Help with inheritence... sibling relationship not good

bobby21

Hi there,

I apologise in advance if this is the wrong section to post in, or not really something this forum deals with, but I have been searching the web for hours and I need some input from someone in the know.

This is a bit of a complicated situation, so I will do my best to explain using fictitious names.


Elderly mother (Jane) is an only parent of 2 children (the father has already passed away). One of the children (Sue) has a partner and a baby. The other (Jack) does not have children yet. Sue and Jack do not live at home with their mother, they both live elsewhere with their partners.

Sue uses the baby as leverage for financial aid / emotional blackmail and in fact half of Jane's private pension goes to Sue every month for various things (phone/rent/food/car).

As far as Jack is aware, Jane's estate and contents are to be split equally between the siblings, but he is HIGHLY concerned that not only is Sue bleeding Jane dry, but also that she will try and take advantage of him when Jane is gone. Jack suspects Sue will try and take valuable things from the house without giving a fair share, or will try to live in the house instead of selling because she has a young child.

Sue is a bit of a loose canon and is more likely to shout and scream in Jack's face than talking things out sensibly so this is not an option. Sue's partner is also aggressive and has been aggressive towards Jack and his partner in the past, so not only does Jack's partner not want to be present for any 'talks' but it is very likely that Sue's partner will always be around so there is not opportunity to talk alone.


What rights does Jack have? Does he have the right to force sale? Does he have the right to be present when Sue is at the property so that valuables do not go missing? If Jack can show a paper trail of monies going from Jane to Sue's accounts for months/years does this hold any weight? What are the options here?


Any help / input on this situation would be very much appreciated, as we would like to be as prepared as possible.

sulkisu

bobby21 wrote: »

Hi there,

I apologise in advance if this is the wrong section to post in, or not really something this forum deals with, but I have been searching the web for hours and I need some input from someone in the know.

This is a bit of a complicated situation, so I will do my best to explain using fictitious names.


Elderly mother (Jane) is an only parent of 2 children (the father has already passed away). One of the children (Sue) has a partner and a baby. The other (Jack) does not have children yet. Sue and Jack do not live at home with their mother, they both live elsewhere with their partners.

Sue uses the baby as leverage for financial aid / emotional blackmail and in fact half of Jane's private pension goes to Sue every month for various things (phone/rent/food/car).

As far as Jack is aware, Jane's estate and contents are to be split equally between the siblings, but he is HIGHLY concerned that not only is Sue bleeding Jane dry, but also that she will try and take advantage of him when Jane is gone. Jack suspects Sue will try and take valuable things from the house without giving a fair share, or will try to live in the house instead of selling because she has a young child.

Sue is a bit of a loose canon and is more likely to shout and scream in Jack's face than talking things out sensibly so this is not an option. Sue's partner is also aggressive and has been aggressive towards Jack and his partner in the past, so not only does Jack's partner not want to be present for any 'talks' but it is very likely that Sue's partner will always be around so there is not opportunity to talk alone.


What rights does Jack have? Does he have the right to force sale? Does he have the right to be present when Sue is at the property so that valuables do not go missing? If Jack can show a paper trail of monies going from Jane to Sue's accounts for months/years does this hold any weight? What are the options here?


Any help / input on this situation would be very much appreciated, as we would like to be as prepared as possible.

What Jane chooses to spend her money on is entirely up to her. If she wants to pay her daughters bills/give her cash/buy food, she is free to do so - frankly it is none of Jack's business (sorry to be blunt). He has no right to his mothers money. There is no suggestion in the post that his mother is incapable of managing her own affairs or money, so even though he might feel aggrieved, that alone does not give him a cause of action.

You mention 'talks', but it is unclear who Jack wants to talk to or talk about. At this point in time, while his mother is still alive, perhaps he needs to discuss the matter with her as she will ultimately decide who she wants to give her money to.

bobby21

Ok, forget about the money given to Jane while Cath is alive. Jack understands that it is Cath's money to do with as she will, what he is far more concerned about is Sue taking advantage of the situation after Cath is gone.

By talks, I mean Sue and Jack talking and coming to an amicable agreement with regards to what is split between who.

mountainofdebt

to be honest I would be advising Jane to get a firm of solicitors to deal with the estate WHEN THE TIME COMES - and to leave it all to the cats/dogs home.

bobby21

Great. Thanks very much for the help. I thought this would be a place to get helpful advice but I guess I was wrong.

Mojisola

sulkisu wrote: »

What Jane chooses to spend her money on is entirely up to her. If she wants to pay her daughters bills/give her cash/buy food, she is free to do so - frankly it is none of Jack's business (sorry to be blunt).

He has no right to his mothers money. There is no suggestion in the post that his mother is incapable of managing her own affairs or money, so even though he might feel aggrieved, that alone does not give him a cause of action.

There would be no need for the organisations that deal with elder abuse (which includes financial) if this were the case.

It may be that Jane is quite happy handing over her money every month. It may be that her daughter is a nasty, manipulative individual who knows how to con her mother.

bobby - google "elder financial abuse" and get some advice from the experts.

duchy

I think Jack is assumed to be seeing his Mum as a future lump sum rather than his loved parent.

Jack has no rights to his mother's money she could write a will leaving the money entirely to theother sibling, in trust for any grandchildren ....or indeed to the cats home. If however as he seems to believe the estate is left jointly to the siblings who obviously don't get on-perhaps he should talk to his mother about those concerns and ask her to nominate an unbiased executor rather than assume the squabbling siblings can act like grown ups settling the estate.

thorsoak

bobby you have been given excellent advice so far - it's just that it isn't what you wanted to hear!

As has been said, Cath/Jane (you seem to have changed the names) has every right to do what she wants with her money whilst she is alive - and, should she choose to ignore both her children in her will and bequeath everything to the local cats' home, then she is equally entitled so to do.

All you can do is to suggest to Cath/Jane that she goes to a local solicitor and has a will drawn up TO INDICATE HER WISHES - and even appoint them to be executors to deal with the whole estate.

mountainofdebt

bobby21 wrote: »

Great. Thanks very much for the help. I thought this would be a place to get helpful advice but I guess I was wrong.

On the basis you're referring your comment to me well I'm sorry you were offended but Jane (from the sounds of it) isn't even dead yet and yet advice is being asked about rights etc.

sulkisu

bobby21 wrote: »

Ok, forget about the money given to Jane while Cath is alive. Jack understands that it is Cath's money to do with as she will, what he is far more concerned about is Sue taking advantage of the situation after Cath is gone.

By talks, I mean Sue and Jack talking and coming to an amicable agreement with regards to what is split between who.

I think you are missing the point. Who gets what will depend on who the mother decides to give/leave it to. It is not up to the children to decide this- therefore discussing how you will split everything is pointless.

You are annoyed that you are not getting helpful advice, when you mean is that posters are not saying what you want to hear. It is not up to the children it is up to their mother. Presumably she will write a will and that will determine what the children get (if anything). If she has not written a will, the best thing that you can both do is ensue that she does.

sulkisu

Mojisola wrote: »

There would be no need for the organisations that deal with elder abuse (which includes financial) if this were the case.

It may be that Jane is quite happy handing over her money every month. It may be that her daughter is a nasty, manipulative individual who knows how to con her mother.

bobby - google "elder financial abuse" and get some advice from the experts.

If what were the case?

I didn't say that abuse does not happen. I said that he hasn't suggested that was the case in his post.

OP isn't saying 'Jack is concerned about his mother's welfare'. In fact the mothers welfare and wellbeing has not even been mentioned. He said 'Jack is concerned that he might not get a fair share of his mothers' property'. There's a difference.