What is fair when dividing your estate within a step-family?

tamlem

lostinrates wrote: »

I can understand this difficulty with half siblings. I have a half sister, much older, and we have all talked quite openly about what would make us comfortable with the will. As far as my father is concerned he married a woman who was a mother, albeit the mother of an adult, and that my sister is his step-dauhter, and the word daughter is important. Therefore a suggestion was made of half and half division of funds and stuff. But there is another factor, that is that my half sister has children while I do not. I am quite sure to have smething of sentiment and indeed of worth would mean a lot to those children, and I am quite content that this should mean I end up with less than half. Quite frankly, I hope they spend it all on themselves and have nothing to leave, and if they do leave very little then I'm happy for the rest of the family to have it: my personal circumstances are better. However, although dificult to discuss I'm glad that we were able to talk about it in advance. It gave me the opportunity to show my parents I thought they were right, and also to feel loved by my father and to have him explain his reasoning and commitment to both daughter and step daughter.

I also think your sentiments are admirable.

Just checking (because its probably me being daft!:o ) is your sister your half sister, as you stated at the beginning, or stepsister? I guess that would make a difference to how some people would make decisions regarding their estate?

NB. Have reread and now see, she is your half sister because you have the same mother, but your fathers step daughter. See- I told you it would be me being daft!!

berts_mrs

Just for the record it is not MY choice, it is his. I left the decision to him. All I was bothered about was being able to live in the house I have worked hard to pay for after he dies.

Of course none of this is her fault and it is unfortunate that the government/CSA of this country do in fact treat one family as more important than the other.

lostinrates

tamlem wrote: »

I also think your sentiments are admirable.

Just checking (because its probably me being daft!:o ) is your sister your half sister, as you stated at the beginning, or stepsister? I guess that would make a difference to how some people would make decisions regarding their estate?

My sister is my half sister, and therefore my father's step daughter. I don't think it would make a difference the other way round. We're both our parent's children.

lostinrates

silvercar wrote: »

You have a very generous nature.:T

Thank you: I think its because while I really like what money can buy, I also really like what it can't. You can't buy morality. But you can work for it.

margaretclare

Isn't this a difficult problem, one that exercises an awful lot of people and one which will become increasingly common with more and more second and even third families as well as the first families. It has also become more common of recent years since more people have 'something to leave' than used to be the case, and in particular, the crazy and unforeseen skyrocketing house values in the past few years.

I too shuddered at the very attitude that a daughter has 'had her share' just by virtue of the amount spent on her upbringing. She didn't ask to be born, and all of us will have had money spent on our care and upbringing in our immature years. We didn't ask for that.

About what is 'fair', I've said before that DH and I leave all that remains when the second of us dies, to 5 grandchildren, 3 of mine and 2 of his. His son and daughter, and my daughter, are well-established and need nothing. None of them will want this property anyway - it's at the wrong end of the country. But about the 5 grandchildren - all of them are likely to be in varying different circumstances by the time they come to inherit. So what is 'fair' - is it based on 'need', is it who their parents were depending on which of us they ultimately inherit from, is it the ones who kept in touch with us more than others? For example, one of them lives in a council flat and has experienced both joblessness and homelessness. She's doing all right by her own efforts but I have helped her out from time to time. Another one goes to a private girls' high school and is a talented musician. Will those two 'need' the same amount? And what about the other 3?

I cannot go down that route. All 5 of them will get an equal share. What their 'need' is and what their 'entitlement', it has to stop somewhere.

berts_mrs

Ok I will try and explain a little better and hopefully you will be able to understand his point of view and not think he's completely heartless, then I'm going away!

When he got divorced their house was sold, she took the capital and everything from the house. He then gave her the rest of the money she need in order to buy them a home to live in leaving himself massively in debt. He also pays a considerable amount of CSA every week. (He's not moaning about this by the way). When we bought our house the debt was added to our mortgage to make it more manageable. Therefore in a roundabout way I'm paying for this too (hence my nasty comment about the debt).

His view is that this home should be left to his daughter and this will be her share, anything we have together should be for us and our children. Of course it is up to her mother what she does with the house after her death as it is hers.

I'm sorry if some of you don't like his choice but at the end of the day they are his wishes, I am not going to try and change his mind.

moggylover

berts_mrs wrote: »

Ok I will try and explain a little better and hopefully you will be able to understand his point of view and not think he's completely heartless, then I'm going away!

When he got divorced their house was sold, she took the capital and everything from the house. He then gave her the rest of the money she need in order to buy them a home to live in leaving himself massively in debt. He also pays a considerable amount of CSA every week. (He's not moaning about this by the way). When we bought our house the debt was added to our mortgage to make it more manageable. Therefore in a roundabout way I'm paying for this too (hence my nasty comment about the debt).

His view is that this home should be left to his daughter and this will be her share, anything we have together should be for us and our children. Of course it is up to her mother what she does with the house after her death as it is hers.

I'm sorry if some of you don't like his choice but at the end of the day they are his wishes, I am not going to try and change his mind.

Explained like that - the fact that he has already provided a house for his daughter, and that she should probably inherit that if her mother does not waste it, it makes it more palatable. However, as I previously pointed out, should you decide to go ahead and have a family you will be able to apply to have CSA payments altered I believe (although I have no experience of this) so perhaps you both need to let go of the apparent (and I admit that is an assumption made on your previous posts so apologise if it is not so) bitterness and get on with life and try not to hold it against the daughter.

lostinrates

moggylover wrote: »

Explained like that - the fact that he has already provided a house for his daughter, and that she should probably inherit that if her mother does not waste it, it makes it more palatable. However, as I previously pointed out, should you decide to go ahead and have a family you will be able to apply to have CSA payments altered I believe (although I have no experience of this) so perhaps you both need to let go of the apparent (and I admit that is an assumption made on your previous posts so apologise if it is not so) bitterness and get on with life and try not to hold it against the daughter.

I disagree. There is no provision for his daughter under this arrangement should her mother remarry, that I can see. Furthermore, extra to the money there is the issue of being remembered. I've afraid I'm still left cold.

moggylover

lostinrates wrote: »

I disagree. There is no provision for his daughter under this arrangement should her mother remarry, that I can see. Furthermore, extra to the money there is the issue of being remembered. I've afraid I'm still left cold.

So am I, but I can understand that he feels he has provided well for them: and hopefully the mother will ensure that that provision is passed to her daughter. I don't "like" the attitude any more than I previously did, personally I would want to love and accept his daughter as if she were my own in those circumstances, but I think I can understand where it is coming from.

Mojisola

lostinrates wrote: »

I disagree. There is no provision for his daughter under this arrangement should her mother remarry, that I can see.

Surely that's the mother's responsibility - the daughter does have two parents.