When the estate breaks the family

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We tried that and sibling rejected it. Our last offer was house outright but sibling is insisting on house and equal split of cash which is a bridge too far for some siblings.

Judges just keep doing continuances which is annoying.

This seems pretty clear cut that the estate will get 1/2 the current value of the house. It seems like sibling would end up worse off by going to court than accepting this offer. What does the estate’s attorney say?

OP, I feel for you.

House outright was a bridge too far and even that was rejected.

Hire an attorney, follow the law in the jurisdiction. Next offer should be relevant share of 1/2 of equity or with them buying out the estate or partition ordered by court.

The relationships are already damaged, so unfortunate.

Your parent has an asset worth probably hundreds of thousands of dollars, they chose not to gift the money initially or to gift the house in the will or to change deed while still alive. It's the will and the state law that govern. Your parents wanted all of you to equally share. One greedy heir should not subvert that. You will never feel close to or trust this person again. No probate court should sign off an an estate with these types of shenanigans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP back here. We have plenty of lawyers now and in creating this mess including one parent (set up will and trust), siblings and spouses of siblings. Other real estate was part of will which was either directly addressed in will or has been sold.

The entire estate can't be closed out until agreement is reached on what to do with the home. The sibling residing in the home has rejected all offers to settle including owning the house outright but not getting share of the cash (equity in home is 5x what split cash would be). They are demanding home outright and equal split of cash. This has infuriated some of the siblings so to partition we go.

We actually used to all be very close.

Hot mess. It is a good reminder to all that making one of your kids your executor could be a terrible move.

Oof. What is House Sibling’s possible rationale for getting a bigger share? Are they arguing that they put money into the house and deserve more than 50% of it on an equitable basis?

But at the end of the day, zero sympathy for House Sibling. I live in a house effectively controlled by my MIL’s future estate - about 1/3 of the current value was contributed by her as a loan when we bought it. I have always known & accepted that we may have to sell depending on MIL’s preferences or however the estate shakes out. I’m grateful that through her providing me leverage I got to live in a house I never could have afforded otherwise and will eventually get a nice chunk of money for the appreciation! It would seem unfair if the executors forced us to move on very short notice, but otherwise, I’m a grown-up and went into this with my eyes open.

Can’t you just pay back the loan while your MIL is still alive? Then she would have no claim to your house, nor would her estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to tell you, I wouldn’t care about this at all. If it’s a house that is the home of my sibling, but my parents helped pay for it, I would want to transfer it to them in the easiest way that satisfies the legal requirements of probate or whatever.

I don’t care at all about me and my siblings getting an equal inheritance. I think if people are at the point where they want someone to move to a new house over that, the family was already “broken.”

I agree

I think any sibling who tries to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars from a parent's estate is a broken person and not one you can have a healthy relationship with.

The executor has a legal duty to the estate and needs to hire a lawyer. The sib doesn't have to move, they can buy out the estate's share. Or the money can be trued up in other ways. It's only by them failing to reach a fair agreement that an issue like a court order for partition could come into play.

OP, I would not kick the can down the road, this should be resolved now so the estate can be settled. Your parent CHOSE to become part owner of the house and it's an asset of the estate. I am guessing this sib has always tried to steamroller people, but your parent did not capitulate and merely gift one child a large sum. Respect their wishes.

I have a sibling who stole thousands from my parent’s estate by refusing to distribute and hiding valuable personal property. That sibling had shown their true self years before, so it is no great loss to have no relationship with them after the way they handled the estate. You’re better off without people like that in your life.

[Anonymous]

The solution is logical and in no way should be influenced by emotions or desires of the house sibling.

Time to hire an estate lawyer to determine the appropriate steps to divide the estate's ownership stake in the house among the heirs. There are typically a few ways to do this, which involve either a sale of the property or an appraised valuation followed by sibling purchasing their equity stake. If sibling can't afford to purchase (via loan or cash) her equity stake, you can usually force a sale of the home. But get a lawyer to advise you so you do it within the letter of the law. It doesn't need to involve expensive drawn-out legal proceedings, just advice on how to move forward appropriately.

IGNORE sibling's rants. Those will happen no matter what you do. The important thing is to abide by the law so that house sibling can't further muddy this situation due to missteps on the management of the estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP back here. We have plenty of lawyers now and in creating this mess including one parent (set up will and trust), siblings and spouses of siblings. Other real estate was part of will which was either directly addressed in will or has been sold.

The entire estate can't be closed out until agreement is reached on what to do with the home. The sibling residing in the home has rejected all offers to settle including owning the house outright but not getting share of the cash (equity in home is 5x what split cash would be). They are demanding home outright and equal split of cash. This has infuriated some of the siblings so to partition we go.

We actually used to all be very close.

Hot mess. It is a good reminder to all that making one of your kids your executor could be a terrible move.

Oof. What is House Sibling’s possible rationale for getting a bigger share? Are they arguing that they put money into the house and deserve more than 50% of it on an equitable basis?

But at the end of the day, zero sympathy for House Sibling. I live in a house effectively controlled by my MIL’s future estate - about 1/3 of the current value was contributed by her as a loan when we bought it. I have always known & accepted that we may have to sell depending on MIL’s preferences or however the estate shakes out. I’m grateful that through her providing me leverage I got to live in a house I never could have afforded otherwise and will eventually get a nice chunk of money for the appreciation! It would seem unfair if the executors forced us to move on very short notice, but otherwise, I’m a grown-up and went into this with my eyes open.

Can’t you just pay back the loan while your MIL is still alive? Then she would have no claim to your house, nor would her estate.

Yes of course but do not have the money for that unless we sell the house or take out a big new mortgage.

[Anonymous]

OP, what is House Sibling's justification for their stance? Are they claiming it was a gift even though estate is tenant in common?

[Anonymous]

House Sibling has already burned down the relationship. And Executor seems to be passively siding with House Sibling??

[Anonymous]

I am still SO curious about how House Sibling justifies this. I wonder if they believe that they had some sort of deal that in return for the house, they would have parents move in and care for them? Or do they feel like they were constrained in their ability to relocate due to the co-ownership? Maybe they wanted to liquidate but parents refused?

[Anonymous]

The executor has a legal obligation to distribute the assets of estate correctly to ALL heirs and within a certain amount of time.

The flip side of all this is that if the executor caves to any of House Sibling's demands that don't follow estate laws, then other heirs would be wronged (and could sue the estate). There are clear legal guidelines for how to move forward and the key is to follow the letter of the law and ignore emotional complaints not grounded in the law.

It's a difficult situation but just stay focused on proper disposition of estate assets and know that heirs will often make ungrounded claims.

Sorry you are dealing with this, OP.

[Anonymous]

There is the law, the parents’ original intent as indicated by the deed, and then what is best for long term harmony - and it’s possible none of those is fair.

No one is entitled to an inheritance. While it’s true that the parents’ “investment” in the sibling’s home has panned out well that is mostly luck and timing and is also unrealized gains. The parents could have left that money in a savings account or blown it on Trump NFTs. Claiming an equal portion of the gains seems greedy. Forcing a sibling to move also feels greedy. If I bought my home today, my payment would double!

I think the non-homeowner sibs need to take whatever hangups they have about the homeowner sibling’s success to therapy instead of blowing a ton of money on legal fees out of spite and losing their family in the process. Therapy is expensive, but in an hour for hour basis it is cheaper than a lawyer.

I get it that the final outcome may not be fair or equal. It might not even result in each sib getting every penny they are legally due.

How many total siblings? From the wording, at least 4. The homeowner, OP, and “siblings” = 2 or more.
How much was the original investment? What is that amount, divided equally among siblings, minus however ever much you are about to blow on legal fees?
How much are your family relationships worth to you? Is the money enough to lose a relationship with your siblings and your children with their cousins? Over money?

[Anonymous]

I wonder if House Sibling just always believed it was a joint tenancy with survivorship (ie the property goes automatically to them) or just plain did not understand what tenancy in common means? Even very intelligent people can fail to understand this stuff. They may have gone decades believing the whole house is theirs and this created an entitlement in their mind, facts non withstanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is the law, the parents’ original intent as indicated by the deed, and then what is best for long term harmony - and it’s possible none of those is fair.

No one is entitled to an inheritance. While it’s true that the parents’ “investment” in the sibling’s home has panned out well that is mostly luck and timing and is also unrealized gains. The parents could have left that money in a savings account or blown it on Trump NFTs. Claiming an equal portion of the gains seems greedy. Forcing a sibling to move also feels greedy. If I bought my home today, my payment would double!

I think the non-homeowner sibs need to take whatever hangups they have about the homeowner sibling’s success to therapy instead of blowing a ton of money on legal fees out of spite and losing their family in the process. Therapy is expensive, but in an hour for hour basis it is cheaper than a lawyer.

I get it that the final outcome may not be fair or equal. It might not even result in each sib getting every penny they are legally due.

How many total siblings? From the wording, at least 4. The homeowner, OP, and “siblings” = 2 or more.
How much was the original investment? What is that amount, divided equally among siblings, minus however ever much you are about to blow on legal fees?
How much are your family relationships worth to you? Is the money enough to lose a relationship with your siblings and your children with their cousins? Over money?

Curious how you arrive at the belief that House Sibling laying claim to likely $100s of thousands they are not entitled to legally is not greedy? But siblings wanting the estate to be divided per the law is greedy?

The reference to House Sibling’s financial status is relevant. If they were struggling financially then sure, it becomes easier to accept that parents’ leaving the title as tenants in common was a mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is the law, the parents’ original intent as indicated by the deed, and then what is best for long term harmony - and it’s possible none of those is fair.

No one is entitled to an inheritance. While it’s true that the parents’ “investment” in the sibling’s home has panned out well that is mostly luck and timing and is also unrealized gains. The parents could have left that money in a savings account or blown it on Trump NFTs. Claiming an equal portion of the gains seems greedy. Forcing a sibling to move also feels greedy. If I bought my home today, my payment would double!

I think the non-homeowner sibs need to take whatever hangups they have about the homeowner sibling’s success to therapy instead of blowing a ton of money on legal fees out of spite and losing their family in the process. Therapy is expensive, but in an hour for hour basis it is cheaper than a lawyer.

I get it that the final outcome may not be fair or equal. It might not even result in each sib getting every penny they are legally due.

How many total siblings? From the wording, at least 4. The homeowner, OP, and “siblings” = 2 or more.
How much was the original investment? What is that amount, divided equally among siblings, minus however ever much you are about to blow on legal fees?
How much are your family relationships worth to you? Is the money enough to lose a relationship with your siblings and your children with their cousins? Over money?

As I read it, House Sibling wants the house in its entirety PLUS an equal share of the rest of the estate. THAT is greedy.

[Anonymous]

What House Sibling WANTS is irrelevant.

All that matters is to distribute the assets properly, in accordance with the estate and will.

The executor has obligation to the follow the law, not the family's squeaky wheel.

[Anonymous]

I believe in Maryland, TIC are proportionally responsible for all costs associated with ownership- taxes, HOA, insurance, maintenance, improvements. If the parents weren’t paying half, I’d expect House Sibling to ask for all of that with interest + legal fees (unless there was a separate shared ownership contract). Depending on how long they’ve been in the house, the ownership costs could make a significant dent in the estate’s half.

House Sibling either has something significant up his sleeve or has his head lodged in another part. I don’t envy you in this situation, OP.