Who pays the bills?

mrcow

Paradise_Found wrote: »

I too would have slagged off the OP (i.e. me!) for:

a) getting too involved in someone else's problems

b) taking the moral high ground

c) thinking that lack of fairness = injustice

So I apologise for my pig-headedness, but hopefully,
people at least understand that until something like
this happens to you, it's not easy to realise how
this 'injustice reflex" just takes over...

You are not being pig headed at all.

You're trying to help your parents out in what has become an extremely stressful situation for them at a time when they are grieving the loss of a parent.

I hope that you have definitely decided against wrting the letter to your uncle now though, I think it would probably end up stressing your parents out even more. I also don't think that you are being judged too harshly here. And I certainly hope that you stick around, carry on posting and get the help you need from here.

Often it's easy to get the wrong end of the stick from one or two line comments from strangers on an internet foum. It can sometimes appear that someone is having a knock, when all they are really trying to do is show you that there is always another side to the story (one that perhaps hadn't been thought of before).

One thing I can guarantee.....if you do carry on being an active poster as opposed to a lurker.....you will save more money that way It's very addictive.

paddy's_mum

Paradise Found - it is easy and so very human to project one's personal feelings onto a situation that is actually, by law, completely cut and dried and subject to alteration in only a very few, highly complicated cases.

Whatever your feelings about your grandfather's conduct or your uncle's seemingly callous behaviour, in law there is very little you can do. During this thread, several people have tried to point that out to you but you have come back with even more comments of unfairness and outrage. They are not having a go at you in any way so far as I can see or read it, just trying to tell it like it is.

For what it may be worth to you, here is my two pennies worth. I do not expect for one moment that your father will end up having to pay out any of his own money in order to settle his late father's bills. The law simply does not work like that.

It may well be that Uncle walks away with more than you think he is "morally eligible" for but the person to blame for that is the will maker. Not your Uncle, not the solicitor, not the laws on inheritance. I appreciate that you have strong feelings of resentment that your parents have not been lovingly repaid for their years of care, but that is not your problem and does not reflect what must happen next.

Can you not find a way to put the animosity aside and deal with all this in a much more stone-like way? It surely cannot be helping your parents that you are getting as wound up as them when what they almost certainly need at the moment is a voice of calm reason and logical explanation?

I also think that you need to be very careful indeed that your anger does not lead you along any path that will induce you to start proceedings to challenge the will. That is a long and very expensive path and should you lose the court case, that will be a cost laid directly at your father's door.

In the short term, you need to speak to a solicitor and also find out exactly what the terms of the will are. Until you know for sure, you (and we) are dealing with 'maybe' and 'perhaps' and uncertainty will not help you to sort all this out, as clearly, neither will starting off with a hostile attitude towards your Uncle, however unfair the terms of the will may seem to you, your parents or us.

May I also add that it crossed my mind to ask when the will was made? Could it have been that at the time, the house was worth £x and the savings too were worth £x, but that property has appreciated since in leaps and bounds and that grandfather used part of the savings simply to live? That sounds far more likely to me than any idea of primogeniture (first born) and would explain why there is such a gulf in the inheritance of each of the sons. Unless you have valid reason to suspect blatant favouritism, might it be better for the emotional health of both you and your parents to just accept that grandpa was a very old man whose memory and thinking were not what they once were?

I do sympathise with your feelings but frankly, at this point, I cannot see that you have anything to gain by being so outraged but a lot to lose if you cannot get past the upset and work calmly for the most clean cut and lawful outcome. Good luck.

Paradise_Found

paddy's_mum wrote: »

I do sympathise with your feelings but frankly, at this point, I cannot see that you have anything to gain by being so outraged but a lot to lose if you cannot get past the upset and work calmly for the most clean cut and lawful outcome. Good luck.

That for your (and previous) comments.

Of course, you are completely correct - I need to sit on my hands
and do a few deep breathing excersices!!


It's just amazing that a fortnight ago, I would have been amongst
those who would have told the 'fathers for justice' protesters to
"get over it - protesting won't change the law", and now I find
myself protesting (albeit on an internet forum rather than a rooftop)
about an equally unchanagable law!

Why do people like me behave in such a 'David and Goliath' way when
faced with situations they haven't got a hope in hell of changing?


MARK

ceridwen

Because you're human in a word - and it aint fair. Unfortunately that came with the territory the day we were born on Planet Earth - life here just isnt fair.

I think that could be a point though - ie the point made by the previous "poster" - the one that said maybe the savings and the house were worth the same amount at the time your grandfather made out his will. I dont know if that is the case or no - but it is a possibility. I dont know how farsighted/intelligent your grandfather was - I know I would personally have said the house and savings are to be added together and split 50/50 if I were your grandfather - but (at the risk of sounding egotistical) I am both farsighted and intelligent. Many people arent. I can see that houses change in value and savings might get used up in the future - but some people couldnt. Only you know what your grandfather was like and what the chances are that that scenario is a likely one. Thats not an easy one - I can only speak for my two relatives I know closely - my father is intelligent and farsighted (so he would realise what might happen to the relative value of the house and savings). My mother, on the other hand, might not realise this. People vary - and most people dont want to think too far ahead into the future - and its understandable as to why - because its very scary to do so. So it is possible that your grandfather might actually have been fair in the way he worked things out in the first place - rather than thinking in a way that was already outdated at the time or being deliberately unfair. He might actually have been fair in the first place - but circumstances changed in a way he didnt anticipate. So - dont get upset with him for being unfair - he might honestly not have realised he was being so.

Errata

Have you considered there may be a very good reason the will was written in the way it was? Something known to your grandad and your uncle but not known by anyone else?
If the will was written some years ago, there has been plenty of time to rewrite it in the light of rising property values, but this didn't happen. There may be a good reason for this which you and your parents are unaware of.
A great many families have secrets known to some but not all of the family members, and sometimes they influence the way an estate is divided up.

Paradise_Found

Errata wrote: »

Have you considered there may be a very good reason the will was written in the way it was?

No, but it was written before my grandad became too frail to
look after himself and required regular hospital treatment/visits.

I'm pretty sure that is why it was so seemingly unfair,
rather than any sinster family secret.

A great many families have secrets known to some but not all of the family members, and sometimes they influence the way an estate is divided up.

I was talking about this to my wife last night and she said that
it would be so much fairer to all concerned if the law was changed
so that if any will is not divided equally, there must be an
accompanying letter (also signed and witnessed) to explain why.

No accompanying letter = will becomes invalid and estate is divided equally

This seems extremely fair, and would mean that the family members
who lose out from an unfair will at least know why they were disliked,
so don't spend the rest of their lives wondering what they did wrong?


What do others think?


MARK

Errata

My stepdad is in a care home. I make sure everything is ok, look after his bills, visit him every other day. His son sees him twice a year for a couple of hours and that's it. If he leaves what money he has left to his son THAT'S HIS BUSINESS, NOT MINE.
Just as my will will be my business and if I want to leave the lot to the BNP that's MY CHOICE.

Unless someone is mentally frail and incapable of writing a new will a solicitor will do a domiciliary visit and amend/update/write a new will.

Paradise_Found

Errata wrote: »

My stepdad is in a care home. I make sure everything is ok, look after his bills, visit him every other day. His son sees him twice a year for a couple of hours and that's it. If he leaves what money he has left to his son THAT'S HIS BUSINESS, NOT MINE.

If that's how you feel, then you are almost saintly in your selflessness
and I applaud you.

However, most people are only human, and would feel that to
be "cut out" of a parent's will without warning and/or just cause
is a betrayal of their own love and trust, and would spend many
years (perhaps the rest of their lives) wondering what they had
done to deserve such treatment...

Just as my will will be my business and if I want to leave the lot to the BNP that's MY CHOICE.

Of course - but to do so without letting your dependants know,
and then expecting them to look after you in your old age is an
extremely mean and cynical thing to do in my book... :rolleyes:

However, if you tell them that your are leaving your money to the BNP,
and they are still happy to look after you, out of love, that is their
(informed) choice.


Sorry if the above offends anyone, but I was brought up on the
understanding that family members should never lie or keep secrets
from each other under any circumatances, and I have kept to that rule
all my life; and even though my truefulness has caused a number of
painful arguments over the years, I'm still sure that keeping secrets
from my wife/parents would have been far, far worse.

Interesting discussion, this!


MARK

bandraoi

The family secret is one thing I had thought of in this situation. It is possible that your grandfather left the house to your uncle as some sort of apology for something in the past. It also fits with your uncle avoiding your grandfather for so many years.

As for providing explanations and not having family secrets, some situations hurt too many people to explain. Sometimes skeletons are best in cupboards, even if it hurts alot when they're there. It may also not be the deceased's secret to tell.

ceridwen

Paradise_Found wrote: »

I was talking about this to my wife last night and she said that
it would be so much fairer to all concerned if the law was changed
so that if any will is not divided equally, there must be an
accompanying letter (also signed and witnessed) to explain why.

No accompanying letter = will becomes invalid and estate is divided equally

This seems extremely fair, and would mean that the family members
who lose out from an unfair will at least know why they were disliked,
so don't spend the rest of their lives wondering what they did wrong?


What do others think?


MARK

Not an easy one that....I see your point...but, on thinking about it, I dont know whether I'd agree. I could just see letters happening along the lines of "I left it all to child 1 - just because they were my favourite (ie the same sort of person as myself)". In my own case - as a single childless person I wont be leaving my house to anyone I know personally - though I have younger relatives - so mine would be "Its not that I think you're so awful personally - but I've chosen to leave it to a good cause instead". I am leaving mine to good causes when I die and would hate to think my younger relatives might start going off on one about it - its MY money, so I will do what I MYSELF choose with it. I slogged hard enough for it - so I have the disposing of it. In my case this is because I dont particularly care one way or the other whether I have younger relatives or no. It wasnt my choosing to do so - so I dont concern myself with them. My money will go to good causes - because to date I have always been low-paid thus far and cant see any sign of that changing (darn it!) - so I've barely been able to give anything at all to these causes in my life (as I've needed every penny I've earned for myself) - but, once I no longer need my house and whatever savings I manage to get - then I might as well give them to these causes I support. It will be a sort of "recompense" for all the money I intended to give them whilst alive - but couldnt afford it due to no choice or fault of my own (I just couldnt get a decently-paid job/had all the extra expenses involved in being single/had all the extra expenses involved in living in a dear area). Whew! - Thank goodness I'm good with money - with the "Terrible Three" to cope with I mentioned.