So, my parents have decided to use some of my inheritance money in a high risk endeavor. They applied for a high risk investment with the inheritance they have set aside for all of my brothers and sisters (I have 10 brothers and sisters) without informing us until after the fact. Several of my brothers and sisters felt that this was too huge a risk and practically yelled at my parents to pull them out. I wasn't even aware that I had any inheritance money coming, so part of me just wants to let my parents try this high risk investment and if it pays off, awesome; if it doesn't, then I wasn't expecting anything anyway. What do you think?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I think that the "inheritance" doesn't belong to you or your siblings until your parents pass on. They can do what they like with it. You have the right idea.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I think your parents should never have mentioned any inheritance at all.
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
Define "inheritance money." If you mean your parents' money--it's your parents' money. If you mean money that your grandparents or other relatives left to you, but that your parents are legally holding in trust until you reach a particular age, well, that gets more complicated.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
That not mentioning it have been wiser. I can't tell you the family harmony we enjoy knowing that there is no inheritance at all for us to squabble over.
ETA: Ambyr makes a good point. I was assumning that this was your parents' money that they were leaving to you. If it isn't, that is a different story entirely as it doesn't belong to them.
[ January 10, 2012, 01:42 PM: Message edited by: kmbboots ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I think that the "inheritance" aspect is somewhat of a red herring. The money isn't yours yet.
That said, I think you do have a duty to check out the investment and make sure that everything is legitimate (and that they fully understand the risks involved). Many scammers do target the aged. Plus there are many borderline schemes, that while not technically scams, do rely upon not fully explaining the fees/risks involved.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: I think you do have a duty to check out the investment and make sure that everything is legitimate.
Gosh, I hope my kids don't think like this. My money -- and my investments -- are my own business. Maybe if one of them is a financial analyst I might ask them, but I don't like ANYONE snooping in my finances unless I'm trying to get credit from them.
Honestly, the OPs family is making a good case for the parents just to spend the supposed "inheritance". I know that I would, in their position. Thailand, here I come!
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I think your parents should never have mentioned any inheritance at all.
Their parents in particular, or is this a general rule you think should be applied to inheritance? Because I'm very much so in the Discuss These Things camp. Transfer of estate, wills, stuff like that shouldn't be an alien or uninformed process that jumps out like a big "surprise! NOW DEAL WITH THIS STUFF!" when a parent dies.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I wouldn't have a problem entrusting the family money to Nigerian princes. Just make sure your parents make timely payments.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Transfer of estate, wills, stuff like that shouldn't be an alien or uninformed process that jumps out like a big "surprise! NOW DEAL WITH THIS STUFF!" when a parent dies.
I think the more money you have, the more of a surprise its disposition should be for your children.
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Transfer of estate, wills, stuff like that shouldn't be an alien or uninformed process that jumps out like a big "surprise! NOW DEAL WITH THIS STUFF!" when a parent dies.
I think the more money you have, the more of a surprise its disposition should be for your children.
I think mentioning actual numbers, unless death is imminent, is a bad idea. "You'll each inherit $100k" becomes problematic if there isn't $100k each left.
I think discussing the general disposition--"We'll be splitting any money we have left evenly between all ten of you, and X and Y, as the oldest, will be the executors in charge of managing the sale of any remaining property or other non-liquid assets"--is pretty essential, though. Especially if the split isn't even. Better to discuss what you're doing and why than let unexpected resentments (or a legal battle over the validity of the will) pop up later.
Posted by happymann (Member # 9559) on :
quote:Originally posted by ambyr: Define "inheritance money." If you mean your parents' money--it's your parents' money. If you mean money that your grandparents or other relatives left to you, but that your parents are legally holding in trust until you reach a particular age, well, that gets more complicated.
This is kind of what it is.
When they received the money from my grandparents, they put it in the stock market and watched it grow and then plummet and then even out (over a 15 year span) so they decided rather than put it somewhere where it would sit until their death, they wanted to put it somewhere where it could start making more money sooner (but definitely high risk).
Some of my siblings have been able to get their chunk now (my parents cancelled their part of the high risk deal) but I've decided to ride it out. While it technically is money from my grandparents, I think of it more as inheritance from my parents that just so happened to originate from my grandparents.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Aros: *shrug* It depends on the family relationship. Obviously if you're coming from a relationship characterized by conflict then thats different. But I'm assuming that there is a decent amount of co-operation and communication to warrant the expectation of inheritance.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
The actual laws on this sort of thing are likely quite clear, even if a lawyer is needed to unravel them. On what we've heard here about the situation, I don't think we're qualified to say whose money it actually is 'in reality', legally I mean.
Morally speaking, though, I think ambyr asked some great questions. How did your parents acquire this money to (possibly) bequeath to you and your siblings? What have they said about what they'll do with it? In other words, if the money was earned by them and they never said anything about what they would do with it besides saying that you guys have an inheritance, well then nobody has any moral say at all in whether they spend it foolishly or scrupulously save and invest. If, for example, your great grandparents started a company which has been profitable for decades, control of which was supposed to be handled with care and profits from which was meant to support the family down through generations, then I think morally you would have some say in whether it were risked in risky investment.
As for actually speaking up about it, whatever the case is with this money, man. I'm imagining lots of people for whom such a conversation would be very bad, and relatively few for whom it'd go well.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Yeah, money from someone else (related or otherwise) that is intentionally meant for the child should not be gambled on high risk ventures, especially if the child is now old enough to understand the situation. Inheritance left to a five year old should be kept safe for the child, but seeing as you are one of eleven kids I can at least assume that you are eleven years old or older, and therefore have a say in what is done with your money.
I'm not one to prescribe to the idea that parents have unanimous power in what is done with money and things of great value meant for the child. My own mother had a habit of usurping cash gifts given to my brothers and I for holidays and birthdays, she also is responsible for the impounding and non-retrieval of a gift car meant for my older brother who was too young to be in control of it.
If a parent loses inheritance given to their child who is still a young child, then it is a somewhat grievous waste of the gift not intended for them in the first place. If a parent invests money intended for the offspring when they are teenage(for the sake of argument lets say sixteen) or older without informing the intended recipient or against their will, I would call that an abuse of authority and disrespectful of their own child.
If it were their own savings originally meant to pass to you and your siblings and they just felt like doing it, more power to them, retirement is not cheap and its harder to plan financially for living to an old age than it is to die soon.
Nonetheless, I would certainly be interested in exactly what they are investing in, despite them being your parents and conceivably having made good investments before you should have an informed hand in your investment. Your thinking in regards to the money is modest and mature but you should still try to learn from what is going on, for better or worse it is your money on the table and its better to be involved whenever it is that way.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Aros: *shrug* It depends on the family relationship. Obviously if you're coming from a relationship characterized by conflict then thats different. But I'm assuming that there is a decent amount of co-operation and communication to warrant the expectation of inheritance.
I'm certainly not advocating conflict. Far from it. In my case, I'm a business grad. My family do not know much more about investing than the blurb headlines they see on Fox News (sure, let's buy gold off the tv). Certainly, financial advice from family is well-meaning. But I'd politely refuse any advice that my family gave.
As far as "butting in" to someone else's finances without an invitation? A little polite probing may be warranted, but anything more is a little tacky. Unless financial competence is in question.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Financial competence may very well be in question. That's like, the whole point I was making.
Edit to add: If your parents come from the perspective that you checking up on them is "butting in" then you're probably unfortunately in the first category, and thus things are different from what I'm discussing.
[ January 10, 2012, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
When the inheritance is explicitly intended for the children, it should hardly be "butting in" when the children take an interest in what is being done with their money. When someone else is handling your finances you have every right to inquire.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by ambyr: I think mentioning actual numbers, unless death is imminent, is a bad idea. "You'll each inherit $100k" becomes problematic if there isn't $100k each left.
I think discussing the general disposition--"We'll be splitting any money we have left evenly between all ten of you, and X and Y, as the oldest, will be the executors in charge of managing the sale of any remaining property or other non-liquid assets"--is pretty essential, though. Especially if the split isn't even. Better to discuss what you're doing and why than let unexpected resentments (or a legal battle over the validity of the will) pop up later.
100% agree. As the executor of my parents' wills (may the time I have to do anything with that beyond signing the occasional document be many, many years in the future), I think this is absolutely critical.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: When the inheritance is explicitly intended for the children, it should hardly be "butting in" when the children take an interest in what is being done with their money. When someone else is handling your finances you have every right to inquire.
That's why parents just shouldn't tell their children. It isn't "their money" until it is. My grandma had to dip into the "inheritance" fund when the market busted. This caused a lot of arguing among the family.
Bottom line: it isn't your money until a court says it is.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I've been trying to get my mom to make a will for the last year or two. I expect her to live for another couple of decades at least, but every now and then the topic of "what do you want when I'm dead?" comes up, and invariably the conversation shifts to the fact that my brother will simply steal whatever he wants from my mother's house if there's no legal document there to protect it. He might even steal it then.
I'm already planning to never speak to my brother again after our parents die, because though I love him, he can be a greedy bastard with no sense of family devotion or history that drives me crazy, and I fully expect we'll get into a blood feud when the time comes. I'm trying to head that off by occasionally pushing a will.
I can count the things my parents have that I actually want with both hands, it's not that much, mostly items of sentimental value or things that have been in the family for a couple generations that my brother couldn't care less about. But I also want all the things I bought my mother, I think it's only fair, especially since some of them are extremely expensive. I'll be damned if he gets them. Other than that, sell it all and split it 50/50. I don't want to have to fight him for it, but I also don't plan to let him walk all over me.
You'd think things could be simpler, especially in the wake of a parent's death.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Lyrhawn, when my aunt died, her stepson stole the will. In her older will, my uncle didn't get anything but since it wasn't updated to include new things she had brought, he got fifty percent of anything not listed. Also, since the step son stole the whole file, my cousins could never find and redeem the life insurance that she said she had.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Yeesh.
I don't think my brother would do something that serious, but I wouldn't put something more mildly duplicitous past him. That really is terrible though, I don't understand how families can do that kind of thing to each other.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
See? Broke parents=family harmony!
[ January 11, 2012, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: kmbboots ]
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
I am not sure my cousins and step cousins consider themselves family. My aunt married my uncle after they were both grandparents already. The families never really integrated.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros:
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: When the inheritance is explicitly intended for the children, it should hardly be "butting in" when the children take an interest in what is being done with their money. When someone else is handling your finances you have every right to inquire.
That's why parents just shouldn't tell their children. It isn't "their money" until it is. My grandma had to dip into the "inheritance" fund when the market busted. This caused a lot of arguing among the family.
Bottom line: it isn't your money until a court says it is.
That post was in regards to when the money has been passed from the original person to the holder of the inheritance intended for the child. In my post before last I said this.
quote: If it were their own savings originally meant to pass to you and your siblings and they just felt like doing it, more power to them, retirement is not cheap and its harder to plan financially for living to an old age than it is to die soon.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by happymann:
quote:Originally posted by ambyr: Define "inheritance money." If you mean your parents' money--it's your parents' money. If you mean money that your grandparents or other relatives left to you, but that your parents are legally holding in trust until you reach a particular age, well, that gets more complicated.
This is kind of what it is.
When they received the money from my grandparents, they put it in the stock market and watched it grow and then plummet and then even out (over a 15 year span) so they decided rather than put it somewhere where it would sit until their death, they wanted to put it somewhere where it could start making more money sooner (but definitely high risk).
Some of my siblings have been able to get their chunk now (my parents cancelled their part of the high risk deal) but I've decided to ride it out. While it technically is money from my grandparents, I think of it more as inheritance from my parents that just so happened to originate from my grandparents.
Did your grandparents specify in their will that this money was to go to you or did they give the money to your parents who then decided they would save it for you?
I think that makes a difference from both a legal and moral perspective. If your grandparents intended for this money to go to you, then your parents are legal and morally your trustees and have a responsibility to you for how the money is used and invested.
If your grandparents bequeathed it to your parents, to use however they saw fit, then their choice to save it for their children is a freewill gift that gives you neither legal nor moral claim on how they use the money. It would be perfectly within their rights to change their mind and spend all the money themselves, unless they established a legal trust with the money that designates otherwise.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by ambyr:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Transfer of estate, wills, stuff like that shouldn't be an alien or uninformed process that jumps out like a big "surprise! NOW DEAL WITH THIS STUFF!" when a parent dies.
I think the more money you have, the more of a surprise its disposition should be for your children.
I think mentioning actual numbers, unless death is imminent, is a bad idea. "You'll each inherit $100k" becomes problematic if there isn't $100k each left.
I think discussing the general disposition--"We'll be splitting any money we have left evenly between all ten of you, and X and Y, as the oldest, will be the executors in charge of managing the sale of any remaining property or other non-liquid assets"--is pretty essential, though. Especially if the split isn't even. Better to discuss what you're doing and why than let unexpected resentments (or a legal battle over the validity of the will) pop up later.
It would have been wholly impractical to do anything otherwise. I'm glad we can (and did) all sit down and work out the matter of managing estate; we know what we got coming, how we have to divide assets, how we manage whatever portion is coming to us through my parents from their greater estates which is likely being shared among cousins , etc. That way we already have things in programs and trusts (educational fund, money for our own retirement/kids/medical emergencies) that minimize inheritance taxes, we know what to do with houses, farms, etc., and no big wonderful surprises to all the sudden start dealing with the day a parent keels over, where I don't want to be trying to fiddle with finances or get in debates over who gets what, because there was just a death in the family?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Obviously the more assets you have the more important this is, but it is important for everyone.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
I personally would want my inheritence if it had been left by my grandparents specifically for me. It seems wrong that my parents could take that money and spend it on whatever they want without telling me or even asking my permission, since, you know, it's not really theirs and the only reason they have access to it would be because I'm a certain age.
That being said, there was a situation that happened when I was younger where I was working in a restaurant bussing tables for about a year, and I earned like three thousand dollars. I saved every bit of it and put it into a CD account that my father had access to (because as a child, you can't have accounts in your name alone). Years passed by (about 10) and I finally decided to cash it out. By this time, my parents had divorced and my dad had made several new investments and expanded his business, which caused him to cash in a lot of old accounts. Well, my account was one of them (of course, I never knew that he did this), but when I asked him for the money that I had earned myself, he said it was gone and refused to give it back. His reasoning was that I owed it to him for raising me. Thankfully, I knew the bank manager and she informed me that my account still existed and that I still had full access to it, despite what my father had said. I withdrew the money and never spoke of it again to him.
I see this situation in a similar, but obviously different, light. It's your money, not theirs. Your grandparents specifically left it to you. They're simply the caretakers, expected to keep it safe until you come of age. If they lose it all on a gamble (because, let's face it, some high risk investments are basically the same as playing texas hold 'em in a casino), you're screwed and you will have nothing. They're not going to give it back to you, even if they lose it all, so what gives them the right? Yes, they are raising you, paying for your clothes and food, but they aren't using it for that. They're trying to make a profit, and without consulting you. And that's where I'd have a problem.
-two cents
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I think your parents should never have mentioned any inheritance at all.
Their parents in particular, or is this a general rule you think should be applied to inheritance? Because I'm very much so in the Discuss These Things camp. Transfer of estate, wills, stuff like that shouldn't be an alien or uninformed process that jumps out like a big "surprise! NOW DEAL WITH THIS STUFF!" when a parent dies.
Convincing my mother to begin estate planning (not to mention living wills etc) for my father's inevitable passing has been a very difficult process for me, and one my siblings have failed, utterly and completely, to assist me in. You think your family is composed of reasonable, rational people with the best of intentions, but this kind of thing... it's not like anything else.
To my mother, even the idea that she would have to name a trustee for the disposition of their estate, so that her children can avoid the heartbreak of bickering over the assets, has been a challenge she hasn't been willing to face
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
To clarify . . . are you and your siblings of age? Was the money left to you . . . or you parents (who were going to then bequeath it to you). That really makes a difference.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I think your parents should never have mentioned any inheritance at all.
Their parents in particular, or is this a general rule you think should be applied to inheritance? Because I'm very much so in the Discuss These Things camp. Transfer of estate, wills, stuff like that shouldn't be an alien or uninformed process that jumps out like a big "surprise! NOW DEAL WITH THIS STUFF!" when a parent dies.
Convincing my mother to begin estate planning (not to mention living wills etc) for my father's inevitable passing has been a very difficult process for me, and one my siblings have failed, utterly and completely, to assist me in. You think your family is composed of reasonable, rational people with the best of intentions, but this kind of thing... it's not like anything else.
Definitely not in that sort of case! Any disagreements about how informed or involved the children should be in the process of estate planning ... would all be principally different than the issue of when the estate holder with children is unable or unwilling to deal with the issue of estate planning.
Posted by Anthonie (Member # 884) on :
Resurrecting a month old thread.
My mom called me a few nights back. I hope her family is not in process of disintegration over her mother's estate. Presently, things keep getting worse.
My grandmother died a year back. She had everything legally and appropriately set up, and I think all of her children knew the particulars of the arrangements. But it still hasn't stopped them from disputing. I think I'm leaning towards kmboots' sentiment that no inheritance is best. I have been surprised to see how all my aunts and uncle have suddenly become different people. My mom has been wise and stayed out of everything, demanding nothing and not begrudging anyone else about who took what.
It's frustrating and heart breaking to me. Three years ago when grandmother was still with us, I wouldn't have imagined anything like this happening. Now it is getting to the point that lawyers are involved and my aunts and uncle are not speaking to each other but instead having their lawyers do it. I guess I should have realized there were going to be problems when my mom's sisters were fighting over flower arrangements at the funeral.
Three years ago, we lost my father's mother, and something similar happened. Before she died, she distributed all her money among her children. But there still managed to be squabbles over THINGS left in her house. One aunt and one uncle hardly speak to each other now, all over a stupid rocking chair.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
It's interesting isn't it? My grandfather is now 91, and his younger son (my father's junior by 25 years) has been slowly collecting all of his things, many of them valuable antiques from the civil war, and rare books, and storing them in his own house. When their father dies, my own father (and 6 grandchildren) won't have a chance to own these things. My uncle is a cheap bastard to begin with, but really, it just seems too depraved to me. I'm glad I don't want any of these things.
Again, I wish I could impress upon my mother how important estate planning actually is. I am lucky to be so non-materialist as a person, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want money if there were any. I just don't want to fight for it.
Posted by CaySedai (Member # 6459) on :
When my mother-in-law Pauline died, no will or life insurance policy was ever found. Her mother (Hilda) had died about 14 months before that and we never found out what she did with the money she inherited. (Hilda had a house in San Diego she had sold and moved in with Pauline before she died.)
There are four sons. The second oldest stole stuff from the house. The four boys went to her safety deposit and split up her jewelry in turns (no appraisal or record).
Since that time, my husband and I have separated. For awhile he had access to my house and things have gone missing, including jewelry from his mom that he said I could have. What I do have, with his permission (mostly because he can't make a profit from it) is mostly a few odds and ends of limited monetary value, family history stuff, photos and old postcards (which he has unsuccessfully tried to sell, which is why he allows me to keep them).
All of this makes me realize again that I need to make plans, even though there is hardly any money or things of value for me to pass on.
As far as the OP, I feel that if the money came from the grandparents and was entrusted to the parents to pass on to their kids, the kids when grown should be made aware of the status of the inheritance and consulted before risky things are done (or even receive it when they are grown). If the money originated with the parents, if is theirs. In either case, however, someone should know what is what, who will be responsible for managing the estate and where to find things.