Potential dispute over car not mentioned in father's will

Malthusian

BobRoberts wrote: »

Yes, you could put it like that. If you completely ignore practicality, common sense, and my Father's wishes.

Your father's wishes were for his wife to inherit the car, as expressed in his Will. If he wished you to have it his Will would have left it to you. Words are wind.

As for practicality and common sense, the fact that this is causing you so much aggro with your mother and the fact that nobody agrees with you that it is her fault suggests that your actions are neither practical nor common sense.

I don't know - I could perhaps arrange to have her phone number changed so that the scammers could no contact her. Would that be acceptable?

As you have no authority over her telephone account you would need to suggest to her that she changes it. Or I suppose you could just steal her handset.

The point I am trying to make is to counter this suggestion that one should only look out for a parent, so long as they have nothing to gain from it.

You are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. The suggestion people are making is that it is not OK to gain at other people's expense simply because you have come up with a reason why it might be in their interests. If it is their property it is their decision to make.

BobRoberts

Malthusian wrote: »

Your father's wishes were for his wife to inherit the car, as expressed in his Will. If he wished you to have it his Will would have left it to you. Words are wind.

Only because it didn't occur to him to specify it in the will. Otherwise he wouldn't have said as much to me. When he was seriously ill, practical stuff like that wasn't top of his mind. (In fact, practical stuff like that was rarely top of his mind)

As for practicality and common sense, the fact that this is causing you so much aggro with your mother and the fact that nobody agrees with you that it is her fault suggests that your actions are neither practical nor common sense.

Actually, everyone who knows me, my parents, and the circumstances absolutely does agree with me. Its only people posting here who don't really know me, my parents, or the circumstances who disagree.

As you have no authority over her telephone account you would need to suggest to her that she changes it. Or I suppose you could just steal her handset.

It was a hypothetical scenario to make a point.

You are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. The suggestion people are making is that it is not OK to gain at other people's expense simply because you have come up with a reason why it might be in their interests. If it is their property it is their decision to make.

Sure - in the absolute letter of the law. That goes back to my original question, which was really about whether there is any sort of process to overturn that.

To be honest - the repeated mantra from people who don't even know me that I'm just selfish and acting shamelessly has felt a gross misrepresentation of the situation.

leespot

The situation is you won't give your mother her car back even though she has asked for it. Your rationale for keeping it is neither here nor there. She owns it you don't.

Yorkshireman99

BobRoberts wrote: »

Only because it didn't occur to him to specify it in the will. Otherwise he wouldn't have said as much to me. When he was seriously ill, practical stuff like that wasn't top of his mind. (In fact, practical stuff like that was rarely top of his mind)



Actually, everyone who knows me, my parents, and the circumstances absolutely does agree with me. Its only people posting here who don't really know me, my parents, or the circumstances who disagree.



It was a hypothetical scenario to make a point.



Sure - in the absolute letter of the law. That goes back to my original question, which was really about whether there is any sort of process to overturn that.

To be honest - the repeated mantra from people who don't even know me that I'm just selfish and acting shamelessly has felt a gross misrepresentation of the situation.

The only information that anyone replying to YOU has got is what YOU have said. If there is any misreprsentaion then the only person it can have come from is YOU! Based on what YOU have said YOU took the car, that lawfully belonged to her, without your mother's permission and YOU have refused to return it to her. All YOU have done is to keep repeating increasingly bizarre reasons to try and justify YOUR unlwawful actions. The bottom line is that the car belongs to your mother and YOU took it without her consent. Furthermore YOU have refused to return it to her and have invented all sorts of reasons why YOU should no do so. YOU caused the problem and the solution is in YOUR hands. It is time YOU faced up to YOUR responsibilities and returned it. That is fact not misrepresentation.

getmore4less

BobRoberts wrote: »

Actually, everyone who knows me, my parents, and the circumstances absolutely does agree with me. Its only people posting here who don't really know me, my parents, or the circumstances who disagree.

if they are so smart and right ask them how to fix your problems and keep the car.

lets remind ourselves of the only real question here from the first post...

So I am wondering where I might stand legally - the car is now in my name, and I am paying the tax, insurance etc. But in her mind I have "robbed her of everything". And I guess, I am a little wary that legally, if not practically, that may have merit. If the car wasn't specified to go to someone else, it would reasonably be included in the "everything" part of the estate that would be left to her.

Any advice or comment would be very welcome

seems there should have been "but only if you agree with me" tagged on the end.