anymore because, you know, WWIII was going to happening and rationing was going to be a thing again and they would still have their worn-out, moth infested clothing from 1965. Well, they always told they hid "the money" in the lining of the coats in the attic. We found a rail in the attic with 30 coats, cut open the lining of every single one of them... and didn't find a cent.