Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

I guess this is just a different way of looking at the world. For some people in this thread it seems completely unfair that relationships could come into play when a will is drafted. But if I found out that one of my siblings or cousins kept in close touch with one of the many aunts that I only think about/see at family gatherings (like OP does), I wouldn't find it weird or sketchy that that aunt remembered them in her will. I guess I would think it's nice that the money is staying in the family, and hope it helps that sibling/cousin process their (probably deeper) grief at her passing.

I would feel differently if it was a parent, or if I thought the recipient tricked the aunt. But that's not the case here, except for the posters who are assuming that any relationship with an elderly person must be a trick, even one that's been going on for 5+ years.

What if you had one aunt, one sibling and you both lived far away from said aunt? Then what’s cooking?

One aunt that I saw occasionally at family gatherings and my sibling and/or sibling's spouse checked in with often via mail or phone calls? I would feel the same. If the aunt was senile and the will was changed without witnesses or something it would be sketchy. If the aunt left everything in her will to my sibling that she felt closer to, then I would not be bothered at all. Geographic distance doesn't figure in if one person is putting in the effort to be "close" to a person and the other is not.

And this is not self-serving because I'm terrible at staying in touch with people. In the hypotheticals here I would always be the niece that was not left money, and that's fine.

So 5 years of a possibly manipulative overly social in law phone calling at your end of life and emailing you a couple times a month overrides 50 years of a bloodline in person, consistent relationship?

Got it, I have an AI app that does exactly that.

Will send to all my naive “relationship based” elderly in laws and revert back when I got a bite or new will revision. Lol.

I think there's something really ugly about your worldview, as evidenced by how you open and/or close every post with a stated intention to take whatever has been said and use it to somehow get more money out of people. There's no reason to assume that OP's SIL was being "manipulative" - why would she manipulate one aunt into leaving her estate to charity? And perhaps you've never met an elderly person, but there's no such thing as overly social phone calling. Most elderly people are quite lonely and love getting calls.

Also, in-person, consistent relationship is a pretty grandiose description of OP's seeing these people twice a year when she visits her hometown. And OP's brother has the same "bloodline" as the OP, so you can rest easy on your worry that family ties are meaningless if a person gets to decide what to do with their own money.

Ok cool, the SIL did it because she loves phoning other people’s relatives weekly and playing estate accountant upon death. If the will beneficiaries just so happen to totally change upon putting her in charge, oh well, such an ugly worldview.

Bingo, that’s why the Dial an Elderly Relative agentic AI app will be so popular.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

I guess this is just a different way of looking at the world. For some people in this thread it seems completely unfair that relationships could come into play when a will is drafted. But if I found out that one of my siblings or cousins kept in close touch with one of the many aunts that I only think about/see at family gatherings (like OP does), I wouldn't find it weird or sketchy that that aunt remembered them in her will. I guess I would think it's nice that the money is staying in the family, and hope it helps that sibling/cousin process their (probably deeper) grief at her passing.

I would feel differently if it was a parent, or if I thought the recipient tricked the aunt. But that's not the case here, except for the posters who are assuming that any relationship with an elderly person must be a trick, even one that's been going on for 5+ years.

What if you had one aunt, one sibling and you both lived far away from said aunt? Then what’s cooking?

One aunt that I saw occasionally at family gatherings and my sibling and/or sibling's spouse checked in with often via mail or phone calls? I would feel the same. If the aunt was senile and the will was changed without witnesses or something it would be sketchy. If the aunt left everything in her will to my sibling that she felt closer to, then I would not be bothered at all. Geographic distance doesn't figure in if one person is putting in the effort to be "close" to a person and the other is not.

And this is not self-serving because I'm terrible at staying in touch with people. In the hypotheticals here I would always be the niece that was not left money, and that's fine.

So 5 years of a possibly manipulative overly social in law phone calling at your end of life and emailing you a couple times a month overrides 50 years of a bloodline in person, consistent relationship?

Got it, I have an AI app that does exactly that.

Will send to all my naive “relationship based” elderly in laws and revert back when I got a bite or new will revision. Lol.

I think there's something really ugly about your worldview, as evidenced by how you open and/or close every post with a stated intention to take whatever has been said and use it to somehow get more money out of people. There's no reason to assume that OP's SIL was being "manipulative" - why would she manipulate one aunt into leaving her estate to charity? And perhaps you've never met an elderly person, but there's no such thing as overly social phone calling. Most elderly people are quite lonely and love getting calls.

Also, in-person, consistent relationship is a pretty grandiose description of OP's seeing these people twice a year when she visits her hometown. And OP's brother has the same "bloodline" as the OP, so you can rest easy on your worry that family ties are meaningless if a person gets to decide what to do with their own money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

I guess this is just a different way of looking at the world. For some people in this thread it seems completely unfair that relationships could come into play when a will is drafted. But if I found out that one of my siblings or cousins kept in close touch with one of the many aunts that I only think about/see at family gatherings (like OP does), I wouldn't find it weird or sketchy that that aunt remembered them in her will. I guess I would think it's nice that the money is staying in the family, and hope it helps that sibling/cousin process their (probably deeper) grief at her passing.

I would feel differently if it was a parent, or if I thought the recipient tricked the aunt. But that's not the case here, except for the posters who are assuming that any relationship with an elderly person must be a trick, even one that's been going on for 5+ years.

What if you had one aunt, one sibling and you both lived far away from said aunt? Then what’s cooking?

One aunt that I saw occasionally at family gatherings and my sibling and/or sibling's spouse checked in with often via mail or phone calls? I would feel the same. If the aunt was senile and the will was changed without witnesses or something it would be sketchy. If the aunt left everything in her will to my sibling that she felt closer to, then I would not be bothered at all. Geographic distance doesn't figure in if one person is putting in the effort to be "close" to a person and the other is not.

And this is not self-serving because I'm terrible at staying in touch with people. In the hypotheticals here I would always be the niece that was not left money, and that's fine.

So 5 years of a possibly manipulative overly social in law phone calling at your end of life and emailing you a couple times a month overrides 50 years of a bloodline in person, consistent relationship?

Got it, I have an AI app that does exactly that.

Will send to all my naive “relationship based” elderly in laws and revert back when I got a bite or new will revision. Lol.

Anonymous wrote:Your brother is just as much to blame as his wife. He could have stopped her, but he didn't.

I'm sorry, OP. At least you can refuse to help this family with equanimity now that you know they will inherit a significant sum. Focus on your own life. The best revenge is living well!

PS: You could also inform your parents and explain that it's only fair that they compensate for this unfairness by weighing each of your inheritances accordingly. Depends what kind of parents they are.

BIL more to blame if his aunts by blood. Stop blaming SIL and put it all on your brother where belongs

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

I guess this is just a different way of looking at the world. For some people in this thread it seems completely unfair that relationships could come into play when a will is drafted. But if I found out that one of my siblings or cousins kept in close touch with one of the many aunts that I only think about/see at family gatherings (like OP does), I wouldn't find it weird or sketchy that that aunt remembered them in her will. I guess I would think it's nice that the money is staying in the family, and hope it helps that sibling/cousin process their (probably deeper) grief at her passing.

I would feel differently if it was a parent, or if I thought the recipient tricked the aunt. But that's not the case here, except for the posters who are assuming that any relationship with an elderly person must be a trick, even one that's been going on for 5+ years.

What if you had one aunt, one sibling and you both lived far away from said aunt? Then what’s cooking?

One aunt that I saw occasionally at family gatherings and my sibling and/or sibling's spouse checked in with often via mail or phone calls? I would feel the same. If the aunt was senile and the will was changed without witnesses or something it would be sketchy. If the aunt left everything in her will to my sibling that she felt closer to, then I would not be bothered at all. Geographic distance doesn't figure in if one person is putting in the effort to be "close" to a person and the other is not.

And this is not self-serving because I'm terrible at staying in touch with people. In the hypotheticals here I would always be the niece that was not left money, and that's fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

I guess this is just a different way of looking at the world. For some people in this thread it seems completely unfair that relationships could come into play when a will is drafted. But if I found out that one of my siblings or cousins kept in close touch with one of the many aunts that I only think about/see at family gatherings (like OP does), I wouldn't find it weird or sketchy that that aunt remembered them in her will. I guess I would think it's nice that the money is staying in the family, and hope it helps that sibling/cousin process their (probably deeper) grief at her passing.

I would feel differently if it was a parent, or if I thought the recipient tricked the aunt. But that's not the case here, except for the posters who are assuming that any relationship with an elderly person must be a trick, even one that's been going on for 5+ years.

What if you had one aunt, one sibling and you both lived far away from said aunt? Then what’s cooking?

Anonymous wrote:My SIL's full time job was shaking the money tree. She didn't work but spent a lot of time calling all the elderly relatives every day, telling them all about the summer camp that Johny really wanted to go to but it was just too expensive. It's also a job, just a different one.

I remember this happening too when SIL couldn’t use a friend’s military rate passes for something big. She dialed for dollars big time, except the relatives with their own brains. Funny how the family email list changes depending on the topic….

My SIL's full time job was shaking the money tree. She didn't work but spent a lot of time calling all the elderly relatives every day, telling them all about the summer camp that Johny really wanted to go to but it was just too expensive. It's also a job, just a different one.

Your post is rather loaded. For example, you mention that your SIL does not work, but you do. Why? Perhaps you’re insufferable and they liked your SIL more?

Say whatever you want, but you’re upset because you want your hands on that money. Think about that for a minute.

So your brother and his wife helped your aunts and they are being rewarded. You sat around and did nothing and now are jealous that you're not getting any money that you don't deserve anyway.

DH's sister does the same, and she deserves every penny that DH's crazy aunt leaves her. We don't want to deal with her, and we don't care about her money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

OP has not stated that she ever knew of either one of her aunts having a will that left a portion of their respective estates to her. There’s no indication that she was ever going to inherit anything from either one of them. Probate law only dictates who inherits and in what shares when a person dies without a will. If y, ou have a will, generally, it’s hard to disinherit a surviving spouse completely, but otherwise, you can leave your money to whomever you want to. There is no obligation to leave your niece anything. Therefore, this is not a case of OP being excluded.

Even if one of these aunts were to die without any will, with no surviving spouse, direct descendants or parents, probate law would dictate that any surviving siblings would be next in line to inherit, meaning one of the parents of OP and her brother (OP indicated they’re still alive) would inherit from the estate, not OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

I guess this is just a different way of looking at the world. For some people in this thread it seems completely unfair that relationships could come into play when a will is drafted. But if I found out that one of my siblings or cousins kept in close touch with one of the many aunts that I only think about/see at family gatherings (like OP does), I wouldn't find it weird or sketchy that that aunt remembered them in her will. I guess I would think it's nice that the money is staying in the family, and hope it helps that sibling/cousin process their (probably deeper) grief at her passing.

I would feel differently if it was a parent, or if I thought the recipient tricked the aunt. But that's not the case here, except for the posters who are assuming that any relationship with an elderly person must be a trick, even one that's been going on for 5+ years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

If it’s not about the money, how or why did SIL & Aunt change one will to exclude the only other niece?

If the brother and SIL are so caring and altruistic then they could have done everything above board: hey family update, we’re the executors and whatever’s left gets split 50/50 to heirs per the usual probate law.

This doesn't make any sense. For the will that names SIL executor, the money goes to charity. But you think that unless the executor breaks the law and distributes the money as though the estate is intestate, she's a scammer?

There's no evidence that the will that gives the money to brother and SIL was changed "to exclude" OP, either. We have no way of knowing whether OP was ever considered or named as an heir by that aunt. I have 9 aunts and don't think I'm a named heir in any of their wills, that's not particularly common.

Start working it PP, early bird gets the worm! You snooze, you lose! Finders keepers!

End of life concerned emails, thank you letters, instagram pics from gatherings, birthday cards. That’s all it takes, get going!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t sense the money for either side is the issue.
It’s the secrets and back channeling that obviously happened and continue to happen.
That also can lead to more cuts in the will, so “Early ButtKisser Gets the Worm.”

From OP’s original post:
“In one case she and my brother are now set to inherit 100% of everything. In the other case, she will get a hefty 6 figure “admin fee” and the rest will be donated.“

If it’s not about the money, then what are you implying about “buttkissing” and “worms”?

Who wouldn’t feel a slap in the face if you thought everyone had normal and good relationships with the old aunts and then learned this change? This did not read like anyone lives within driving distance.

“‘I’m really disgusted by this all. The lack of communication, transparency and omissions.‘“

I actually also think it’s NBD on the money front so it’s really about the trust & ethics front, plus having the time & skills to settle an estate while out of state.

Maybe OP can chime in, there’s a lot of projecting going on around here.