You are here

Not just blended families. An interesting discussion on

Rags's picture

familial manipulation and greed.

My brother and sister insist I share our mother’s $440K estate with their 8 children, or they’ll cut off all contact. What should I do? (msn.com)

Dear Quentin,

We are three siblings: my brother, my sister and I. Our mom passed away from a stroke in Arizona. Her estate went to probate court as she had no will. We were all on the same page and had no issues getting everything done. Her house was sold very quickly for $420,000. There was $20,000 left in her bank account after paying off her credit cards. 

‘My brother has five kids and my sister has three children. I have no children, so they know they are in the wrong.’

I assumed we were splitting everything three ways. But then my sister in-law informed me that the grandchildren deserve a share. My brother has five kids and my sister has three children. I have no children, so they know they are in the wrong, and they’ve stopped all communication with me. They are stating I should (or will) get $58,000 from my mother’s estate or nothing.

I want to make this right. Should I just take the money?

Brother, Uncle, Son

Dear Brother,

It’s a classic 11th-hour twist.

The law is on your side. Under Arizona’s intestate law — when someone dies without a will — the spouse of a deceased person will inherit everything, even if there are children. If there are children but no spouse, the children will inherit everything. The law does not mention grandchildren, but if there were no children living, grandchildren would be next in line to inherit.

Your siblings are leveraging their relationship with you and your access to their children as a way to force you to reduce your inheritance from $147,000 to $58,000. They are putting a price on those good relations continuing, and that price is $89,000. It’s unfair and unethical to force you to share your inheritance with their children. The eight grandchildren should inherit from their parents, not from you.

“The rules for intestate inheritance only apply to estate assets, assets that are subject to probate,” according to Berk Law Group in Scottsdale, Ariz. “Stated differently, the rules do not apply to nonprobate assets or trust assets. So, before discussing ‘who gets what’ from an intestate estate, we need to define the ‘what.’ What assets make up the intestate estate?”

I don’t believe that acquiescing to your siblings’ demands will turn this toxic situation into a healthy one.

Nonprobate assets include those owned as joint tenancy with right of survivorship or bank, investment or life-insurance accounts where there is a listed beneficiary. “Unbeknownst to many, in Arizona, bank accounts that are owned by two or more individuals are automatically deemed to be joint tenancy with right of survivorship,” the law firm adds.

Of course, the irony is that — should you never have children and should you also die intestate — these nieces and nephews would inherit your estate, either indirectly by inheriting it from their parents who would inherit your estate, or directly if your siblings die before you. So by isolating you now, they risk provoking you into making a will disinheriting all of them.

Follow your gut. Do what you genuinely believe is the right thing and not what you feel pressured into doing. Sometimes when we listen quietly, the answer finds us. Pay attention to how the two options make you feel in the pit of your stomach. For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that acquiescing to your siblings’ demands will turn this toxic situation into a healthy one.

They are who they are — and $89,000 won’t change that. 

 

Winterglow's picture

The way I see it is that if the sibs want their kids to get a share it comes out of their own 1/3 of the inheritance. OTOH, where I live, inheritance laws are pretty cut and dry - there is practically no wriggle room whether there is a will or not.

Aniki-Moderator's picture

Agreed. Give each kid $1. Brother's inheritance is reduced by $5; sister's is reduced by $3. Asshats.

AgedOut's picture

let's see: xyz amount in estate, divided by the number of living children of said deceasee (3) = your amount inherited. if the siblings choose to parcel out their inheritance then their amount would be the one divided by the # of children they have.

 

 

easy peasy the siblings are sleazy. 

DPW's picture

Wow. $89,000. Sad. Break up a family over this amount.

id keep the cash, remove toxic family from my life, and live the best life. 

ndc's picture

Quentin is right. Siblings that would behave this way aren't in your corner, so I wouldn't do much to "preserve a relationship" with them.

ImperfectlyPerfect's picture

Unbelievable but I can see this happening and how someone justifies it in their mind. I would hope my sibilings would be reasonable and I believe they would but I am the one with steps and no bio(s) - I think there's a larger question: are the lives of those who produce offspring more valuable then the ones that don't? Are you worth less than them if you don't create and multiple decendants?? 

Aniki-Moderator's picture

Something similar happened to friends of ours, the "Boaters". His AND her families. After the proverbial dust settled, they have cut ties with all siblings and their offspring. Every.Single.One. The Boaters have no children and have ensured their wills exclude the estranged relatives (and taken legal steps regarding contact). It's sad when people put monetary values on relationships. 

Rags's picture

parents.

Their estate/Will has been set for decades. It is split equally between my brother and I upon the demise of both of our parents.... hopefully not for another decade+ (Dad is 80, mom is 78).  They are amazing parents and GPs.

As GKs started showing up my mom decided she wanted their estate split equally among all of their direc heirs (sons and BGKs).  I have no BKs. My younger brother has 3.

I had no issue with it.

My brother Vetoed because he did not feel it was fair that he and his family would get 80% and I would only get 20% as I had no heirs. He told mom that if that was her decision, he would engage to  have it all go to me.  Mom and dad chose to let the long standing Will remain in place.

Mom's motivation was a trust for all of her down line. It was not greed related.

She felt bad that she had not seen the position my brother took.  My brother is extremely fair minded.

Since then, my SS asked me to adopt him so he would be an heir to any trust if that is what had been implemented.

As it stands, SS will ultimately inherit whatever his mom and I accumulate including any inheritance I receive from mom and dad.

My niece and nephews will split my brother and my SIL's estate.  Which is extremely significant. He has done exceptionally well.