Anyone Else Have a Controlling Sibling? - Resolved Post 216

[cabanafrau]

Maybe maybe not. I don't really care at this point who is controlling and who isn't. My above comment you quoted goes far beyond a post on the DIS and so does the other one. Sub out the OP and insert whoever you want to and my opinion will still be the same.

What made me curious from the start is the fact that OP states very clearly her sister is controlling, yet very clearly and very deliberately didn't draw the line in the sand in such a way as to take on the burden, even share the burden, of handling dad's estate in any way herself. It was fine to draw that line in the sand another way, choosing to sit back and let the controlling sister undertake all of the effort. Curiously the step too far was a room in the same hotel chosen by her sister and sharing the rental vehicle. Both of those decisions were drawn out in very vivid detail for us, yet the choice not to exert any efforts on her own behalf to settle the estate matters strikes me as quite curious. Maybe it's because I've personally watched so many families go through the process of settling an estate, but those facts don't easily fit together for me.

 

[piccolopat]

OP, no sense commenting on your family dynamic as you know what it is and what you want to do to address the issues. As for this trip, I would call someone at the bank before I left home to find out what the rules are in California. According to the California Probate Code, it says that "probate estates of $150,000 or less do not need to be probated. If the estate consists of assets in excess of $150,000 a probate is necessary." You've already said inheritance funds of $48,000 for each of the three of you has been found so it is likely you already passed this threshold. If you can only take an inventory of the safe deposit box, why spend for the three of you to go? It's also possible that when this all started, no one knew the estate would exceed the thresholds that trigger probate in the absence of a will and so the legal advise might not be valid any longer.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

What made me curious from the start is the fact that OP states very clearly her sister is controlling, yet very clearly and very deliberately didn't draw the line in the sand in such a way as to take on the burden, even share the burden, of handling dad's estate in any way herself. It was fine to draw that line in the sand another way, choosing to sit back and let the controlling sister undertake all of the effort. Curiously the step too far was a room in the same hotel chosen by her sister and sharing the rental vehicle. Both of those decisions were drawn out in very vivid detail for us, yet the choice not to exert any efforts on her own behalf to settle the estate matters strikes me as quite curious. Maybe it's because I've personally watched so many families go through the process of settling an estate, but those facts don't easily fit together for me.

I mean that's one interpretation of the comments but having been with people when it comes to settling an estate as well I do know that it can vary in the level of involvedness (is that a word lol).

My mother-in-law took control (as usual) on all the estate stuff for her mom. Her brother, who lived states away normally, did nothing. Nadda. Because it was not something he wanted to be involved with. But he did request to have a say in certain things such as flower arrangements and a few items from the estate he requested go to his children because it meant something to them. That's just one estate planning. My grandfather's was a epic mess (my grandmother is still alive though it was his belongings and who does what with my grandmother since my grandfather did a lot for my grandmother over her life). Anywho.

However, what part of my below comments don't pertain to real life to people in general?

Well here's the thing you and I have differing opinions..that's totally ok.

But my comment still stands..in real life..all the time people make decisions where their line in the sand is. Only you and I do mean you can determine if that line in the sand is worth it.

Maybe maybe not. I don't really care at this point who is controlling and who isn't. My above comment you quoted goes far beyond a post on the DIS and so does the other one. Sub out the OP and insert whoever you want to and my opinion will still be the same.

Like I said I don't really care who or who isn't controlling at this point. We may never really know. In the end it's the OP who has to deal with it not me and the OP who has to figure out if staying at the other hotel is worth it or not given all other things.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

I'm a bit frustrated with my older sister right now. She was very bossy when we were growing up, but as an adult, her need for control has skyrocketed. To give some context on that, when her first daughter was born, my brother took a picture of the baby through the nursery glass and posted the picture on Facebook with a loving comment. My sister became enraged at him because she wanted to "release" the baby photos on Facebook herself, and she didn't think he removed the photos quickly enough after she complained. This resulted in my brother being shunned from family events (which are mostly held at her house) for about four years. Yes, four years. No, they didn't have a bad relationship before that came up.

Fastforward to now. I see my sister and her family on a weekly basis, as my son and I travel to her home each Sunday. It's important to me to keep family relationships strong for the sake of all the kids. My sister has two daughters now, and we love them.

Our father died across the country last summer, leaving no will, but money has popped up in various accounts, and he had a safe-deposit box in California. My sister has been managing the process of getting these accounts together, which I really appreciate. She asked my brother and I to travel to California with her this summer to look into the safe deposit box, and any other accounts that might exist there. We agreed. I booked the flights she wanted me to book, and she said to not rent a car (even though I saw a great deal) because my brother would do it. I told her to let me know when the time to choose a hotel room would come up, as I'm a bit fussy about how & where I'll stay & wanted some input on that. 3 days later, she tells me via text that we're all (her, my brother & me) going to stay in a single standard room in a relatively cheap hotel that I would never choose to stay at. She says this room & the rental car will be paid for out of our joint inheritance. Well, fine about the money. Since she's doing the organizing work on this, imo she can manage payment of the trip how she likes.

But where I draw the line is giving up my adult right to choose where & how I spend the night. I booked an affordable but nice bed & breakfast that's a 5-10 minute drive from their hotel. I told her I would pay for it independently (not from our joint inheritance) as it was important to me to not sleep 3 adults to a room, & because I like to choose my own lodging.

My sister is really angry about this. Pointed out that the money for their hotel will still come out of our joint inheritance. I said that's fine. Then she complained that everything would take too long, since my B&B is in the "wrong direction". I told her I would get a taxi or rent my own car if that was a problem. I then ended the conversation. I had tried to keep it upbeat & positive, but she was, & probably still is, really angry.

Thoughts?

I'd say you get an A++++. I think I would also skip her planned meals "out of my inheritance", cause you know that is coming.

Then I would tell her, don't you dare take a PENNY out of "my inheritance" for this trip. I am coming of my own accord.

Then let her cry over that. You gotta stop it kiddo.

PS Whatever she did to your brother, she will now do to you.

She may also charge FEES more than likely against your father's estate. I would ask if she is planning that as she seems like the type.

Also DO NOT give her permission to take out money out of the estate on your behalf unless it is done legally. At least get it notarized or something.

This usually ends family relationships in many cases. You are already worried. You know it is coming. HUGS

 

[robinb]

She may also charge FEES more than likely against your father's estate. I would ask if she is planning that as she seems like the type.

As the de facto executor she is absolutely entitled to being reimbursed for her time.

 

[Imzadi]

She may also charge FEES more than likely against your father's estate. I would ask if she is planning that as she seems like the type.

As the de facto executor she is absolutely entitled to being reimbursed for her time.

First of all, since there was no will, she is call and administrator, not an executor. And yes, Robin is right, whether administrator or executor, that person gets fees for being the administrator or executor.

The OP doesn't remember, but probably she & the brother did sign a form, right after their father's death, stating that they agreed to allow the controlling sister to be the Administrator of the estate.

 

[Skellingtonj]

First of all, since there was no will, she is call and administrator, not an executor. And yes, Robin is right, whether administrator or executor, that person gets fees for being the administrator or executor.

The OP doesn't remember, but probably she & the brother did sign a form, right after their father's death, stating that they agreed to allow the controlling sister to be the Administrator of the estate.

...which was her first mistake.

 

[luvsJack]

Or has the whole thing fell to the sister because the op and her brother didn’t take action and do it themselves?

Dsis was executor of Mom’s estate. She didn’t take any fees. She kept up with all expenses that were incurred, took them from the money and divided what was left. She had this whole statement thing typed up. I shooed her away with that and didn’t even look at it, of course I trust her, and I get that the op may not trust her sister. Maybe the OP should ask what money there was and what is/will be taken out of it.

 

[cabanafrau]

Or has the whole thing fell to the sister because the op and her brother didn’t take action and do it themselves?

Dsis was executor of Mom’s estate. She didn’t take any fees. She kept up with all expenses that were incurred, took them from the money and divided what was left. She had this whole statement thing typed up. I shooed her away with that and didn’t even look at it, of course I trust her, and I get that the op may not trust her sister. Maybe the OP should ask what money there was and what is/will be taken out of it.

The "whole statement thing she had all typed up" is part of the process of administering an estate, eventually to closure of the estate. Depending on the length of time an estate is open an administrator may need to prepare an accounting yearly. It's part of the gig. Smaller, less complicated, undisputed estates may only have an inventory and a final accounting.

 

[cabanafrau]

First of all, since there was no will, she is call and administrator, not an executor. And yes, Robin is right, whether administrator or executor, that person gets fees for being the administrator or executor.

The OP doesn't remember, but probably she & the brother did sign a form, right after their father's death, stating that they agreed to allow the controlling sister to be the Administrator of the estate.

Actually the distinction between executor/administrator/personal representative may not depend on the estate being formalized with a will or intestate, but a matter of the nomenclature found in a state's probate statutes.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

As the de facto executor she is absolutely entitled to being reimbursed for her time.

Absolutely.

OP sounds frazzled and may not know this. As a sib she is entitled to ask sib what her fee is. I know I would.

OP does not need any more surprises from controlling sister. This is perhaps the toughest moment in their relationship.

 

[luvsJack]

The "whole statement thing she had all typed up" is part of the process of administering an estate, eventually to closure of the estate. Depending on the length of time an estate is open an administrator may need to prepare an accounting yearly. It's part of the gig. Smaller, less complicated, undisputed estates may only have an inventory and a final accounting.

So then the op has the right to expect the same.

Mom’s isn’t closed but I certainly hope dsis doesn’t have to do that every year. There is only the land left to deal with.

Not having a will sure does leave a mess.

 

[cabanafrau]

So then the op has the right to expect the same.

Mom’s isn’t closed but I certainly hope dsis doesn’t have to do that every year. There is only the land left to deal with.

Not having a will sure does leave a mess.

Just to be clear, even with a will an inventory and an accounting are required. Yes, a good estate plan absolutely should help bring order to the process. Even with well drawn, well thought out plans I've seen unbelievable battles go on.

Inventory and accounting is required annually. If your mom's estate is largely settled and no one's scrabbling over every nickel, the annual accounting and inventory at this point might amount to -- 10 acres of property at Cherry Creek, X amount of taxes paid, X amount of any possible insurance paid, X amount of maintenance paid for whatever. All funds paid through account 1234 at First National Bank with starting balance of $12,400, current balance of $7,892 after listed expenses for Cherry Creek property paid.

 

[luvsJack]

Just to be clear, even with a will an inventory and an accounting are required. Yes, a good estate plan absolutely should help bring order to the process. Even with well drawn, well thought out plans I've seen unbelievable battles go on.

Inventory and accounting is required annually. If your mom's estate is largely settled and no one's scrabbling over every nickel, the annual accounting and inventory at this point might amount to -- 10 acres of property at Cherry Creek, X amount of taxes paid, X amount of any possible insurance paid, X amount of maintenance paid for whatever. All funds paid through account 1234 at First National Bank with starting balance of $12,400, current balance of $7,892 after listed expenses for Cherry Creek property paid.

I don’t know every detail but since it’s all still listed as my mother’s there is no land tax due on that portion. It’s just sitting here, more or less. My portion was deeded to me years ago, as was my sister’s so we pay our own taxes. The only insurance would be on the house and my brother takes care of that out of his own money as well as maintenance on the house. The money was divided up within the first year of her death. My sister and I took things we wanted as far as belongings, donated clothes and stuff and the rest is still in the house with my brother. So honestly the only thing to account would be “10 acres of land at xxx” or something to that affect.

We had a great-great uncle that owned a beautiful parcel of land with these huge old oak trees and an old house with huge porches. When he died at like 102, his kids would not agree to the will. So they fought over it and it stayed in court. The land sat there and grew up, the house pretty much rotted in place with all his belongings in it. So now, it’s all grown up and not used for anything. His kids have all died now and their kids are probably pretty old. No one owns the land and there it sits. Really sad. That beautiful place was so important to him and he was so proud to have it to leave to his kids and they let it go to waste and ruined their relationships with each other

I think that situation taught us all that none of it is really worth fighting over.

 

[cabanafrau]

I don’t know every detail but since it’s all still listed as my mother’s there is no land tax due on that portion. It’s just sitting here, more or less. My portion was deeded to me years ago, as was my sister’s so we pay our own taxes. The only insurance would be on the house and my brother takes care of that out of his own money as well as maintenance on the house. The money was divided up within the first year of her death. My sister and I took things we wanted as far as belongings, donated clothes and stuff and the rest is still in the house with my brother. So honestly the only thing to account would be “10 acres of land at xxx” or something to that affect.

We had a great-great uncle that owned a beautiful parcel of land with these huge old oak trees and an old house with huge porches. When he died at like 102, his kids would not agree to the will. So they fought over it and it stayed in court. The land sat there and grew up, the house pretty much rotted in place with all his belongings in it. So now, it’s all grown up and not used for anything. His kids have all died now and their kids are probably pretty old. No one owns the land and there it sits. Really sad. That beautiful place was so important to him and he was so proud to have it to leave to his kids and they let it go to waste and ruined their relationships with each other

I think that situation taught us all that none of it is really worth fighting over.

Seems so strange to me that there aren't land taxes due simply because your mother is deceased. I'm not saying that to say I don't believe you, just that it's so different from what I'm used to here that it's hard to imagine how that works.

Not much really surprises me anymore about what people will do regarding inheritances. I've just decided that there are people who are wired to scheme, plot or scrap if there's a nickel to be had. I can't even begin to understand the situations where there's virtually no money or assets involved and everybody's armed to fight over every penny -- to the point where they exhaust the estate entirely and each have to pay substantial legal bills out of their own pockets in the end.

 

[cabanafrau]

I mean that's one interpretation of the comments but having been with people when it comes to settling an estate as well I do know that it can vary in the level of involvedness (is that a word lol).

My mother-in-law took control (as usual) on all the estate stuff for her mom. Her brother, who lived states away normally, did nothing. Nadda. Because it was not something he wanted to be involved with. But he did request to have a say in certain things such as flower arrangements and a few items from the estate he requested go to his children because it meant something to them. That's just one estate planning. My grandfather's was a epic mess (my grandmother is still alive though it was his belongings and who does what with my grandmother since my grandfather did a lot for my grandmother over her life). Anywho.

However, what part of my below comments don't pertain to real life to people in general?





Like I said I don't really care who or who isn't controlling at this point. We may never really know. In the end it's the OP who has to deal with it not me and the OP who has to figure out if staying at the other hotel is worth it or not given all other things.

Of course people choose different levels of involvement in settling estates, for a variety of reasons.

I don't understand your question to me, especially since you quoted back to me your previous comment that I initially quoted? I didn't quote you to disagree with your comment, simply to leave an indication of what my comment pertained to, which was regarding my own thoughts surrounding OP's original statement, along with those she's since added to flesh out the situation. As an outsider I have no way of knowing the truth of the situation. I happen to believe that it's possible for the sister to be controlling, yet that not make her a horrible person all the way around. Just because I'm leaving room for the possibility that OP isn't looking at the whole situation objectively or doesn't have control issues of her own doesn't mean I think she's a bad person either. Sometimes it's helpful to hear how an outsider sees things to recognize what we're too close to see on our own.

 

[luvsJack]

Seems so strange to me that there aren't land taxes due simply because your mother is deceased. I'm not saying that to say I don't believe you, just that it's so different from what I'm used to here that it's hard to imagine how that works.

Not much really surprises me anymore about what people will do regarding inheritances. I've just decided that there are people who are wired to scheme, plot or scrap if there's a nickel to be had. I can't even begin to understand the situations where there's virtually no money or assets involved and everybody's armed to fight over every penny -- to the point where they exhaust the estate entirely and each have to pay substantial legal bills out of their own pockets in the end.

She didn’t have to pay land taxes before she died due to age. The remaining land is still in her name.

Yeah, dh’s family has already had some of that since their dad died and his mom is still alive and it’s all her’s for now. She had her will set to leave the land a certain way and the house to the youngest brother. Well, he died. So she changed it to leave the house to his oldest son. And then he died. Each change caused an argument and after dnephew died it became a big thing. So she made a decision and half the family lost their dang minds. I told her she should just sell the whole place and enjoy the money. No sense in all that.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Of course people choose different levels of involvement in settling estates, for a variety of reasons.

I don't understand your question to me, especially since you quoted back to me your previous comment that I initially quoted? I didn't quote you to disagree with your comment, simply to leave an indication of what my comment pertained to, which was regarding my own thoughts surrounding OP's original statement, along with those she's since added to flesh out the situation. As an outsider I have no way of knowing the truth of the situation. I happen to believe that it's possible for the sister to be controlling, yet that not make her a horrible person all the way around. Just because I'm leaving room for the possibility that OP isn't looking at the whole situation objectively or doesn't have control issues of her own doesn't mean I think she's a bad person either. Sometimes it's helpful to hear how an outsider sees things to recognize what we're too close to see on our own.

Ah ok I gotcha.

As to the question part I was misinterpreting part of your comments to me so apologies for that

 

[mousefan73]

I'm a bit frustrated with my older sister right now. She was very bossy when we were growing up, but as an adult, her need for control has skyrocketed. To give some context on that, when her first daughter was born, my brother took a picture of the baby through the nursery glass and posted the picture on Facebook with a loving comment. My sister became enraged at him because she wanted to "release" the baby photos on Facebook herself, and she didn't think he removed the photos quickly enough after she complained. This resulted in my brother being shunned from family events (which are mostly held at her house) for about four years. Yes, four years. No, they didn't have a bad relationship before that came up.

Fastforward to now. I see my sister and her family on a weekly basis, as my son and I travel to her home each Sunday. It's important to me to keep family relationships strong for the sake of all the kids. My sister has two daughters now, and we love them.

Our father died across the country last summer, leaving no will, but money has popped up in various accounts, and he had a safe-deposit box in California. My sister has been managing the process of getting these accounts together, which I really appreciate. She asked my brother and I to travel to California with her this summer to look into the safe deposit box, and any other accounts that might exist there. We agreed. I booked the flights she wanted me to book, and she said to not rent a car (even though I saw a great deal) because my brother would do it. I told her to let me know when the time to choose a hotel room would come up, as I'm a bit fussy about how & where I'll stay & wanted some input on that. 3 days later, she tells me via text that we're all (her, my brother & me) going to stay in a single standard room in a relatively cheap hotel that I would never choose to stay at. She says this room & the rental car will be paid for out of our joint inheritance. Well, fine about the money. Since she's doing the organizing work on this, imo she can manage payment of the trip how she likes.

But where I draw the line is giving up my adult right to choose where & how I spend the night. I booked an affordable but nice bed & breakfast that's a 5-10 minute drive from their hotel. I told her I would pay for it independently (not from our joint inheritance) as it was important to me to not sleep 3 adults to a room, & because I like to choose my own lodging.

My sister is really angry about this. Pointed out that the money for their hotel will still come out of our joint inheritance. I said that's fine. Then she complained that everything would take too long, since my B&B is in the "wrong direction". I told her I would get a taxi or rent my own car if that was a problem. I then ended the conversation. I had tried to keep it upbeat & positive, but she was, & probably still is, really angry.

Thoughts?

take your money and run

 

[barkley]

I don’t know every detail but since it’s all still listed as my mother’s there is no land tax due on that portion.

She didn’t have to pay land taxes before she died due to age. The remaining land is still in her name.

oh my-i hope your sister has REALLY researched this because if the exemption is the same senior as one offered in our area once the property is either sold/transferred OR the assessor's office finds out your mom has passed not only will the previously exempted taxes from the day after her death to now have to be repaid-here's there a 100% penalty ON TOP for failing to report the death.

the senior exemption program here (and many other places) requires the senior to be living in the home, and while there are ways to retain the exemption when/if the person goes into nursing care or assisted living-death immediately cancels eligibility (unless a surviving spouse or domestic partner meets the eligibility criteria on their own).

if she hasn't checked on this she may want to before more penalties could accrue.