Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread, I see why so many marriages fail.

So quick to dismiss. So quick to ditch the spouse. So willing to put other things ahead of your spouse and your marriage

Reading through this thread, I see why so many marriages fail.

Men are so quick to impose their beliefs and decision-making on their wives even when it relates to separate non-marital property. So quick to control the spouse. So willing to put their own self-interest and control the spouse and be the dominant voice in the marriage.

There FTFY.

Gimme a break. A spouse should have an opinion on their future together. Owning a second home impacts him, regardless of how they got ownership of the house. That's not controlling. In fact, ignoring is dismissive of a valid concern

Have your siblings buy you out.

Your DH is 100% right that being a joint owner with the bouncer sibling is asking for a world of trouble.

I'd favor the buyout + rent out/reserve for family use (including bouncer).

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread, I see why so many marriages fail.

So quick to dismiss. So quick to ditch the spouse. So willing to put other things ahead of your spouse and your marriage

Reading through this thread, I see why so many marriages fail.

Men are so quick to impose their beliefs and decision-making on their wives even when it relates to separate non-marital property. So quick to control the spouse. So willing to put their own self-interest and control the spouse and be the dominant voice in the marriage.

There FTFY.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP This is not his decision it is yours.

You work, why in the world is he even involved. Ladies take control of your lives.

Otherwise divorce him,

I understand the female empowerment aspect here. But I am a male, and make about 85% of our HHI (and in many years, if was a lot more than that). My job pays for, and has paid for, virtually everything in our lives. I am responsible for more than 80% of our retirement savings, and the only reason it's that low is that many years, my wife's entire income was dumped into retirement savings.

Does that mean I get to make all financial decisions for our family? Of course not.

Stop talking out of your ass.

You are talking about making decisions because your current income is high. That is not OPs situation. OP is talking about the possibility of an inheritance of property using non-marital funds to take care of that property. It is not a financial decision about the family. It is a financial decision about her separately owned money and assets.

Anonymous wrote:^^OP here— and the idea of using inheritance money for upkeep is brilliant, instead of using marital assets. Unfortunately my husband believes that all assets, even inherited, are shared....

Advice from a qualified real estate or estates and trusts attorney trumps what your husband "believes". Consult an attorney and if necessary, after you have consulted the attorney and decided how YOU want to handle YOUR inheritance, you may decide to ask the attorney to explain to you and your husband in a joint meeting how things will be structured.

Generally inheritances are separate property (i.e. property only of the inheritor) unless something is done during the marriage to change the status of the separate property, i.e. using marital income for upkeep and taxes.

Personally, I would consult an estates and trusts attorney. There may be a way to title the property or place the ownership or the property and some maintenance money in trust so that all three of you can use the property but are also shielded from some of the liability potentially created by the less responsible brother. But, of course, this would need to be done as part of your Dad's estate planning while he is still competent enough to make decisions.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thank you for all the good suggestions.

I like the idea of setting aside other money I inherit and using that to pay for the minimal upkeep. We aren’t wealthy and this is a really basic cabin; it’s just in a beautiful location and surrounded by many dear old family friends.

The cabin has been jointly owned by siblings in our family for many decades with no major issues. The problem now is that one of my siblings has struggled in life and made unfortunate choices. My husband is worried about the legal implications of owning a property with this sibling. For example, if they were to be sued by someone, could the cabin be seized to settle a lawsuit? I don’t know how this works. I probably need to speak to a lawyer about this aspect.

Speak to a lawyer and make sure that you get insurance on the cabin that will cover any damage to the property as well as any liability from accidents on the property. You need a lawyer to explain what the best way is to title the inherited property among the three of you to protect you all -- for example -- if your sister inherits 1/3 and wants to sell her 1/3 can she? Or what if she passes away - will the property pass automatically to the survivors? It will depend on how the property is titled.

The lawyer also needs to tell you what you need to protect yourself from any liability -- property insurance? personal liability umbrella?

And lawyer needs to speak to how you can keep this property out of your marital property -- if you begin to pay for upkeep with current income or joint funds, then your husband has a marital interest in the property. If you can pay for upkeep out of funds that you can demonstrate accrued prior to marriage or from the inheritance, then you can keep this property out of your marital estate.

Your DH has legitimate concerns, but that doesn't mean he gets to dictate what happens.

As to the legal implications of owning the property with sibling -- if someone got a judgment against your sibling that went unpaid, or if sibling used the property as collateral, that person (or business) could file a lien against the house for up to the value of the sibling's 1/3 interest. The lienholder may be able to force the sale of the property (or you and other sibling would have to buy out). From the sale proceeds, the lienholder would be paid out of the sibling's share. If the sibling's share is not enough to cover the lien, that's too bad for the lienholder - but they cannot get any portion of your share.

Depending on how property is titled, you will probably be responsible for sibling's share of taxes if they don't pay.

Reading through this thread, I see why so many marriages fail.

So quick to dismiss. So quick to ditch the spouse. So willing to put other things ahead of your spouse and your marriage

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So much good advice (even when it’s conflicting) in this thread. I don’t have a lot of people I can talk to about this so I really appreciate you giving me your thoughts.

To answer the question about “dysfunctional sibling”: didn’t graduate from HS, works in a job where physical confrontations are not uncommon (bouncer at a bar), has been charged after assaulting unruly patrons a few times (never convicted), but is unfailingly loyal to me and is the most attached of all of us to the cabin and would never accept a buyout due to sentimental attachment. But probably won’t always be able to contribute to maintenance due to cash flow challenges. I don’t think we’d have to worry about sib living in the cabin, as it has no heat or A/C.

My husband is like, “I do not want to own property with or be legally bound to your sibling in any way,” and I get that. However I think if it’s an inheritance, my husband is not legally bound in any way. It’s my risk to take that everything will work out.

I know you want to keep the place, but the bolded is simply a nonstarter, and I can see why your husband would be unhappy about it. You sibling has to realize that if he can't afford to pay for his share of the cabin, the other siblings need to buy him out. You can tell him that you will obviously invite him to use it. The alternative is to force a partition sale, and then it's out of the family forever.

Now, as long as you can convince the sibling, and can afford to purchase his portion from the inherited funds, and can afford the upkeep on the property, I think your husband is being a little unreasonable. He's right that the cabin should not determine his vacations for all time, but he's being unnecessarily rigid.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So much good advice (even when it’s conflicting) in this thread. I don’t have a lot of people I can talk to about this so I really appreciate you giving me your thoughts.

To answer the question about “dysfunctional sibling”: didn’t graduate from HS, works in a job where physical confrontations are not uncommon (bouncer at a bar), has been charged after assaulting unruly patrons a few times (never convicted), but is unfailingly loyal to me and is the most attached of all of us to the cabin and would never accept a buyout due to sentimental attachment. But probably won’t always be able to contribute to maintenance due to cash flow challenges. I don’t think we’d have to worry about sib living in the cabin, as it has no heat or A/C.

My husband is like, “I do not want to own property with or be legally bound to your sibling in any way,” and I get that. However I think if it’s an inheritance, my husband is not legally bound in any way. It’s my risk to take that everything will work out.

He wants to inherit but won't contribute to upkeep. What is your plan with your other paying sibling for dealing with this?

Anonymous wrote:OP This is not his decision it is yours.

You work, why in the world is he even involved. Ladies take control of your lives.

Otherwise divorce him,

I understand the female empowerment aspect here. But I am a male, and make about 85% of our HHI (and in many years, if was a lot more than that). My job pays for, and has paid for, virtually everything in our lives. I am responsible for more than 80% of our retirement savings, and the only reason it's that low is that many years, my wife's entire income was dumped into retirement savings.

Does that mean I get to make all financial decisions for our family? Of course not.

Stop talking out of your ass.

Imagine if your husband got a large inheritance from a relative. And he wanted to use it to buy a large boat.

You may have some objections:

- its costly to maintain
- it will consume a lot of your free time
- it will limit what else you could have done in your free time
- and ultimately, you don't even like the ocean; you prefer the woods.

You would have every right to question and object to spending the money on a boat, as the spouse. That's essentially what he is doing.

I know its not exactly apples to apples; this scenario doesn't have the sentimentality involved. But its not that different.

You're asking him to dedicate portions of his resources (time and money) to a task that has an opportunity cost.

Honestly, you need to listen to him

Anonymous wrote:I’m a woman that is Team Husband on this. You are going to end up paying the deadbeat siblings portion of taxes and maintenance. I am going to end up with a similar problem when my in-laws pass away. I’ve told my husband for years that I’m not paying for his two siblings portion of everything and that enough property will have to be sold to cover all this nonsense.

Your situation is more complicated because you have some sentimental attachment here. You have to buy your brother out probably. If he refuses, you have to go to court to sell This thing.

If you want to convince your husband otherwise (and his feelings matter here), you need a plan that doesn’t seem blinded by sentimentality about your sweetheart of a brother that cannot afford this and might end up in jail.

9:39 again - good point here - will the bouncer be asking for a "loan" continually? That affects OP's spouse.

Anonymous wrote:^^OP here— and the idea of using inheritance money for upkeep is brilliant, instead of using marital assets. Unfortunately my husband believes that all assets, even inherited, are shared....

To this point, I’d open a bank account in your own name with this money. It doesnt need to be secret. But it needs to be separate.