inheriting twice
biggamogs
Posts: 2 Newbie
My wife's grandmother has recently died without a will, we thought as my mother in law is an only child, this would not be too much of a problem, however it has since turned out that the man she thought was her uncle was in fact her brother. He was born when her mother was not married and was brought up by my MIL's grandparents as their son, while it seems that it was known about by my wife's grandmothers siblings it appears that it was kept from him and my MIL. When my MIL's grandparents died both without wills he inherited a share of their estate as their child. Since finding out he is my MIL's brother he is now claiming half of my wife's grandmothers estate.
My MIL is accepting he only just found out he is her brother (although to me it seems a bit suspicious that as soon as the inheritance is being sorted out he suddenly finds out).
This is all a mess but there 2 main questions.
By accepting his part of the Grandparents estate is he accepting that he has been adopted by them and therefore excluding him from his mothers estate?
If he accepted the grandparents inheritance in error does he have to return it to be shared between the my grandmothers 2 siblings and her estate?
My MIL is accepting he only just found out he is her brother (although to me it seems a bit suspicious that as soon as the inheritance is being sorted out he suddenly finds out).
This is all a mess but there 2 main questions.
By accepting his part of the Grandparents estate is he accepting that he has been adopted by them and therefore excluding him from his mothers estate?
If he accepted the grandparents inheritance in error does he have to return it to be shared between the my grandmothers 2 siblings and her estate?
0
Comments
-
Have you got the dates for this? What proof is there he is who he says he his? Simply accepting an inheritance wrongly because of lack of knowledge proves nothing certainly not adoption. The whole story sounds bizarre. A lot of proof acceptable to the court would be needed to overturn what has happened.My wife's grandmother has recently died without a will, we thought as my mother in law is an only child, this would not be too much of a problem, however it has since turned out that the man she thought was her uncle was in fact her brother. He was born when her mother was not married and was brought up by my MIL's grandparents as their son, while it seems that it was known about by my wife's grandmothers siblings it appears that it was kept from him and my MIL. When my MIL's grandparents died both without wills he inherited a share of their estate as their child. Since finding out he is my MIL's brother he is now claiming half of my wife's grandmothers estate.
My MIL is accepting he only just found out he is her brother (although to me it seems a bit suspicious that as soon as the inheritance is being sorted out he suddenly finds out).
This is all a mess but there 2 main questions.
By accepting his part of the Grandparents estate is he accepting that he has been adopted by them and therefore excluding him from his mothers estate?
If he accepted the grandparents inheritance in error does he have to return it to be shared between the my grandmothers 2 siblings and her estate?0 -
The most important thing is to find out if they were officially adopted by the grandparent, as this would change the normal intestacy flow.
It was quite common for grandparents to raise an illegitimate child as their own but it was also common to do it officially by adoption, so as to allow the young mother a completely fresh start.0 -
It is up to the 'uncle/brother' to prove he is who he says he is. Anyone could make these claims.
An officially-approved DNA test result will need to be accepted by the court, and that will be after much legal wrangling between solicitors. Call his bluff and see if he is willing to go along with that.
This is a situation where emotions and family ties need to be put aside.0 -
And prove legal adoption as well. Quite a lot of hurdles to be overcome. The onus is on him to prove it and bear the costs.0
-
It is up to the 'uncle/brother' to prove he is who he says he is. Anyone could make these claims.
An officially-approved DNA test result will need to be accepted by the court, and that will be after much legal wrangling between solicitors. Call his bluff and see if he is willing to go along with that.
This is a situation where emotions and family ties need to be put aside.
All he needs is a copy of his birth certificate to prove who his mother was.0 -
Yorkshireman99 wrote: »And prove legal adoption as well. Quite a lot of hurdles to be overcome. The onus is on him to prove it and bear the costs.
Surely he does not need to prove that, he is inheriting fron his birth mother not an adopted parent. If was adopted then they can no longer inherit from their birth mother, so that means it is down to the administrator to establish his adoption status.
Sounds a bit like my GF he was brought up by his GPs, even though my GM married a year later. Like most of these private family arrangements no formal adoption ever took place.0 -
My guess is that he'd have not been officially adopted. Back then, inter-family, it just rarely happened unless the taker was taking the child because the parent was a danger to the child.
This type of thing is quite common and normal - daughter gets pregnant, her parents take the child and the daughter gets on with her life. My gt-granny did it twice, with both her daughters' events.... and no adoption went on at all. It's just how people lived. The attitude was to just "take them in and bring them up", legal stuff was much less likely back then. It was also common to not tell the child.
When I was growing up there was a LOT of this going on... if your daughter got pregnant and you could take the child in, you did that.0 -
This is not so. On the front of each birth certificate it says that it is NOT proof of identity. Anyone can buy a copy of a birth certificate by paying the fee. It proves absolutely nothing.Keep_pedalling wrote: »All he needs is a copy of his birth certificate to prove who his mother was.0 -
Yorkshireman99 wrote: »This is not so. On the front of each birth certificate it says that it is NOT proof of identity. Anyone can buy a copy of a birth certificate by paying the fee. It proves absolutely nothing.
It may not be proof of identity, but it is proof of who the mother gave birth to. This is not some total stranger that has come out of the woodwork, so proof of identity should be easy to establish especially as the OP says that other members of the family had knowledge of his true parentage, certainly no DNA test required in this case.0 -
Keep_pedalling wrote: »It may not be proof of identity, but it is proof of who the mother gave birth to. This is not some total stranger that has come out of the woodwork, so proof of identity should be easy to establish especially as the OP says that other members of the family had knowledge of his true parentage, certainly no DNA test required in this case.
That's what I was thinking. But is it perhaps better expressed as "proof of who the mother [of the uncle] was" rather than "proof of who the mother gave birth to"?
Is another issue that most of the people who knew the "true" position are most likely dead by now? I wonder how "uncle" discovered he was brother if it had always been concealed from him?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards