Money Moral Dilemma: Should I pay my sister half the money our deceased father gave me?

teresa54

Bingokitty said:

I think you are lucky she isn’t asking for £30k, that would make it equal. We could also go down the route of what £30k is worth now. I love how the legal element is brought into this as though it should trump the moral element of that should be done. 

It’s hard to understand the circumstances but from my own perspective I’m deemed as the “well off” member of the family but what’s often forgotten is that we work 2-3 times in hours and spend many evenings with lost sleep over the stresses of being self employed with staff, I don’t have any vices and generally am a home bird and keeping up appearances are not in my interest. Should I then be penalised for not matching my siblings priorities in spending choices? 

I’d love a £30k boost just to have a holiday (not literally) from stress to try and have a few months of work that’s on a full nights sleep. 

Are you saying, then, that other members of your family spend their money indiscriminately, that they spend their money on 'vices' and choose to go out rather than being a home bird? Are you saying they have no stress? 

Is that a basis for insisting on equal shares of a family inheritance, without regard to those worse off financially? 

With great respect and correct me if wrong, but it's coming across that you feel like the moral high ground all belongs to you. 

bandanaman

You got £30k more than your sister...... - then the remainder was split 50:50 after father's death - so you still have £30k more than your sister - from your father. You may THINK that she does not need it BUT YOU KNOW she deserves £30k.
So if she is willing to only request £15k I would thank her profusely and agree (and buy her a nice Xmas present as well)

WIAWSNB

ginger_chocolate said:

MSE_Kelvin said:

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

A few years ago, my father gave me £30,000 to help pay off my mortgage. My sister agreed with the arrangement, and I signed a piece of paper to say that I'd received it. 

Sorry but what? Why did your sister need to "agree" to the "arrangement"? What did this piece of paper you signe say? This whole thing seems extremely weird and feels like there must be some information missing...

Agree? Not necessarily. It sounds like dad being thoughtful, and wishing to prevent just what is happening.
I'm bemused by all the 'family is the most important' comments. Horse poo. Individuals are just that. Some are good, some are self-focussed.
Blood is not thicker. Good people matter, regardless. 

VVatt

Simple moral dilemma. Did dad ask, ,or intend that you would make sure sister was treated fairly following his demise, if that is yes no reason to fall back on solicitors advice do the decent thing. If you are in no doubt your dad did not intend that then no action needed. Though that may ppt. a long term feud with sister. I know,,, whatever I would follow my conscience, your call

mlz1413

Paying off your mortgage was a nice thing for your father to do.  
You signed up for that mortgage and knew it needed paying back over many years.
It sounds like your sister had a mortgage and paid it back without your father's help.
So morally I would say her request/demand is fair.

Your solicitors have told you that you do not have to Legally pay it back.

You clearly don't Want to pay it back saying that the money means more to you than your sister.  But if father paid your mortgage off, why are you still in a worse position?

You came here for others opinions and I would say, pay her the £15k.

But if you don't like your sister and never wish to see or speak to her again (or.maybe still!), then make the decision to keep the money.

maz2702

One question, would this 15k be coming from the sister who was given 30k or from the fathers estate?

If it is from the estate, and they value family/sister would it not be fair to just give her the additional 15k?

Mind you my mum once bought me an outfit for a family event(it cost £86.00. I was really not financially well off at the time and about to go bankrupt), but my mum did not buy my sister an outfit for the same event and even now 25 years later she moans that my mum 'owes' her an outfit, completely dismissing the fact my parents paid for her 23K church wedding, party and designer dress. Whereas for my wedding, my parents did not contribute.

With siblings nothing is ever fair.

Misha96

There is a common assumption that the only proper way to divide an estate is equally. If the testator does anything else it's somehow "unfair .

Where I to make uneven  gifts in life or by  way of my Will that's my legal right. The thought of people moaning after my death and a slightly larger beneficiary being told of their "moral  obligation to share is troubling. 

The OP has no moral obligation to her sister. If anything, it is immoral not to uphold her father's legal decisions.

bobster2

Bingokitty said:

I think you are lucky she isn’t asking for £30k, that would make it equal. 

JaneandBeth said:

As stated in another post above, you have had £30k more than your sister. If she is asking for £15k from the father's money she is still £15k down on what you have had.

bandanaman said:

You got £30k more than your sister...... - then the remainder was split 50:50 after father's death - so you still have £30k more than your sister - from your father. You may THINK that she does not need it BUT YOU KNOW she deserves £30k.
So if she is willing to only request £15k I would thank her profusely and agree (and buy her a nice Xmas present as well)

Seakay said:

In my eyes she would be owed £30,000 (plus interest) for equity of distribution of your father's money.

These posters have spotted an issue - i.e. what does "extra £15,000" mean?

I think the wording of the original dilemma has caused a little confusion. The dilemma says "My dad's now died and, once probate is granted, my sister wants an extra £15,000, or half of the £30,000 he gave me"

Putting aside the morality, equity could be achieved in two ways...

1) Estate is distributed 50/50 and then afterwards the OP gives sister £15,000 as a gift. She has received an "extra £15,000" while OP has lost £15,000. And overall what they both have received in total is equal.

OR

2) A deed of variation is used, and the Executor distributing the estate divides funds in such a way so that sister receives £30,000 more than the OP but it's only "£15,000 extra" compared to what she would have received if the estate was distributed 50/50. In this case it looks like an "extra £30,000" compared to the OP but it achieves the same thing as option (1).

Misha96

pragmatism said:

Grieving the recent loss of a parent has a major impact on family members and family relationship dynamics. It is generally recommended that those affected do not make big decisions relating to finances etc for a year at least. This issue falls within that rubric. Once the estate is settled grieving will really progress then and depending on the circumstances of death can take up to three years. Personally, I would place the £15,000 into an account somewhere for 2-3 years and then have a good think about the whole issue in the light of passage of time/ shifts in relationships and discuss with sister as appropriate before making final decision as to how £15 000 and any accrued interest be disposed of. 

I think your suggestion shows great  wisdom. Probate and estate administration are only a phase in grief and shifts in family dynamics. I still hold that the OP has no moral obligation through she may want to make a gift. 

Jemma01

Misha96 said:

There is a common assumption that the only proper way to divide an estate is equally. If the testator does anything else it's somehow "unfair .

Where I to make uneven  gifts in life or by  way of my Will that's my legal right. The thought of people moaning after my death and a slightly larger beneficiary being told of their "moral  obligation to share is troubling. 

The OP has no moral obligation to her sister. If anything, it is immoral not to uphold her father's legal decisions.

Exactly, I find it even more troubling that adults think they're entitled to other adults money, because they happen to be their children! I'm sorry, but my parents in their life are free to do whatever they want with their money, they owe no one anything, once you're over 18, you're too old to expect anything from your parents, if they gift you willingly, great, if they don't, their money their choice. I can't imagine if I had children that they think they're entitled to my money!! i can't imagine the audacity of questioning my dad's spendings just like I can't imagine anyone questioning my spendings. Parents don't owe you fairness in how they spend their money, it is THEIR money. It's like I can't gift my sister/neice/nephew anything without having to spend the same on my other sister/niece/nephew. Give us a break.