Anonymous
12/20/2016 18:05
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
Larla should just wait and see and not negotiate anything unless a lawsuit is actually filed. Even then, her lawyer should advise her.
It sounds like Roy doesn't need the money. It's only Mary who possibly does, and she has to decide whether she wants to challenge the will and if Roy will be supportive, or if a lawsuit will be all on her. Mary also has to seriously consider that she may be unsuccessful and whether she will regret the legal bills if that's the outcome.
It sounds like Roy doesn't need the money. It's only Mary who possibly does, and she has to decide whether she wants to challenge the will and if Roy will be supportive, or if a lawsuit will be all on her. Mary also has to seriously consider that she may be unsuccessful and whether she will regret the legal bills if that's the outcome.
Anonymous
12/20/2016 17:20
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
The comment about Warren Buffet actually does have to do with wealth. Very wealthy people have so many advantages anyway that they don't need to be left the bulk of their parents' estates. They are doing quite fine without the addition of many millions. The rest of us who are of much more modest means generally choose to leave what is left when we go to our own children, particularly when there is a family home.
She doesn't have to assume that she will "lose" the challenge to the will, but she can assume that she would have to spend a lot of money to fight it if a suit were brought. If she loses the challenge, she will get nothing because she is too distant a relative; if she negotiates and enters into a compromise, she can get more than she would have had Thelma left most of her estate to her own children. If Thelma is declared to be intestate, everything will go to her own children.
She doesn't have to assume that she will "lose" the challenge to the will, but she can assume that she would have to spend a lot of money to fight it if a suit were brought. If she loses the challenge, she will get nothing because she is too distant a relative; if she negotiates and enters into a compromise, she can get more than she would have had Thelma left most of her estate to her own children. If Thelma is declared to be intestate, everything will go to her own children.
Anonymous
12/20/2016 17:01
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
The comment about Warren Buffet is not about the amount of wealth. It's that there are respected people that think it's reasonable to not leave the bulk of their wealth to family. So I think that the point that this is unusual in a will is questionable, and can be disputed.
Assuming she is going to "lose" a challenge to the will and offering part of her inheritance to the siblings is not necessarily a smart move for Larla. She needs to see a good lawyer on her own.
Assuming she is going to "lose" a challenge to the will and offering part of her inheritance to the siblings is not necessarily a smart move for Larla. She needs to see a good lawyer on her own.
Anonymous
12/20/2016 14:23
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It's not weird that it happened once. It's weird that (presumably) one person kept bringing it up over and over.
It's presumptuous to assume that it's one person who keeps bringing up the will. It is an unusual will and people are going to comment on it and question its validity, as they always do in the cases of unusual wills. Very few people leave the bulk of their estate to a distant family member rather than the direct descendants, which is why the other thread attracted a lot of attention.
It's well known that Warren Buffet doesn't plan to leave the bulk of his wealth to his own kids. Maybe Thelma thought the same way. At least she left generous amounts to each child -- more than many are left with even when everything goes to the kids.
Lawyer's fees are not insignificant, and people of limited means to begin with have to carefully consider whether fighting over the will makes financial sense, especially if there is a good possiblity they may lose. The possibly $400K to gain split two or possibly three ways minus lawyers fees, minus renovation costs in order to sell the house, minus realtor's fees, and all the emotional angst and familial discord -- the net gain may may make less difference in their lives than the hassle of contesting the will.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/why-the-very-rich-arent-giving-much-of-their-fortunes-to-their-kids/2014/08/10/4a9551b4-1ccc-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html?utm_term=.8f5790597c52
Most of us are not in the Warren Buffet category in terms of wealth, and neither was Thelma. It would be expensive to contest the will, so it would be worth it for Larla, Mary, and Roy, to sit down with their lawyers and come up with a way to split up the estate without going to court if the lawyers see grounds for Mary and Roy to contest the will. It would save them all the expenses of court proceedings (so they could avoid the result in Bleak House!) and Larla will still end up with more than she would if the will ends up being found to be no good. Selling the house and splitting the proceeds three ways would work out better for all of them.
Anonymous
12/20/2016 12:00
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
^ correction: Lawyers'
Anonymous
12/20/2016 11:54
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
Anonymous wrote:
It's not weird that it happened once. It's weird that (presumably) one person kept bringing it up over and over.
It's presumptuous to assume that it's one person who keeps bringing up the will. It is an unusual will and people are going to comment on it and question its validity, as they always do in the cases of unusual wills. Very few people leave the bulk of their estate to a distant family member rather than the direct descendants, which is why the other thread attracted a lot of attention.
It's well known that Warren Buffet doesn't plan to leave the bulk of his wealth to his own kids. Maybe Thelma thought the same way. At least she left generous amounts to each child -- more than many are left with even when everything goes to the kids.
Lawyer's fees are not insignificant, and people of limited means to begin with have to carefully consider whether fighting over the will makes financial sense, especially if there is a good possiblity they may lose. The possibly $400K to gain split two or possibly three ways minus lawyers fees, minus renovation costs in order to sell the house, minus realtor's fees, and all the emotional angst and familial discord -- the net gain may may make less difference in their lives than the hassle of contesting the will.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/why-the-very-rich-arent-giving-much-of-their-fortunes-to-their-kids/2014/08/10/4a9551b4-1ccc-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html?utm_term=.8f5790597c52
Anonymous
12/20/2016 02:33
Subject: For those who have read the "inheritance debacle" thread... What do you think?
It's not weird that it happened once. It's weird that (presumably) one person kept bringing it up over and over.
It's presumptuous to assume that it's one person who keeps bringing up the will. It is an unusual will and people are going to comment on it and question its validity, as they always do in the cases of unusual wills. Very few people leave the bulk of their estate to a distant family member rather than the direct descendants, which is why the other thread attracted a lot of attention.