Could You Really Be This Bitter - Inheritance.

Very mixed feelings about this whole affair. The D felt she could estrange herself and ho her own way but still benefit from her M's estate. The M felt bitter and rejected.
No winners but the lawyers yet again.
£50,000 is not a bad outcome I think, but it leaves many questions about the true state of the relationship unanswered and we won't, and shouldn't,know what those are. know

Many typos there, sorry.

'Wright Hassall Solicitors' - I've always loved that name!

I worked in legal offices for many years and charities are notoriously reluctant to agree to any 'sharing' of their legacies.

In this instance I think the daughter was lucky to be awarded anything - it's not an automatic right for a child to inherit from its parent, especially if there is a will.

It does appear to set a new precedent. Very up in the air though don't you think?

I still think the bitterness is the real sadness. The daughter will be left knowing her mum never forgave her. I would find that very difficult.

They had been estranged since the daughter was 17. That was many years before so they had had many opportuniies to work out the problem, which I seem to remember from previous reports, was caused by the mother objecting to her daughter not living her life in the way her mother wanted

If I had been the daughter, knowing the mother I wouldn't have expected my mother to leave me any money. Chasing her mothers money after she is dead, seems very demeaning. Possibly they deserved each other.

Children have no right to their parents money. It was her mothers, to do as she wished with.

The mother had every right to leave her money to the charities, to judge the mother with no knowledge of the relationship isn't fair ,

The point here is that the first judgement put at risk the right for UK citizens to leave their money to whomever they wish.
This has made it quite clear that our last wishes will be carried out.

If I remember correctly, it was the mother who estranged herself from the daughter because of her choice of husband.

IMO the daughter was certainly due something from her mother's estate, as I assume some of the money came from the daughter's late father.

I think charities are legally obliged to pursue legacies.

I'm not sure it's the case that the mother's final act was motivated by bitterness. We don't know what happened to lead to the estrangement but I'm relieved this Judgement confirms that all of us can leave any money we have where we want, we don't have to leave it to people we have no relationship with. Even if those people are our own children.

Riverwalk, spot on. That's where it got complicated. The daughters argument was her late father would have wanted her to have it.

I agree, it's good to know that what we set down in our wills should be carried out with out dispute. At least until there's a new precedent set. So people can still contest.

I do not expect to be left anything by my adoptive Mother, she hates me, even though I have actually done so much for her since my beloved father died in 1974.
I really do not care, her money will go to a greedy friend of hers who suits her, dusts twice a day, and critisises the neighbours washing, if you know what I mean.
I will have done my duty by her and will get on with my life.
Anyone reading my post from the weekend will understand.
In Scotland she cannot cut me out completely as I am intitled to 'the bairns piece', I would not fight for it.

I too haven't seen or heard from my mother since my father died almost 20 years ago. I have no idea of she is still alive or not, but, in any case, I would want no part in any "inheritance " and wouldn't demean myself in fighting for any part of it. If I was actually ever left anything in her will, I'd give it straight to a charity. Some rifts last not only a lifetime, but beyond the grave as well.

It IS sad, that's for sure. I don't put all the blame on the mother though. The ed, obviously, did things to aggravate the situation over the years, from what I'm reading, like naming a child for a relative that her em hated. I get the sense there was a lot of tit for tat over the years and this was just the final one.

I do blame the em for how it started though. Ed was 17, which says to me that em had more responsibility for what happened - she was supposed to be "the adult." If she would have accepted ed's choice of bf and, eventually dh, things would never have gone this far. Maybe she could have even helped them out a little. I don't mean "enabling," but perhaps watching the kids so ed could work or providing money for the downpayment on a home. It probably wouldn't have ended the way it did if it didn't begin the way it did.

But I agree it's good we can still leave our money to whom we choose. I'm also glad the ed got something, if only for the sake of the gc.

But it IS sad. It certainly IS.

It is sad when parents and children are estranged but the mother was entitled to have her wishes upheld.
It would be pointless making a will if it could be overturned for no good reason. The only reason to overturn it would have been a question of competency. They have quite a different system here in France where children cannot be left without anything and the inheritance laws cause all sorts of problems.

We know nothing of the husband at the time of the split between mother and daughter ,

To me the story reads like her mother never forgave her. I find that sad.

If the daughter would not have a relationship with her mother, why should she be left anything? If the mother was the one that didn't want a relationship, yes it was a final act of bitterness. No one knows what went on here, so cannot judge. It defends on. Many factors. Was there abuse? Indifference? Who knows. I do however think it is up to anyone to choose where their cash goes. Best thing isspend it.

I'm assuming that her late father was aware of the estrangement during his life time so presumably could have left his daughter something in his own will instead of leaving everything to his wife.

Inheritance isn't a right, it's a gift and we should all feel secure in the knowledge that what ever our last wishes are they will be applied.

I agree with the idea that a person's will should be left as they wished. But I also think the mother's wrath towards her only child smacks of 'last word' and 'vengeance shall be mine'. She's met her maker now so no doubt He'll be having the last word.

And one day the daughter will meet her maker and He may have the last word on her greed. Clearly it was all about the money and had nothing to do with moral outrage, because she wasn't satisfied with the original settlement and tried to get more.

Luke 12 v 13 and 14
"Someone in the crowd said to Jesus 'Teacher tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me'. But Jesus replied 'man, who appointed me judge or executor between you'. And He said to them, 'watch out! guard yourselves against every form of greed for a man's life does not exist in the abundance of his possessions'.

Luke 15:12

The younger one said to his father, 'Father, give me my share of the estate.' So he divided his property between them.

Then it ended with the son returning and even though he'd lived recklessly and lost everything, the father embraced him, forgave him and ordered the fatted calf be killed so there could be a feast and celebration at the son's return.

Jeez, how hard is it to find forgiveness in this world? I do wonder.

Smileless, I don't know how you can deduce that it was 'clearly all about money'.

None of us know what really went on or what the main motivation was. The daughter had apparently lived her life in some degree of poverty. You'd think regardless of what had gone before her mother could have left her something.
Maybe I'm too soft but I'm happy being this way.