Parents spent my inheritance...

G_M

pollyannaL wrote: »

First things first, i need to get a copy of the will. I've never seen it. I know it was written that grandkids had a share of the deceased's house sale.
.

In case you are not aware, once Probate is granted, all wills are publicly available.

Send £10 to

https://www.gov.uk/search-will-probate

AdrianC

pollyannaL wrote: »

First things first, i need to get a copy of the will. I've never seen it. I know it was written that grandkids had a share of the deceased's house sale.

OK, so as well as the will, you'll need to find out the sale price of the house. That's not hard, assuming it was a straightforward sale that was recorded by the Land Registry - https://nethouseprices.com/ and plenty of similar sites allow you to go back about 20 years (you may need to use the advanced search to increase the date range.

I would love to answer all your Qs, but i really don't know enough (yes, that is my fault).

No "fault" on your part - you were tucked up like a kipper at the time. You now know enough to know what you need to know. You've moved from the unknown-unknowns to the known-unknowns, an' all that...

my parents have now closed the conversation, and do not allow me to speak about it. think they are embarrassed and uncomfortable.

Yes, I flippin' well bet they are...

csgohan4

Op your parents are still treating you like a baby and 'not allowing you to speak' about the topic lol.


I think they burned their bridges a long time when they decided greed was better having than their own blood.


Sue them for what your entitled too. You will make enemies but you know the truth

moneyistooshorttomention

Hopefully it won't come to a case of suing them - fingers crossed.

They are OP's parents - though they seem to have forgotten the full definition of what constitutes "parental duties".:cool:

It seems quite clear that OP probably can't rely on any helping hand with sorting this out from Sister. I don't know about Brother - he may be more of a possibility - as he had the sense at the outset to make sure the parents couldnt do this to him.

The parents have probably managed to convince themselves in their own little minds that OP really will get their money back eventually and are totally ignoring the facts:

- its' OP's money and they had no right to borrow it without her full/willing consent. Yep...I expect they are telling themselves they've "borrowed" it. They may well genuinely expect to pay it back at some point. That doesn't make it correct that they did that.

- they are ignoring the practicalities of the Council may grab the money tied-up in their home for care home fees somewhere along the line and just how would the Council differentiate between their money and OP's money? Answer - they probably wouldn't and would just grab the lot.

- they are ignoring the fact that OP (and sister) would be due for a proportionately bigger share of the equity tied-up in the house than her brother (ie to get their money back first and then the balance gets split as "inheritance").

I think it's worth someone "authoritative" that they will/might listen to trying to explain the basic "facts of life" to these parents first. At the moment - it sounds like those parents are trying to act like frightened children burying their heads in the sand and, quite possibly, don't see themselves as having stolen OP's money (even though they have in actual fact).

Add that it's the norm for inheritance to go to the "next generation down" and not "2 generations down" - as this part of Gran's inheritance has done. Gran really should have left this more "conventionally" (ie to that next generation down - meaning the parents). Gran didn't think that through as to what problems leaving it 2 generations down (when the higher generation is still struggling financially) might cause.

Is there some other relative (eg aunt or uncle) that parents will listen to - as they sympathetically agree that the inheritance should have gone just one generation down, but it has leapt a generation and gone down two generations. Followed by saying "Well Gran has basically made a mistake here - but it was her money - so she had the right to make that decision. Now what are we going to do about this to ensure that both generations are as 'sorted out' financially as possible and things are done fairly?"

I do have sympathies with the parents - as they think "Why hasn't the norm been observed as to where the inheritance goes? It should have been ours - as we are the 'children' - and not leapt past us to our own children". Easier to cope with an inheritance "shooting past one's nose" and going to someone less "appropriate" for it if one is financially sorted out oneself. Gran seems to have ignored the fact that many "baby boomers" (and that obviously includes these parents) still aren't financially straight yet and do actually need inheritances to become so.

In OP's position I think I would probably go for sympathising with my parents that it hadn't been left to them/agree it would have been more appropriate to leave it to them and I could see they needed the money BUT say that it needed to be very clear/down in writing/signed/witnessed by solicitor/etc/etc - that I had a charge on their house (as well as my share of that inheritance from them) and my money would be paid to me first come their death or the sale of their house.

Not forgetting it looks like that will have to be a joint charge - as it sounds like Sister's share of Gran's inheritance is also tied-up in that house.

EXAMPLE:
House worth £300,000.
OP owns a percentage of the house that currently (2016) equates to £100,000.
Sister is the same
Brother doesn't own any of the house.

House sold and the equity goes:
- firstly to give OP and Sister their £100,000 each back

Then:

- There is £100,000 left and that is the "inheritance" from the parents to their 3 children and that part gets split 3 ways between them (assuming it's still safely there - and not grabbed by care home fees).

That seems to be the fairest way to deal with the fact that the parents "should" have had Gran's inheritance left to them BUT their "children" had it left to them instead. It will mean waiting however-many years for OP and sister to get their money (ie because of waiting for the house to be sold on the parents death) - but they will have it eventually (rather than Brother or State getting it) and they can manage meanwhile (as they are okay for owning houses themselves).

marksoton

Jesus Money, that reads like War and Peace!

moneyistooshorttomention

Yeh - I know....:rotfl:

But I thought it best to explain how the parents are probably thinking/what the societal norms are re inheritances and come up with what I think is the best solution all round to sort this out.

I've just seen this happen to a friend of mine....and she is having to share her inheritance with her own children because of Gran's wishes - and she needs the money herself. Meanwhile - her children are professionals and one of them is so high-flying that you will have heard of his last employer (who he has just been poached from - with a wad of money waved under his nose).

AdrianC

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Add that it's the norm for inheritance to go to the "next generation down" and not "2 generations down" - as this part of Gran's inheritance has done. Gran really should have left this more "conventionally" (ie to that next generation down - meaning the parents). Gran didn't think that through as to what problems leaving it 2 generations down (when the higher generation is still struggling financially) might cause.

Gran can leave her money to whoever she flippin' pleases. Gran did nothing wrong at all. As soon as you start to suggest she did, you're tacitly giving the parents permission to view the money as "rightfully" theirs.

moneyistooshorttomention

Just explaining how the parents are probably thinking.

It is hard for "baby boomers" to watch this happening to them. Hence I'm trying to figure out "best solution" for all concerned. Neither generation would come off well out of it if there was a court case - money will be lost all round and they'd probably never speak again.

This way should avoid that.

seven-day-weekend

If the OP has been left the money in the will, the parents should not have 'borrowed' it without the OP's consent. (I believe that is called stealing). End of. I don't care how they 'see' it, they are wrong. The Gran had a perfect right to leave her assets as she pleased.

They should pay it back instantly., and raise the money however they can.

davidmcn

AdrianC wrote: »

Gran can leave her money to whoever she flippin' pleases. Gran did nothing wrong at all.

And it's pretty normal and understandable why testators might want to skip a generation - often these days people die in their 80s/90s, by which time the "children" already have all the money they need (may even be retired themselves), whereas it's the grandchildren who are more likely to need the cash.