Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all very interesting, but can someone explain this to me? So, I borrow money from my mom, and invest it. A year later, she dies. I never paid her back her money. Two years later I receive the return on the investment. I then have to pay the loan back to the estate? My brother would get half the amount of the loan. Right? Why would my brother get any of the profit from the investment?

OP has doled out the information strangely and in tidbits, but the money was supposed to be an "investment loan" on the grandmother's behalf, to create an "infusion of capital" to the grandmother herself, not to a loan to benefit the uncle. So both the amount of the loan and the proceeds from the loan are the grandmother's, not the uncle's. As she has passed, they go to the heirs and assigns, meaning OP's father and uncle (and any other siblings), equally.

Has OP made it clear that the investment was on grandma’s behalf? I thought grandma’s money was considered a “loan” because uncle was borrowing to invest for himself? If the investment was on grandma’s behalf and not uncle’s, then uncle owes dad half the return. If the investment was on uncle’s behalf using grandma’s money, then uncle owes dad whatever half the loan amount is once you convert it into 2018 dollars. Say the loan was $5000 and the loan was taken out in 1982. Whatever $2500 from 1982 is worth today, that’s what uncle owes dad.

Anonymous wrote:My father is 78 and his brother is 79, almost 80.

It is impossible to stay out of it because my father tells everyone that the money is for his children. He writes pages long emails to the entire family about how he hopes we will use the money.

For context, each of my siblings would receive about $3,000 before taxes. It isn’t a fortune. Maybe we could go on a nice cruise? However, we would lose out on our uncle and cousins at holidays, weddings, and other special events like religious milestones. Everyone would know the reason for the rift. I feel ashamed even thinking about it. I was not raised to think money was more important than family.

But your cousins were raised to think that money is more important than family if they do not support your dad in this.

Aren't they ashamed that their dad is a swindler? Why are you the one who is embarrassed by this?

Some family is not worth shit.

We had a similar situation in my family, except an older sister borrowed money from the younger sister and wouldn't pay back for one reason or the other even though she could easily afford to. She kept whining about how little and inconsequential the money was but would not pay it back.

The entire family got together, including older sister's kids and asked her to pay back pronto before she ruined the family.

She finally paid. Everyone is happy, even though no one would ever borrow a dime to this woman anymore.

Anonymous wrote:If the loan wasn’t deducted from ur uncles half then ur dad has a valid legal claim whether or not you like it. It’s not fair for your dad to get screwed twice-once when he got less because he forgave it and once again when he doesn’t get the original split of the forgiven amount OR the benefits of the investment. Say ur piece to fleas and let him do what he wants. It’s none of the grandkids-you or your cousins-business. Stay above it.

I agree. Your uncle sounds like a selfish asshole.

I would empathize with my father while I tell him to do whatever he wants and that we do not need the money. I'd remind it that he shouldn't do it for us, but himself.

But to claim that your father is the one destroying the family is a joke. You uncle is a selfish ingrate.

Try to avoid discussing it with the cousins and let dad/uncle duke it out. It’s their decision.

OP's father owns 50% of that loan - 50% of balance and 50% of profits, interest, dividends, whatever

Anonymous wrote:This is all very interesting, but can someone explain this to me? So, I borrow money from my mom, and invest it. A year later, she dies. I never paid her back her money. Two years later I receive the return on the investment. I then have to pay the loan back to the estate? My brother would get half the amount of the loan. Right? Why would my brother get any of the profit from the investment?

If you don't pay the loan back to the estate when it's divided up, then yes the brother should share the profit, since he didn't inherit the money he should have inherited that you invested but he actually inherited part of the investment itself.

If you paid back the loan to the estate when it was divided up (meaning gave your brother half of that money), then everything is square, the brother was paid everything he was owed, and the investment is yours and nothing to do with your brother.

The problem in this thread is that OP's uncle refused to pay OP's father half of the loan amount when the estate was settled, justifying it as just a bad investment even though the investment was made without OP's father's knowledge or permission. So OP's father inherited half of that bad investment instead of half of the money it cost. And now that the bad investment turns out to be a good investment, OP's uncle is saying that he shouldn't need to share the returns because the investment was his alone. Even though he didn't pay for it with his own money but half of OP's father's money too.

It's really pretty simple. OP's uncle is a manipulative thief and the entire family is trying to swindle OP's father out of his rightful share.

Anonymous wrote:This is all very interesting, but can someone explain this to me? So, I borrow money from my mom, and invest it. A year later, she dies. I never paid her back her money. Two years later I receive the return on the investment. I then have to pay the loan back to the estate? My brother would get half the amount of the loan. Right? Why would my brother get any of the profit from the investment?

You work for your money and your money works for you. That's the whole essence of the 4000 year old banking industry.

Anonymous wrote:This is all very interesting, but can someone explain this to me? So, I borrow money from my mom, and invest it. A year later, she dies. I never paid her back her money. Two years later I receive the return on the investment. I then have to pay the loan back to the estate? My brother would get half the amount of the loan. Right? Why would my brother get any of the profit from the investment?

opportunity cost of capital, my friend. time value of money, my friend.

Anonymous wrote:This is all very interesting, but can someone explain this to me? So, I borrow money from my mom, and invest it. A year later, she dies. I never paid her back her money. Two years later I receive the return on the investment. I then have to pay the loan back to the estate? My brother would get half the amount of the loan. Right? Why would my brother get any of the profit from the investment?

OP has doled out the information strangely and in tidbits, but the money was supposed to be an "investment loan" on the grandmother's behalf, to create an "infusion of capital" to the grandmother herself, not to a loan to benefit the uncle. So both the amount of the loan and the proceeds from the loan are the grandmother's, not the uncle's. As she has passed, they go to the heirs and assigns, meaning OP's father and uncle (and any other siblings), equally.

This is all very interesting, but can someone explain this to me? So, I borrow money from my mom, and invest it. A year later, she dies. I never paid her back her money. Two years later I receive the return on the investment. I then have to pay the loan back to the estate? My brother would get half the amount of the loan. Right? Why would my brother get any of the profit from the investment?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My father is 78 and his brother is 79, almost 80.

It is impossible to stay out of it because my father tells everyone that the money is for his children. He writes pages long emails to the entire family about how he hopes we will use the money.

For context, each of my siblings would receive about $3,000 before taxes. It isn’t a fortune. Maybe we could go on a nice cruise? However, we would lose out on our uncle and cousins at holidays, weddings, and other special events like religious milestones. Everyone would know the reason for the rift. I feel ashamed even thinking about it. I was not raised to think money was more important than family.

Your entire family would shun you and your siblings if your uncle has to pay the money he legally owes your dad?

Your. Father. Is. Not. The. Problem. Here!!!

NP here and it's not entirely clear to me that the uncle legally owes the money to the dad. OP's father should have made his claim at the time the estate was distributed but now the estate has been settled (although it is unclear how many years have passed since the estate was settled so it may still be within the statute of limitations to file a claim for the funds) OP's dad may not have a further right to dispute the distribution of the estate. I think would be worth your dad's time to spend $200 on a consult with an attorney that has a background in trusts and estates law.

I completely agree with all of the other posters though that morally your dad is in the right and morally your uncle should pay your dad 50% of the gain on the investment. I also agree that it is insane that the cousins are threatening to estrange themselves from OP and others in the family when their father (?) effectively stole money from the estate.

The father likely didn't do that then because he didn't want to rock the boat. Scoundrel uncle probably pleaded some sob story about how he needed the full amongst of his inheritance money asap. So father rolled over then, and cheating uncle hopes he rolls over again now. But it's the last straw this time. I bet the uncle has a business and personal reputation of cheating people left and right for decades.

I get what you're saying but I'm not sure if the father has a claim here solely from a legal perspective depending on how much time has passed since the estate was settled and that was my only point. Like I said, completely agree that from a moral perspective uncle should pay him back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My father is 78 and his brother is 79, almost 80.

It is impossible to stay out of it because my father tells everyone that the money is for his children. He writes pages long emails to the entire family about how he hopes we will use the money.

For context, each of my siblings would receive about $3,000 before taxes. It isn’t a fortune. Maybe we could go on a nice cruise? However, we would lose out on our uncle and cousins at holidays, weddings, and other special events like religious milestones. Everyone would know the reason for the rift. I feel ashamed even thinking about it. I was not raised to think money was more important than family.

Your entire family would shun you and your siblings if your uncle has to pay the money he legally owes your dad?

Your. Father. Is. Not. The. Problem. Here!!!

NP here and it's not entirely clear to me that the uncle legally owes the money to the dad. OP's father should have made his claim at the time the estate was distributed but now the estate has been settled (although it is unclear how many years have passed since the estate was settled so it may still be within the statute of limitations to file a claim for the funds) OP's dad may not have a further right to dispute the distribution of the estate. I think would be worth your dad's time to spend $200 on a consult with an attorney that has a background in trusts and estates law.

I completely agree with all of the other posters though that morally your dad is in the right and morally your uncle should pay your dad 50% of the gain on the investment. I also agree that it is insane that the cousins are threatening to estrange themselves from OP and others in the family when their father (?) effectively stole money from the estate.

The father likely didn't do that then because he didn't want to rock the boat. Scoundrel uncle probably pleaded some sob story about how he needed the full amongst of his inheritance money asap. So father rolled over then, and cheating uncle hopes he rolls over again now. But it's the last straw this time. I bet the uncle has a business and personal reputation of cheating people left and right for decades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does "wrote I think off' so to speak" mean? Not obvious your dad doesn't have a claim.

I'd just keep my head down and be nice to everyone.

When my grandmother died, my father and brother had a small quarrel over the loan. It looked like a bad investment and my father wanted my uncle to deduct the entire value from my uncle’s half. My uncle was not willing to do that. Eventually, my father made a big deal of saying the loan amount didn’t matter. I know he has brought this up at least a few times as if rubbing in to my uncle that he was the bigger man and could spare the money. Only now that the payoff is coming, he has reopened it.

Your uncle invested with half his and half your father's money, against your father's wishes. Your father is entitled to the returns, and the fact that your cousins will be upset with you if your father gets what he's legally entitled to is nuts. Your uncle should be able to steal from your father's share of the inheritance to make investments your father wants no part of, and then keep all the proceeds for himself? How does that make sense? How is your whole family on the side of the guy who stole from his brother? Just because this gamble paid off?

No. My uncle invested my grandmother’s money before she died. It was meant to be a short term injection of capital that would be paid back. My father did not know about the loan until after my grandmother died.

OP, do you realize this makes your uncle much worse? He took money from a dying old woman in secret. Your uncle sounds like a real manipulative jerk and your cousins seem to the same thing. I'm sure your dad isn't perfect but in this case he is absolutely in the right.

Yep.

I don't care if OP is female or male, but her/his values are really messed up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? Why don’t you just let him give you the money and then do whatever you want with it... why not just donate it?

My cousins would look at me badly if I accepted the money.

You cousins sound just as F'd up as your uncle, their father.

True colors come out at inheritance time. Split the money even steven and move on. Everything will be back to normal in 12 months time. Nothing will be back to normal if your uncle and cousins keep your share of inheritance. They have proven themselves selfish and untrustworthy, and now they are bullying you and pretending to be victims! wow. wake up OP, wake up.

I'm curious as well as to how the cousins could possibly have a problem with the money being split. Not that it would or should matter what they think, of course. But it's not like OP's dad is demanding ALL of the money for a penalty (I presume), but just his share.

Have the cousins actually said that they'd be unhappy about it? I can't imagine what possible way someone could justify that. It seems that even illogical and delusional OP acknowledges that her father would win the case in court AKA he's the rightful owner of the money, and can distribute it as he chooses.

I'm wondering if a PP was right about there being some other reason for OP siding against her father no matter how outrageous the position. It sure does seem that way.

Scamster uncle and scamster cousins have been collecting interest on this loan for years and not telling OP or OP's father. OP is a sucker.

And now the principal is due and final profits. OP is a sucker again.

Don't be surprised when your cousins are jailed down the road. There are laws in this country. Feel free to do a quick check on the SE Asian crime rate of fraud in America. It's pretty damn high.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would rather have my cousins and my uncle than the money. My siblings feel the same. The money is not a life changing amount when divided between six of us. I told my father that I don’t need it or want it under these circumstances. If my father secretly needs it for himself, he should let us know. It’s wrong for him to pretend that he is fighting for us.

This was the position I took with my sister on a similar issue. It didn't work. She still feels entitled and I still feel shorted and our children, who know about the discrepancy, also resent it. It's better to work it out fairly if possible, even if you don't really need the money.

I don’t want to be cold, but my father is angry with his brother and will die in maybe five years at the most having damaged how the family sees him. My uncle will also die soon, but my cousins will live forty or fifty more years. That’s a very long time for my siblings and I to be estranged from family. It will impact our children as well. I can’t accept this money and I cringe to think that our father will brag about how he dragged his brother through court for us.

I would CRINGE if my dad stole his mother's money for his Get Rich Scheme Loans.

I would CRINGE if my dad told everyone the loan was worthless, sorry, pretend it doesn't exist at the estate disbursement time. Yes he deserved to be ridiculed.

I would CRINGE if my dad hid from his siblings the fact that Grandma's loan was profitable and to be paid pack in full.

I would CRINGE if my dad refused to give his siblings their share of their mother's loan. No matter what people may have said in the interim about my dad's terrible behavior.

I would CRINGE to think about all the other schemes my dad has swindled grandma and others on. This type of person is relentlessly selfish and corrupt.