Money Moral Dilemma: Should my sister-in-law give up her house after her husband's death?

pjran

Simple answer NO. It’s her home until she dies.

Let’s hope the children pay for any necessary adaptations if needed in the future. It’s in their interest to keep the property well maintained.

miriamac

MSE_Sarah wrote: »

This week's MoneySaver who wants advice asks...

Her late husband's two grown-up kids will inherit it, but only after her death. It's large and they are pressuring her to downsize and give them the cash difference now. She's reluctant as it's been her home for 20+ years, and has all the memories of her husband.

Unfortunately the MSE team can't always answer money moral dilemma questions as contributions are often emailed in or suggested in person. They are intended to be enjoyed as a point of debate and discussed at face value.

Spendless wrote: »

Well, no because we only have it from the (non existent) OP point of view. Saying 'they want their cash' and we're unable to explore more. I did say we can't ask more or clarify on MMDs.
...

If we were able to question the OP, or even if the wording of the MMD was better worded 'they want me to downsize from my large house which meets all my old age needs' we wouldn't have to second guess

It's worded perfectly clearly - we've to take it at face va!ue.

It's all too easy to layer our own experiences all over a post, and then give the answer we'd hope to hear.

If the MMD does nothing e!se, it asks us to do something out of the ordinary on an internet forum - drop our own personal baggage and answer the dilemma at face value.

That is difficult! Even answering it 'at face value', my response has to be filtered through my own personal knowledge. Which is rooted in Scots law.

From that point of view, the MMD sounds like a 'life rent' situation. That means that the children are way out of order (even if we assume that their underlying intentions are benevolent - which doesn't come through in a 'face value' reading).

Get the executor/executrix involved!

REJP

No. It is her house, and she might need the value if she has to go into a care home under current legislation.
Don't be bullied by the sons. Shame on them. Will they also want the money available from the sale of her new property if she downsizes then dies?
Make a new will and leave money to a charity.

Spendless

miriamac wrote: »

It's worded perfectly clearly - we've to take it at face va!ue.

It's all too easy to layer our own experiences all over a post, and then give the answer we'd hope to hear.

If the MMD does nothing e!se, it asks us to do something out of the ordinary on an internet forum - drop our own personal baggage and answer the dilemma at face value.

That is difficult! Even answering it 'at face value', my response has to be filtered through my own personal knowledge. Which is rooted in Scots law.

From that point of view, the MMD sounds like a 'life rent' situation. That means that the children are way out of order (even if we assume that their underlying intentions are benevolent - which doesn't come through in a 'face value' reading).

Get the executor/executrix involved!

I read it differently. 'they are pressurising her to downsize AND give them the cash' leads it (to me) more open to interpretation than 'they are pressurising her to downsize IN ORDER TO give them the cash'

I'm not saying that the children AREN'T just being greedy, just that I'd like to know more

My frustration is more about the way MMDs are described on here. In the thread that is a rant about them, I mention that there was once one about a camera where the dilemma said 'I have no insurance' so it really was black and white because the way it read the problem wouldn't be there if there was insurance. The OP did join mse and when they explained there was far more of a problem with why there'd been no insurance. It changed the whole dilemma!

kazt2006

I would advise her to take her own independent legal advice and not from firm who dealt with the will. If the kids are harassing her then she can get her own legal injunction to be left in peace.

John_Gray

"All property is theft" said Proudhon, but here we are faced with some Moneygrabbing Millennials trying to implement a different version of the saying.
"Sell the house and give us Lots of Money" appears to be their suggestion.
They should be spurned. Utterly.

Tabbytabitha

"Setting fire to it on her deathbed" gets my vote.

Pollycat

Spendless wrote: »

I read it differently. 'they are pressurising her to downsize AND give them the cash' leads it (to me) more open to interpretation than 'they are pressurising her to downsize IN ORDER TO give them the cash'

I'm not saying that the children AREN'T just being greedy, just that I'd like to know more

My frustration is more about the way MMDs are described on here. In the thread that is a rant about them, I mention that there was once one about a camera where the dilemma said 'I have no insurance' so it really was black and white because the way it read the problem wouldn't be there if there was insurance. The OP did join mse and when they explained there was far more of a problem with why there'd been no insurance. It changed the whole dilemma!

But you know that you are not going to know more.
It's a MMD and that is the nature of the beast.

Mojisola

Anja wrote: »

How about equity release on the property. Give them the money now to shut them up and then when she dies they won’t have anything left to inherit. She gets to stay in the house and they get their way now and hopefully leave her to get on with her life!

But that might mean she can't downsize in the future if wants to.

Pollycat

Anja wrote: »

How about equity release on the property. Give them the money now to shut them up and then when she dies they won’t have anything left to inherit. She gets to stay in the house and they get their way now and hopefully leave her to get on with her life!

Why should she have to 'shut them up'?
From the original MMD, it appears she can live in the house until she dies then the sons inherit.
They will just have to wait for their money.
If their father wanted them to have any money whilst his wife was still alive, his will would have reflected that.