My dads solicitor is also mine & my sisters solicitor and feel he is just trying to keep everyone happy and recommending I meet her etc,
basically she agrees to act properly as executor or stands aside. If she continues to refuse to do either she can be removed.
.
Why is sharing everything equally the fairest option? The only option, and therfore also the fairest option, is to follow the wishes of the father and divide the assets up the way he wanted. Sharing equally has no role to play in this, as far as I can see.There is always the possibility that you could sell the house and share everything equally among the four of you - i.e. your father's savings and the sale price of house. Sometimes the simplest option is the fairest option. It seems that neither you nor your eldest sister are interested in sharing equally - regardless of your father's will.
Hoping someone can advise as my solicitor is not the best and unfortunately is my sisters solicitor too so feel he is just trying to keep us both happy.
Why is sharing everything equally the fairest option? The only option, and therfore also the fairest option, is to follow the wishes of the father and divide the assets up the way he wanted. Sharing equally has no role to play in this, as far as I can see.
Sharing everything is of course the fairest option - regardless of the father's intentions re. the distribution of his wealth to his adult children. The OP - in his original posting - mentioned that the savings spread between the daughters didn't amount to much, whereas the father's property had extensive grounds that required maintenance. There is nothing to stop the OP from redistributing the inheritance in a more equitable way.
Why do wills have to be equitable from the beneficiaries perspective? The testator expressed his wishes and absent any legal obstacle, that's what must happen.... There is nothing to stop the OP from redistributing the inheritance in a more equitable way.
So - let me get this right. People should not really be allowed to do what they want with their own property? Their own opinion is to be discounted? Really, they should divide everything equally between their offspring? Even though there is no legal obligation/requirement to favour each family member equally?
Even with this;
"my wife as have I, had looked after my dad for the last 20 years up to his death and assume his wish to leave the house to me was for this reason."
Ah now, really.
mf
People have very strong feelings on wills / inheritances. I find it interesting that the OP never mentioned that he and his wife looked after the father for 20 years in his original posting. All we've been presented with here is one party's point of view. People can be unreliable narrators and can selectively alter facts to suit the narrative that most stongly supports their desired outcome - which in this case amounts to being the sole inheritor of a large and most likely valuable property. Furthermore, what is legally correct may often times diverge from what is morally correct. It's too simplistic to portray the eldest sister as being some kind of avaricious entity (bad) and to set this construct against the caring son (good) - who merely wishes to carry out the wishes of a benevolent father.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?