Do I take the money and run?

[Corraleno]

Wills are intended to show what the person *wanted* to happen to their money. Fair or not, it doesn't matter. If the grandma wanted her money to go to the 3 children and not her granddaughter, then that's what should happen.

 

In this case, there's a technicality and her actual wishes aren't going to be granted.

 

Except that the "technicality" the family is claiming is not true, and there's no way to know what the grandmother's "actual wishes" were. If she really wanted her assets to only go to her living children, it would have been very easy for her to have the will properly witnessed.

 

Jackie

[Corraleno]

IF you take the money and divide afterwards, you would still be responsible for paying the taxes on it at the end of the year right?

 

No, inheritance tax is paid by the estate before the money is distributed, so the inheritors do not pay any tax. And unless the grandmother has assets in excess of $3.5 million (assuming she died in 2009), there wouldn't be any estate tax anyway.

 

Jackie

[Murphy101]

I agree there is something fishy here. There's zero reason a legal will with her intent should not be available. It is very easy to do without a notary or even a lawyer. And most elderly are very aware of the need for a will that reflects their true desires. Heck, most drs ask patients if they have these things in order at some point.

 

If she had not wanted you to have your fathers portion, she could very easily have made it so. Yes, you weren't active in her life since he died. Maybe that is why she wanted to do something for you.

 

I think they should have made sure their mother had the will in order before she died. Now they just need to accept the legalities as they are.

 

I'd take what your grandmother allotted to your father and presume she wanted you to have it or she would have made arrangements otherwise.

 

As for running, if the others get nasty, then yes.

 

Otherwise, say that you are viewing this as a bequest from your father. Afterall, if something happened to them, I'm sure they would expect their portion to go to their child(ren).

[OnTheBrink]

Agree to and sign nothing until you've spoken to an appropriate attorney. Most give free initial consultations, so, imo, you have nothing to lose by talking to one.

[The Girls' Mom]

The thing to watch out for...if you legally inherit the full 1/4, you will NOT be taxed on it. However, if you legally inherit the full 1/4, then give a portion of that to someone, that portion given away is then considered a GIFT, not inheritance and is taxable over a certain amount. At least this is the tax advice I was given last year when I was going through a similar situation.

[Corraleno]

The thing to watch out for...if you legally inherit the full 1/4, you will NOT be taxed on it. However, if you legally inherit the full 1/4, then give a portion of that to someone, that portion given away is then considered a GIFT, not inheritance and is taxable over a certain amount. At least this is the tax advice I was given last year when I was going through a similar situation.

 

Yes, any amount above $13,000 per person would be subject to gift tax ~ and that is paid by the giver, not the recipient. So, for example, if you inherited $100,000 and kept $25,000 and gave each aunt/uncle $25,000, you would have to pay gift tax on the additional $12,000 per person (currently 50%, I think?). If you and your DH decided to make the gifts jointly ($12,500 from each of you to each of them) you could escape the gift tax. But if the % you would be giving each relative would exceed $26,000, then you would be stuck with tax.

 

But there is no reason you should have to give them any money, if the probate court decides you are legally entitled to your share!

 

Jackie

[Pippen]

I agree there is something fishy here. There's zero reason a legal will with her intent should not be available.

 

If someone were to call me up offering me 25% of something I was legally entitled to, I'd be plenty suspicious.

 

It is very easy to do without a notary or even a lawyer. And most elderly are very aware of the need for a will that reflects their true desires. Heck, most drs ask patients if they have these things in order at some point.

 

I think plenty of people don't follow through on wills. My mom is one of those who totally avoids anything official when it comes to money and death. We had to urge her many times to do something about a will and power of attorney for healthcare. I believe she finally did a handwritten will, but even when her sister was dying and she was telling me how important it was to have a POA, she didn't get it done for herself.

 

On the totally opposite side of the spectrum is my dad who has rewritten his will more times than I'm sure I know about. After divorcing from my mom, after wife #2, after wife #3, several times when married to wife #4 including writing her out, several times after that including once writing me out, and most likely again now he's married to Mrs E#5. His estate will be very small but having total control of it is a really huge deal to him.. All that fuss and my brother and I don't really care.:001_huh:

 

We've only had one problematic will situation and that was when my brother died leaving his estranged wife as his beneficiary. She'd left him, cheated on him, wrote bad checks in their account which he had to cover, and disappeared off the map...but she showed up right quick to collect the life insurance payout. Even then the family was divided on his intent--part of us thought he still loved her and was holding out hope she'd return, and that would have changed it if he'd wanted to, part thought he'd never leave her a dime. It didn't matter what we thought--what happened was the money was distributed according to the will.

[LMA]

I didn't read other replies but each state has its own laws how assets are divided legally if there is no will. The relatives have no right to tell you what you are to get or not get. Consult your state laws and, if needed, your own estate lawyer to help you handle it.

[Alice]

I also agree that I'd seek legal counsel and have them look at the wills. I'd be suspicous that the "invalid will" is really your grandmother's wishes. My FIL in the past few years has repeatedly offered to change his will to disinherit dh's siblings and to leave everything to our kids (because they are the only grandchildren with the family "name".) We don't think this is something he would have wanted before he began to suffer from dementia and it is NOT something we want or seek. We refused to help him change his will and now he is mentally incapable of doing so. But if we'd been people who were less ethical or more greedy it would have been very easy to sway him to do it and to get a new will made up. Once you've had legal help in seeing the will (or wills...I'm not sure if there was a first will) then you can better decide if you want to abide by what you think were your grandmother's wishes and really what your legal rights are.

[CAMom]

I'm going to post without reading any other responses so that I'm not influenced by anyone else.:)

 

I am currently executing my grandma's estate. She passed away in August and I was very close to her having taken care of her the last 10 years of her life.

 

IMHO, you should take the smaller amount of money and be thankful. You know that her wishes were for her to divide her money between her living children and that you were not included in that. You should honor her wishes. I think it would be wrong for you to essentially say, "Sorry, grandma. You blew it by not getting it notarized!"

 

It would not be right for you to take what rightfully belongs to your father's siblings according to your grandmother's intentions! Seeing that you were not expecting a dime, be very thankful for the smaller blessing.

 

Best wishes!

[specialmama]

I need impartial advice....

 

My grandmother passed away this last fall. I have to admit I really wasn't all that close to her. She was a really sweet lady but my dad died about 20 years ago(I was a teenager) so my connection with that side of my family has been very little.

 

I have had more connection with my aunt in the last few months due to my grandmother death. She is a great lady and I have been happy to get to know her better. Sad that it has to be a death to bring people together.

 

My aunt called last night and said that while working out my grandmother estate they realized that the will she created had never been notarized and was not valid. The "unofficial will" stated that the money would be divided among her three living children. However, since it is not valid they have to include me in place of my deceased father for a 4th of the inheritance.

 

I was not counting on any money coming from this whole thing. But suddenly I'm getting a BIG sum of money. Here is the kicker.....they want me to take only 1/4 of my 1/4 and give the rest to them.

 

 

I am so torn. I can see where they are coming from. But on the other hand I'm kinda in awe of them even asking. There are many more details that I won't bore you all with. I really want to do the right thing. Taking the smaller amount would help us out (a lot), but the larger amount would really put us in a great place. I would like to walk away form this w/o it getting ugly. So far communication has been fine. But I HATE dealing with money and family, or friends, or ....well really anyone!:confused::confused::confused::confused:

 

Any advice out there????

 

Meli

 

Meli, I have not read all the responses, but I was in this exact position last year when an uncle's will had my father (and his siblings) listed and my father passed on years ago. At the time, I accepted my uncle's offer to appeal to the judge and handle it for me. He stepped in and told them that my dad's next of kin should get his share. It was agreed, but only 1/4 of my dad's share was granted to split between my sister and me. My uncle asked if we would fight it, that he'd support that. But I declined and signed off on the 1/4. Now... a year later... I wish I could go back and fight for what was rightfully mine. I hate this greedy attitude, but it's NOT because if my dad was alive, he'd get the FULL amount. If you want my two cents, then go for whatever your parent would get if they were alive. It's not about you against them, it's about honouring your parent. They would want you to get their full share. Be like Nike. Otherwise, be like me and have regrets. ;)

[bettyandbob]

You are entitled to your share--the full 1/4 of the estate.

 

You were a teen when your father died. You will never know if what your aunt is saying about your grandma's intentions is true. Maybe you did not make a lot of effort to keep in touch with your father's family, but it goes both ways and you were young and suffered a bigger loss when your dad died so perhaps the bulk of the effort should have been them. You cannot second guess any of this. You should simply get what you are legally entitled to. Period.

[Murphy101]

You are entitled to your share--the full 1/4 of the estate.

 

You were a teen when your father died. You will never know if what your aunt is saying about your grandma's intentions is true. Maybe you did not make a lot of effort to keep in touch with your father's family, but it goes both ways and you were young and suffered a bigger loss when your dad died so perhaps the bulk of the effort should have been them. You cannot second guess any of this. You should simply get what you are legally entitled to. Period.

 

Yes. This is the basis of my opinion too.

[CAMom]

I think the key is that she doesn't know that. All she has is the word of a person that she doesn't really know who is saying that these are the wishes of a person who is now gone.

 

In the absence of really knowing what grandma wanted, I think she should simply follow the law.

 

OK, I see I was totally in the minority.;)

 

But...does the original will say that if the child of grandma dies before grandma does that the children of the deceased are entitled to the deceasesd's portion? My grandma's trust did say that. She named her two children and five granddaughters as heirs. She specifically stated that if any of her grandchildren were to die before her that their children (her great grandchildren) would inherit their mother's portion to be put into a trust fund until they reached 21.

 

What confuses me is why people think the OP is entitled to the assets of someone with whom she really had no relationship. To me, a biological link does not entitle one to the possessions of another.:confused: No one can know whether or not her father would have given her his share when he died if he had inherited the money. Maybe there would have been nothing left.

 

I totally disagree that it is "unfair" to distribute one's assets in any way they choose. If a parent chooses to leave their entire estate to one child, that is there perogative. Just as they are free to give gifts to whomever they choose when they are alive, so it is (IMO) when they have passed. If they want to leave every dime to a charity, that should be up to them. I do not get dishonoring someone's wishes after they're dead.:confused:

 

I will concede that the OP should know exactly what both documents say. She should know if it's a simple will or a living revocable trust. But, in the event that the grandma really wanted things changed to include only her living children in her estate, that should be honored.

[RanchGirl]

This probably makes me a super suspicious person but my first thought was that the aunt was setting you up the whole time. Could it be that this relationship that has only begun since your grandmother died was for the purpose of getting you to agree to take a much smaller portion of the estate than you are owed?

 

Could it be that they are trying to get you to preemptively sign away your rights before a lawyer contacted you?

 

I hate to think this of people, but they are trying to cheat their niece so.....:001_unsure:

 

 

:iagree: this seems very suspicious. I would give the aunt the benefit of the doubt on whether she has been playing you all along, but don't give up your legal rights -- accept what the probate court or legal will gives you.

 

My grandmother had 4 kids. Each child got one fourth. The portion for the child who had predeceased her was split among his four kids. The other grandchildren received a very small portion, more of a token gift, that was taken out of their parent's 1/4. This seemed entirely appropriate to me even though my cousins received a lot more than me. My Mom is still alive for me to enjoy and she received her share and I will get some of that when she passes.

 

You will find out if your aunt truly wants a relationship with you if you accept the money your grandmother legally left to you. For her to ask you to gift it back to them is -- at best -- inappropriate IMO.

 

As a mother and hopefully future grandmother, I can't imagine not leaving money to my child's child just because that child's parent had died. And if your grandmother had wanted to make that unusual decision, she could have easily made a legal will to do so. But she apparently didn't. So I would say you should assume that your grandmother wanted you to have the money and act accordingly.

 

I would try to find a gracious way blow off your aunt's ridiculous request should she bring it up again. Something like "Aunt, I have really enjoyed getting closer to you the last few months and I hope nothing will get in the way of that. I'm going to accept whatever is in grandma's legal will and not try to second guess it." And then if she pushes further, you'll know that she considers the money more important than a relationship with you, and you can just refer her to your lawyer.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I agree with everyone that says to take your dad's share - he would have passed it on to you anyhow - you have already been "penalized" by losing your father so long ago. Why should you also lose an inheritance???

 

Let me begin by saying that I don't think that anything should be done without seeing the wills in question and probably consulting a lawyer.

 

But on the other hand, I don't think that ANYONE has a RIGHT to an inheritance. My mom is one of eight siblings. There are issues of special needs, issues of being in less good financial positions (mostly do to poor decisions, but still being in less of a place to provide for oneself), issues of who did the most to care for my grandmother in the couple of years she was in nursing homes and hospitals.

 

Fair isn't always equal. Before my grandmother passed away, my mom would complain about how money was given to this brother or that sister or this nephew. I maintained that as long as my grandmother was still in her right mind, that was HER money. She could give it to whomever she wanted.

 

Similarly, I think that there are several different ways to write a will and all of them might be "fair" in certain circumstances.

 

This isn't to say that the OP shouldn't put forth energy to see that the will executed is the will that was the last one written that met legal requirements. Relatives have still been known to be less than scrupulous about wills. But there isn't IMHO a right to money that was earned and saved by someone else. (To be clear, that applies to all of the relatives, not just OP.)

[Murphy101]

Ronette-

I do not think she is entitled to anything. I think that if it was left to her father, then as his only heir, she is legally permitted what was his unless her grandmother's will said otherwise. It didn't. Any opinion as to what grandma might have wanted is nothing more than heresay bc that doesn't appear to be what she legally arranged.

 

I do think a person can do whatever they want with their possessions and can arrange their will any way they want. If others find that unfair - too bad for them. They should go make their own inheritance. It's only unfair if you are being denied something that is yours to begin with - with rare exception that is not someone else's money or possessions.

 

In this situation, it is not clear what grandma wanted most, but it isclear that at some point she was ok with her son having a portion. It's fair to presume that he would have passed it to his dd.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Martha

[Corraleno]

What confuses me is why people think the OP is entitled to the assets of someone with whom she really had no relationship.

 

Because it appears that she is legally entitled to her father's share of the inheritance, and her aunt is asking her to give away a substantial chunk of money that is legally hers. It's not as if the OP is contesting a will that cut her out and she's trying to get something she's not legally entitled to. She is legally entitled to it ~ what confuses me is why people think she should just give it away? :confused:

 

Jackie

[DarlaS]

Because it appears that she is legally entitled to her father's share of the inheritance, and her aunt is asking her to give away a substantial chunk of money that is legally hers. It's not as if the OP is contesting a will that cut her out and she's trying to get something she's not legally entitled to. She is legally entitled to it ~ what confuses me is why people think she should just give it away? :confused:

 

Jackie

 

:iagree:

 

I have four kids. If one of them happens to (God forbid) precede me in death, I would want their inheritance to go to their child/children.

 

I would be deeply suspicious that she actually intended to have this happen this way--relationship or no relationship.

[CAMom]

Because it appears that she is legally entitled to her father's share of the inheritance, and her aunt is asking her to give away a substantial chunk of money that is legally hers. It's not as if the OP is contesting a will that cut her out and she's trying to get something she's not legally entitled to. She is legally entitled to it ~ what confuses me is why people think she should just give it away? :confused:

 

Jackie

 

See, I don't think just because you are legally entitled to something you are necessarily morally entitled to it.

 

I'm sure many would feel that my grandma's estate is very "unfair." She changed her trust several years ago to give me a much higher percentage than anyone else-even more than her own children. I admit that I felt somewhat uncomfortable when she did it but it was her estate. She felt that since I had invested years and years in caring for her, she wanted me to have most of her assets. Fortunately, no one has contested anything.

 

I also have sympathy for the family members who are grieving and trying to execute the estate. If the OP is set to inherit a BIG sum of money (granted, I don't know what BIG means), then the execution of this estate will be a huge effort for the executor or successor trustee. I've put hundreds of hours into administrating this estate over the past 6 1/2 months.

[kalanamak]

If the OP is set to inherit a BIG sum of money (granted, I don't know what BIG means), then the execution of this estate will be a huge effort for the executor or successor trustee. I've put hundreds of hours into administrating this estate over the past 6 1/2 months.

 

My brother was executor, and the will stipulated he was to be paid for his efforts. I sent a check to the executor of Hubby's father's will, but it was never cashed. I got the percentage I should send by googling.

 

I think even family members who do this should be fairly paid.

[LMA]

See, I don't think just because you are legally entitled to something you are necessarily morally entitled to it.

 

I'm sure many would feel that my grandma's estate is very "unfair." She changed her trust several years ago to give me a much higher percentage than anyone else-even more than her own children. I admit that I felt somewhat uncomfortable when she did it but it was her estate. She felt that since I had invested years and years in caring for her, she wanted me to have most of her assets. Fortunately, no one has contested anything.

 

I also have sympathy for the family members who are grieving and trying to execute the estate. If the OP is set to inherit a BIG sum of money (granted, I don't know what BIG means), then the execution of this estate will be a huge effort for the executor or successor trustee. I've put hundreds of hours into administrating this estate over the past 6 1/2 months.

 

If a will is left and it is valid, then the wishes of the will have to be carried out. However, if there is no valid will, the relatives legally do not get to choose how the assets are divided. It is not theirs to divide. The state divides it for you according to state law. (And I have been an administrator of an estate where I had to divide according to state law as no will was left.)

 

Many states say that an estate has to be divided equally among the children if there is no will and no surviving spouse. And if a child is deceased, then that portion is usually given to the descendants of the deceased.

[bettyandbob]

I don't think this is a question of "fairness" at all. I find it quite disturbing that an aunt is trying to tell her a deceased person's intent. When was that so-called will written. What was grandma's state of mind, when it was written. The truth is she may not have had "legal capacity" at the time and this is why the will could not be validated. This is related the "being of sound mind" statement you always hear associated with wills. Grandma may not have been "all here" for a long time and her living children may have inappropriate influence in writing that will. So, you truly don't know what is going on.

 

I think it's best to have the estate distributed through the local probate court.

 

It sounds like the siblings are still due a substantial amount of money whether they get 1/4 or 5/16 of the estate. 5/16 = 1/4 + (1/4)(1/4). They are the greedy ones to me. If you want to talk fair--is it fair to lose your father as a teen and spend many years without first his financial and later his emotional support.

 

The worst thing to do here is to take the 1/16 portion the siblings are asking her to take. The only way for her to be sure she doesn't get stuck with a substantial tax is spend most of that portion on a very knowledgeable estate attorney.

 

Don't evaluate fairness here you really don't know the deal with your dad's siblings or his mother.

[stripe]

I say, don't agree to anything at this point, and get legal advice.

[vkay]

OK, I see I was totally in the minority.;)

 

But...does the original will say that if the child of grandma dies before grandma does that the children of the deceased are entitled to the deceasesd's portion? My grandma's trust did say that. She named her two children and five granddaughters as heirs. She specifically stated that if any of her grandchildren were to die before her that their children (her great grandchildren) would inherit their mother's portion to be put into a trust fund until they reached 21.

 

What confuses me is why people think the OP is entitled to the assets of someone with whom she really had no relationship. To me, a biological link does not entitle one to the possessions of another.:confused: No one can know whether or not her father would have given her his share when he died if he had inherited the money. Maybe there would have been nothing left.

 

I totally disagree that it is "unfair" to distribute one's assets in any way they choose. If a parent chooses to leave their entire estate to one child, that is there perogative. Just as they are free to give gifts to whomever they choose when they are alive, so it is (IMO) when they have passed. If they want to leave every dime to a charity, that should be up to them. I do not get dishonoring someone's wishes after they're dead.:confused:

 

I will concede that the OP should know exactly what both documents say. She should know if it's a simple will or a living revocable trust. But, in the event that the grandma really wanted things changed to include only her living children in her estate, that should be honored.

:iagree: If it helps, I completely agree with you. I have noooooooooo idea why all the responses coming up with information that the op didn't even say. Like throwing in the word "alleged" etc when it comes to the invalid will. Goodness. If we just take the op's original word and assume she isn't being lied to, then the g'ma didn't intend to give her anything. geesh. It's that simple. Now if the family is making that up and swindling her - well, that's a different story.

 

Also, I can't understand why all of the "entitlement" posts. Interesting insite to the differences in humans I guess. That lady could have left it all to her cat for anyone should care, and just because one of us would do it differently, doesn't mean it's what should happen.

[Catherine]

with the deceased person would inherit as much as family members who were there with the person regularly for years. But I'd have to agree that there is so much that you don't know here and getting the advice of a competent lawyer, and actually seeing the "original" document is the key to clarifying those questions.

 

I personally know someone who was left out of her husband's will, likely through his neglect of keeping his affairs up to date. When he suddenly, unexpectedly died young, his grown son of his first marriage, who was independently wealthy already (and whose incredibly expensive education had been fully funded by my friend and her dh) was the sole beneficiary of his big life insurance policy. She was left to pay for their daughter's college education, her mortgage, insurance and funeral expenses, after having been a SAHM for 18 years. She asked her stepson for help with his sister's education and some of the funeral expenses, and he refused. My point is simply to say that he destroyed any hope of a close relationship with his father's family by following the letter of the law, at the expense of generosity and good will.

[Sonshine]

I don't find the poster's situation and the one described by Catherine very similar. It seems as if regardless, the other heirs will get a substantial amount of money. Second, she is possibly inheriting the logical part of an estate that would have gone to her father if he were alive. It also doesn't sound as if anyone is going to face financial hardship if she obtains this inheritance. Furthermore, she is not wealthy. It sounds more like she could use the money and would not be harming anyone to the point of financial hardship were she to take her share.