Two siblings forced the sale of our inherited beach house and I can't get over it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property was co-owned by our father and uncle. No messy drama. During estate at the end of our dad's life, we were offered the opportunity buy out our uncle for a very fair sum we could all afford. My husband and I wanted to, but my two siblings and their spouses said no. Not only did I know the property would never depreciate, I thought it was important to let our dad stay there with his limited time and also keep the family tradition going. Siblings didn't care, they wanted the cash, so the property was sold.

Now six years later the property is worth three times what it was. We would have millions in equity between the three of us if they listened. In addition, the family tradition was lost. I think it broke my dad's heart before he died that he couldn't spend his remaining months there and know it was staying in the family. It infuriates me so much, especially during a holiday week like this. And siblings have a tenancy to complain how expensive a beach house rental is for their family in the same area.

Many times it makes sense for elderly owners of different branches to sell the shared property in advance of one of the partners dying. My grandmother, uncle and uncle (her two brothers) owned an oceanfront beach house in Beach Haven NJ for decades. The uncle who was a lawyer advised that the house be sold before one of them passed to simplify estate situations.

That was incredibly stupid. They lost all of the stepped up basis.

YES!!!

[Anonymous]

OP, stop being a baby

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you should have given them their share in cash. This is your fault, not theirs. I assume you couldn’t afford to buy them out?

We all have similar HHIs, so it would have been unfair to put the full burden on me and my husband. It was a very fair price but it wasn’t exactly a small sim; ot would have been a stretch for just us. Not to mention they likely would have tried to keep using it, right. I didn’t want that dynamic either.

It is what it is. At the buyout, you would have had them sign a document on the terms of use, including fair market rent for comparable properties. Yes, it sucks, but if you are not going to buy out, then there is nothing you can do and need to let this go.

I’m the OP. I think this and also the person above who wrote similar sounds great in theory. I’d love to read a copacetic real world example of this happening after a pair of siblings enjoyed free access and use of a property for 40 and 50 plus years. It gives me anxiety just thinking about it. Of course in retrospect it’s easy to say I wish my husband and I did just that. There’s just really no good reason we couldn’t have kept the same arrangement my dad and uncle had. They honestly never argued about anything. It was all very chill and there was always happy family members there. Big house, lots of beds, lots of laughs. Breaks my heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, don't ask for sibling advice here. DCUM is terrible with siblings conflicts.

I must have missed the part where OP was asking for advice on how to repair relations with her siblings. I only read the part where she is still pissed that they wouldn't bankroll her fantasies of owning a joint beach house.

This.

LOL. Thank you for proving the point that DCUM is terrible with sibling conflicts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you should have given them their share in cash. This is your fault, not theirs. I assume you couldn’t afford to buy them out?

We all have similar HHIs, so it would have been unfair to put the full burden on me and my husband. It was a very fair price but it wasn’t exactly a small sim; ot would have been a stretch for just us. Not to mention they likely would have tried to keep using it, right. I didn’t want that dynamic either.

It is what it is. At the buyout, you would have had them sign a document on the terms of use, including fair market rent for comparable properties. Yes, it sucks, but if you are not going to buy out, then there is nothing you can do and need to let this go.

I’m the OP. I think this and also the person above who wrote similar sounds great in theory. I’d love to read a copacetic real world example of this happening after a pair of siblings enjoyed free access and use of a property for 40 and 50 plus years. It gives me anxiety just thinking about it. Of course in retrospect it’s easy to say I wish my husband and I did just that. There’s just really no good reason we couldn’t have kept the same arrangement my dad and uncle had. They honestly never argued about anything. It was all very chill and there was always happy family members there. Big house, lots of beds, lots of laughs. Breaks my heart.

OP, I feel you. I have similar fantasies and a messed up family. But pining for an amazing place with no arguments, always happy family members sounds like a dream you are going to have to mourn and let go.

[Anonymous]

Your dad would not have wanted you to ruminate over the sale. It is done and you have received your inheritance. Think about what you can do with it that honors your father’s memory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you should have given them their share in cash. This is your fault, not theirs. I assume you couldn’t afford to buy them out?

We all have similar HHIs, so it would have been unfair to put the full burden on me and my husband. It was a very fair price but it wasn’t exactly a small sim; ot would have been a stretch for just us. Not to mention they likely would have tried to keep using it, right. I didn’t want that dynamic either.

It is what it is. At the buyout, you would have had them sign a document on the terms of use, including fair market rent for comparable properties. Yes, it sucks, but if you are not going to buy out, then there is nothing you can do and need to let this go.

I’m the OP. I think this and also the person above who wrote similar sounds great in theory. I’d love to read a copacetic real world example of this happening after a pair of siblings enjoyed free access and use of a property for 40 and 50 plus years. It gives me anxiety just thinking about it. Of course in retrospect it’s easy to say I wish my husband and I did just that. There’s just really no good reason we couldn’t have kept the same arrangement my dad and uncle had. They honestly never argued about anything. It was all very chill and there was always happy family members there. Big house, lots of beds, lots of laughs. Breaks my heart.

OP you father and uncle either bought it equally together or inherited equal portions.if you were buying it out and they were all eventually getting checks from the buy out then it’s very easy to charge rent and not allow them free anytime access.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those low class Bush and Kennedy families are so dumb for keeping oceanfront land in the family for generations. Don’t they know you can rent at a variety of places on Airbnb and stay in hotels?

LOL, how stupid is this? If you're not wealthy like the Bushes or Kennedys, you might not even be able to keep the house for two generations. WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENED TO OP. Nobody here is saying that a beach house wouldn't be fantastic; they're saying that OP couldn't afford to buy it, so too bad so sad. I too am bummed that I didn't have the money to buy affordable beachfront property 10, 20, 30 years ago, but that is life.

I would also not discount how difficult it can be to manage a jointly owned property. Maintenance, upkeep and taxes can be sizable expenses, and if you have reluctant or poor owners, you are going to have to deal with this all the time. Are you going to rent the property out at all? That's another source of conflict. Does one family live closer and use the house more often? Did someone in one family leave a boogie board there and another family used it? (there was a DCUM posting like that). Who decides when to redecorate and how much to spend? What happens to the next generation, when the house needs to be divided 3, 6, or 10 ways among the offspring of three families? It's easy to romanticize the past when you don't have to shell out every year for taxes and upkeep.

We have rented the same beach house year after year and have lovely memories and family traditions, even without being Bushes or Kennedys.

+1
Co-owning property with family can be really hard and fraught with conflict, and the more co-owners, the worse. There are conflicts over who gets holiday weekends or spring break or popular summer weeks, over paying for and handling maintenance and repairs, about renovations and redecorating, about cleaning (or not), shared possessions, etc. The siblings may have enjoyed the time they spent there but not wanted to sign up for co-ownership. That's totally reasonable. It's fine to be sad, but carrying a grudge for years and letting it ruin your family relationships is silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you should have given them their share in cash. This is your fault, not theirs. I assume you couldn’t afford to buy them out?

We all have similar HHIs, so it would have been unfair to put the full burden on me and my husband. It was a very fair price but it wasn’t exactly a small sim; ot would have been a stretch for just us. Not to mention they likely would have tried to keep using it, right. I didn’t want that dynamic either.

It is what it is. At the buyout, you would have had them sign a document on the terms of use, including fair market rent for comparable properties. Yes, it sucks, but if you are not going to buy out, then there is nothing you can do and need to let this go.

I’m the OP. I think this and also the person above who wrote similar sounds great in theory. I’d love to read a copacetic real world example of this happening after a pair of siblings enjoyed free access and use of a property for 40 and 50 plus years. It gives me anxiety just thinking about it. Of course in retrospect it’s easy to say I wish my husband and I did just that. There’s just really no good reason we couldn’t have kept the same arrangement my dad and uncle had. They honestly never argued about anything. It was all very chill and there was always happy family members there. Big house, lots of beds, lots of laughs. Breaks my heart.

Do you know for sure they never disagreed? You were a kid. And you want a house that's always full of happy family members, but you only want it if your siblings paid -- if they didn't, you didn't want them to come. So you wouldn't get those full houses full of loving people. Your dad and uncle no doubt had guests who didn't pay for the house (including their own adult children) which is likely one reason that it felt so great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Property was co-owned by our father and uncle. No messy drama. During estate at the end of our dad's life, we were offered the opportunity buy out our uncle for a very fair sum we could all afford. My husband and I wanted to, but my two siblings and their spouses said no. Not only did I know the property would never depreciate, I thought it was important to let our dad stay there with his limited time and also keep the family tradition going. Siblings didn't care, they wanted the cash, so the property was sold.

Now six years later the property is worth three times what it was. We would have millions in equity between the three of us if they listened. In addition, the family tradition was lost. I think it broke my dad's heart before he died that he couldn't spend his remaining months there and know it was staying in the family. It infuriates me so much, especially during a holiday week like this. And siblings have a tenancy to complain how expensive a beach house rental is for their family in the same area.

Yeah. Similar happned to me. At the end of Dad's life sibling agreed we would keep the place. Even came up with a plan for use/costs. After Dad died sibling just wanted money. I could not afford to buy out at the time. I kick myself because only 3-4 years later I could have swung the price with no problem. I loved that place. But you have to just let it go. We bought another place somewhere else. New family traditions. Not worth hating on siblings. Be happy you have those memories. My Dad would love our beach place and he would love seeing his grandchildren there. To be honest, new place is better. Find your own new traditions, pass them on, and enjoy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP.

Just to be clear -- is someone really implying that you have to own a beach house to create good memories and a happy childhood for your children? Really, or am I misreading how the dichotomy is set up?

I'm not sure that people without beach houses are confined to mortgagor children. That's ... an odd take.

I assume people who did not grow up with access to family vacation homes don’t really understand, so it’s easy to be dismissive about the experiences, memories and traditions. A rental is not the same thing, not even close. And also, if you’re miserable and hate where you’re from or are estranged from family, it’s even easier to be dismissive about all of this.

Beach houses, and family businesses, tend to work out well when one person (or a married couple) own them and have the ultimate say on how they’re run/used.

Once ownership passes on to a group of siblings, that’s when the problems typically start. I expect that when my FIL dies, one of the four siblings in my wife’s family will force a sale of the Delaware beach house.

+1

Nailed it - you own it, you have the say - you don't own it, well then you do NOT have the say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you should have given them their share in cash. This is your fault, not theirs. I assume you couldn’t afford to buy them out?

We all have similar HHIs, so it would have been unfair to put the full burden on me and my husband. It was a very fair price but it wasn’t exactly a small sim; ot would have been a stretch for just us. Not to mention they likely would have tried to keep using it, right. I didn’t want that dynamic either.

It is what it is. At the buyout, you would have had them sign a document on the terms of use, including fair market rent for comparable properties. Yes, it sucks, but if you are not going to buy out, then there is nothing you can do and need to let this go.

I’m the OP. I think this and also the person above who wrote similar sounds great in theory. I’d love to read a copacetic real world example of this happening after a pair of siblings enjoyed free access and use of a property for 40 and 50 plus years. It gives me anxiety just thinking about it. Of course in retrospect it’s easy to say I wish my husband and I did just that. There’s just really no good reason we couldn’t have kept the same arrangement my dad and uncle had. They honestly never argued about anything. It was all very chill and there was always happy family members there. Big house, lots of beds, lots of laughs. Breaks my heart.

OP, I feel you. I have similar fantasies and a messed up family. But pining for an amazing place with no arguments, always happy family members sounds like a dream you are going to have to mourn and let go.

NP. It sounds lovely but how can that ever work? Someone had to be responsible for maintenance and bills and all of the not fun things that come with home ownership. It’s very different visiting the family vacation home and owning it. I would rather spend more money for my own place than own a larger place with my siblings. It’s too difficult. I’m saying this as someone who enjoys renting a big house to have my parents, siblings, nieces and nephews all come stay along with my family. It’s pleasant because we are all on vacation with no responsibilities. It would be different if any of us owned it.

[Anonymous]

I have a feeling that OP is angrier about the fact that her siblings wouldn't even consider and discuss co-ownership of the beach house, than if they had all sat around the table, discussed the options, the pros and cons, and then came to a conclusion.
The outcome would have been the same and the house would have been sold, but at least OP would have been listened to.

OP is the sentimental one of the 3 siblings and the other 2 should have dealt with the situation with a bit more tact - even if they said no to co-ownership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property was co-owned by our father and uncle. No messy drama. During estate at the end of our dad's life, we were offered the opportunity buy out our uncle for a very fair sum we could all afford. My husband and I wanted to, but my two siblings and their spouses said no. Not only did I know the property would never depreciate, I thought it was important to let our dad stay there with his limited time and also keep the family tradition going. Siblings didn't care, they wanted the cash, so the property was sold.

Now six years later the property is worth three times what it was. We would have millions in equity between the three of us if they listened. In addition, the family tradition was lost. I think it broke my dad's heart before he died that he couldn't spend his remaining months there and know it was staying in the family. It infuriates me so much, especially during a holiday week like this. And siblings have a tenancy to complain how expensive a beach house rental is for their family in the same area.

Yeah. Similar happned to me. At the end of Dad's life sibling agreed we would keep the place. Even came up with a plan for use/costs. After Dad died sibling just wanted money. I could not afford to buy out at the time. I kick myself because only 3-4 years later I could have swung the price with no problem. I loved that place. But you have to just let it go. We bought another place somewhere else. New family traditions. Not worth hating on siblings. Be happy you have those memories. My Dad would love our beach place and he would love seeing his grandchildren there. To be honest, new place is better. Find your own new traditions, pass them on, and enjoy.

This is why, if the parents have the means, they should leave specific things to specific people. My mom is bequeathing her rental properties to me with instructions that my brother will be paid out his share through cash when her estate settles. I want the real estate, he wants the cash. I won’t have to buy him out, he’ll get his share directly from cash in the estate. It couldn’t help the OP though since her dad shared ownership with her uncle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP.

Just to be clear -- is someone really implying that you have to own a beach house to create good memories and a happy childhood for your children? Really, or am I misreading how the dichotomy is set up?

I'm not sure that people without beach houses are confined to mortgagor children. That's ... an odd take.

I assume people who did not grow up with access to family vacation homes don’t really understand, so it’s easy to be dismissive about the experiences, memories and traditions. A rental is not the same thing, not even close. And also, if you’re miserable and hate where you’re from or are estranged from family, it’s even easier to be dismissive about all of this.

Beach houses, and family businesses, tend to work out well when one person (or a married couple) own them and have the ultimate say on how they’re run/used.

Once ownership passes on to a group of siblings, that’s when the problems typically start. I expect that when my FIL dies, one of the four siblings in my wife’s family will force a sale of the Delaware beach house.

+1

Nailed it - you own it, you have the say - you don't own it, well then you do NOT have the say.

I think it’s also important to have one person who has a final say on how a piece of property is run and managed. Maybe there are family properties out their being run smoothly by 4 siblings. I’ve never encountered one, though.