Anyone Else Have a Controlling Sibling? - Resolved Post 216

[Shanti]

Tell her she’s nuts. That’s what we would have done. One person cannot have so much say in how things are done. I had a huge issue with my sister. My parents told me not to speak to her because she was crazy and completely irrational. I didn’t and it blew over. After maybe a few months. 4 years is bananas. What does he say about all this??

My brother was angry at the time he was being shunned, but now is happy to be back in her good graces.

Today, after talking with my sister, he called me to try to tell me to stay at their hotel & not get a rental car. I told him my plans were set, and he wasn't happy.

 

[Shanti]

The sister would have to have been legally named as the person to settle the estate... Executor, or whatever. This has been mentioned by posters here since very early on, and if the sister is the sole legal administrator/executor then I am not sure why the OP would not have gone ahead and posted that. Since the OP has responded with a very deafening silence to the comments and questions about these legal factors... then I think that it is fair to post that a lawyer is probably necessary.

I don't recall signing anything naming my sister an administrator or executor of his estate. I've signed a lot of papers, but they've been joint signatures along with my brother and sister, indicating that we were in agreement about what to do about various accounts & the safe deposit box. It's been a lot of paperwork for all of us. That's why she wants us to go to California as a group, because we all have to be there to sign off on things.

 

[cabanafrau]

Well, the OP has stated that it is not about the 1/3 of the hotel bill. She doesn't seem to have any problem with that. I think she said it was fine if the sister wanted to bill it to the estate... She is willing to still go ahead and pay for her own accommodations.

The OP has also never seemed to indicate that she thought that the sister might be lying or cheating.... If others did, given the circumstances, I think that might be a concern that would come to mind. Why should that not even be mentioned here.

Some of the rest of the above post is true.... But there are just two small but important points.
Points that the OP has not been clear on.

1. I am not seeing where the OP mentions anything legal. The sister would have to have been legally named as the person to settle the estate... Executor, or whatever. This has been mentioned by posters here since very early on, and if the sister is the sole legal administrator/executor then I am not sure why the OP would not have gone ahead and posted that. Since the OP has responded with a very deafening silence to the comments and questions about these legal factors... then I think that it is fair to post that a lawyer is probably necessary. I have said that a lawyer is needed... Never that she needed to lawyer up against her sister.

2. Even if the sister is the person who is legally responsible for the estate... If she was not named, as such, in any will, how would she have been the sole person in charge when there are two other of the deceased surviving children involved? You don't just assume that responsibility, right? She would have to have been named/appointed. Even if the sister is the sole legal executor, since when does that mean that she gets to demand that both siblings share a room with her? Also, that the OP not rent a car for your own transportation. That, very simply, IS toxic and controlling. And just one of several other things that the OP has mentioned that seem to show a very controlling and self centered personality. It really is very classic.

OP: If you have signed off on any agreement that your sister be the sole executor, then as you seem to understand, you have to accept that.
If the whole entire issue is the hotel room.... (which obviously it is not -seems to go a lot further than that) then I would go ahead with your plans, as stated.
If that is your actual question... Here is my advice.
If people who are this kind of personality type get all mortally wounded and fall on knives when their sensitivities are offended... That is on them.
People can only control you if you let them.

I will also just say that I am seeing words like enraged and anger.
Yes, I will mention that as a concern. Definitely.

Laws of intestacy exist for a reason. These types of situations happen every day. It's not even uncommon for non family members to approach a court and request to be named personal rep/administrator/executor of an estate. Estate law is written and codified in such a way to handle such things and make sure that heirs of law receive notice of proceedings so they may be heard by the court if they choose. Estates are also published in the newspapers in order that creditors be given an opportunity to submit claims and receive payment before an estate is liquidated and distributed to beneficiaries.

What I'm most curious about is how the sister has managed to track down various bank accounts and other assets for a father who's been out of their lives for so many years? Even professionals struggle with those types of issues when brought in to manage estates. Makes me wonder if dad established his accounts in such a way that his children were named beneficiaries. Absent provisions being made by the father the bank accounts will eventually pass to the children by operation of law, but that will take time -- and plenty of paperwork and red tape. Frankly it sounds to me like the sister is doing a very thorough and above board job on behalf of the estate and her siblings. She may attempt to micromanage some petty arrangements for whatever reason, but I know literally dozens of siblings and other family members in estate matters who would gladly deal with the kind of nutty, overzealous control over hotel rooms and rental car arrangements versus unscrupulous siblings who spirit away most of a parent's estate for their own benefit or mire the estate in a legal battle over petty issues that becomes so costly it leaves everyone walking out with only attorney fees to be paid after the estate has been squandered on the legal fight.

Where some are only fixated on words like enraged, angry, controlling, I urge some consideration for the viewpoint that OP and her brother seemingly stand to gain quite a sum with what seems to be little to no effort on their part, yet I'm not really hearing or sensing much gratitude for the effort the sister has undoubtedly put in to achieve the results that are being reported here. OP and the brother have been asked to come along to take care of one specific task, the results of which seem to stand to further benefit them. I'm hearing a lot made of sister's unreasonable controlling issues in making the travel arrangements. Notable also is OP's complete unwillingness to compromise in any way regarding her choices of how to undertake this trip. I completely understand OP's desire for her own hotel room. I do question whether there wasn't some compromise possible on OP's end.

 

[Imzadi]

My brother was angry at the time he was being shunned, but now is happy to be back in her good graces.

They obviously get along okay enough that Controlling Sis is wiling to share a room with him.

Today, after talking with my sister, he called me to try to tell me to stay at their hotel & not get a rental car. I told him my plans were set, and he wasn't happy.

If Controlling Sis does shun you over this or some other petty thing, my suggestion is to just shrug and say, "Fine." Like you expect that kind of response from her. And matter of factly, not emotionally, say, "Just don't take it out on the kids. They should continue to have their relationships with each other, regardless of what you & I do. I'll just drop off my DS on Sunday and not come in." Don't let her know this is an emotional spot for you, (you've mentioned it a couple times on this thread,) or she will use it to own you. At some point, if it comes up, you will have to draw a line in the sand and decide if it will be okay of she does shun you and DS for a few years too. If it is, know kids are resilient. They can pick up their relationships once they are in contact again.

 

[Shanti]

I'm not really hearing or sensing much gratitude for the effort the sister has undoubtedly put in to achieve the results that are being reported here...Notable also is OP's complete unwillingness to compromise in any way regarding her choices of how to undertake this trip. I completely understand OP's desire for her own hotel room. I do question whether there wasn't some compromise possible on OP's end.

I have thanked my sister in the past, and again yesterday when I told her on the phone how much I appreciated her work, and that I didn't mind helping to pay for her & my brother's lodging & car as a result of that.

It's not like we wouldn't have gotten this without her, though. She made it clear early on that she wanted to manage the paperwork process, so I allowed that. But if she hadn't, I would have. So I don't "owe" the money to her or anything. It's my share of my inheritance from my father, and I'm entitled to it.

I was never given any choices about this trip. I was told where I would have to stay & how, without any input from me even after I had requested in advance to have input. So following that, I made my own arrangements, but am still helping to pay for the arrangements she made without allowing me a word of input. I don't see that as unreasonable on my part.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But, as soon as the death certificate is signed, all accounts & assets of the deceased are frozen. The sister wouldn't be able to get into any accounts or even the safe deposit box, even if she is co-named on the account, unless she was listed as the Administrator of the estate. And it sounds like she petitioned to be and the brother & OP allowed it as the OP said:



It also doesn't sound like the sister is trying to cheat or swindle the siblings out of money or assets or the sister, as controlling as she is, also wouldn't have said:



The sister would have planned a trip by herself and pocketed any assets that aren't listed. But, she purposely ASKED the siblings to go with her, so they could open and look at all the accounts TOGETHER.

She also said upfront:



Again, if she was planning on cheating, lying, etc. she would have hid the fact that she is planning on taking out the money from the inheritance until AFTER. As controlling as she is, she IS telling the OP what she is planning on doing.

Some of you are saying "Hire a lawyer." For what? How much is a third of the cheap hotel bill? Another $30? I'd also say, "Fine take it out of the inheritance."

To hire an estate lawyer, the retainer will be between $200 - $500. To REMOVE an already appointed Administrator will be several more hundreds of dollars as it has to go to court. THEN, who is going to be the Administrator if the sister is removed? Doesn't sound like the OP or the brother want it. To hire a Public Administrator to oversee the case, depending on the amount of assets, may cost several hundred more dollars. It doesn't sound like there is a lot of an estate if the sister is getting a cheap hotel room for the 3 of them to share. OR she would have charged a better one to the estate already.

All that for a third of a hotel bill.

The sister being petty & controlling doesn't necessarily equal lying & cheating.

Yes you are missing something. The OP said it isn't about the hotel bill. And in any estate worth spending the money to fly out there and stay, legal advice is needed. When My parents died, I hired a lawyer to give me legal advice. Cost me $300. Best 300 I've spent even though I ended up with nothing.

 

[Wishing on a star]

No, this is def. not unreasonable on your part....
And, it doesn't surprise me at all to hear that she just insisted that she, alone, handle all of the paperwork.
And, of course, in your own words, you 'allowed' it. You rolled over immediately.
That is how a person with this controlling narcissitic personality type operates.
They are in control, and if others aren't under that control and roll-over immediately, there is anger, judgment, and 'shunning'.

OP, if you and your brother have both already agreed, legally, that she is appointed as the administrator/executor, then that is a done deal.
I am with you that I would simply not, NO way, NO how, be sharing this hotel room. (might compromise with my own room at the hotel....)
I advise that you hold your ground on that.
So, that is great. (And I would also be just upfront and informational about this.... no sucking up or apologizing or hoping for her approval is necessary.

However, I am noticing that you are still wanting to appease and suck-up and just thank her so much, trying to get back in her good graces.
Perhaps this will all be a kind of wake up call for you, and you will be able to see this situation, dynamic, and relationship more clearly.
Then you will be able to understand how you might want to handle this relationship with your sister in the future.
I would advise you that, for a person with this personality type, your current mode of operation.... sucking up... stopping by every week... rolling over.... and, especially seeking permission and/or approval... that is what I would call 'feeding the beast'. Just something I have learned (the hard way) in my earlier years!!!!

As you, yourself, mentioned in your original post, she is only getting worse with this controlling behavior.
And, this is also to be expected. Really, all just so classic.

 

[mom2rtk]

If everyone else in the family is showing up at her house for holidays, and she won't allow my brother to come, what am I supposed to do about that? If I boycotted, everyone else would still go to her house, and my son and I would have been by ourselves.

If it's as bad as you say, that's a risk I'd be willing to take.

 

[RC Fan]

OP, your scenario is eerily similar to mine. My sibling appeared to be doing everything right at first, but greed took over.

Those who have not personally been down this road don’t know what these people are like. Stand your ground! Protect yourself and your family.

 

[Skellingtonj]

My brother was angry at the time he was being shunned, but now is happy to be back in her good graces.

Today, after talking with my sister, he called me to try to tell me to stay at their hotel & not get a rental car. I told him my plans were set, and he wasn't happy.

There’s something really wrong with that statement. Why do you all bend over backwards for her???

 

[Shanti]

There’s something really wrong with that statement. Why do you all bend over backwards for her???

Well, I'm not bending over and I have this thread to show for it...

That might be the reason why.

 

[Skellingtonj]

Well, I'm not bending over and I have this thread to show for it

There’s something really wrong with that statement. Why do you all bend over backwards for her???

I don’t really agree. But I’m ending it here.

 

[North of Mouse]

No advice, OP, but sure makes me thankful for my two older/one younger sisters. Sure would not want any hard feelings or estrangement between us, or our three brothers. Our Mom taught us the golden rule many, many years ago.

Hope everything works out OK!

 

[barkley]

I don't recall signing anything naming my sister an administrator or executor of his estate. I've signed a lot of papers, but they've been joint signatures along with my brother and sister, indicating that we were in agreement about what to do about various accounts & the safe deposit box. It's been a lot of paperwork for all of us. That's why she wants us to go to California as a group, because we all have to be there to sign off on things.

i haven't read all the responses but i'll just suggest that before you take the time, effort, money and what seems like EXTREME patience to travel to california w/ your siblings-

call the financial institution YOURSELF and find out what the deal is on the safety deposit box. if your dad died w/o a will in california it's not just a simple 'here we are' that gets you into that box, likewise even if your sister has possession of the key, unless she's listed on the bank's box paperwork they won't just give her access. it may entail paperwork that then takes 3, 6 or more months of a waiting period AFTER you've gotten a california court's permission for someone to administer the estate. they want to ensure that if your dad had any outstanding debt that the proper steps are taken for creditors to get what is owed them-and an unknown asset like a safe deposit box could require probate.

i say this as someone who now lives out of california but living outside had to administer 2 estates. despite one of the individuals having a will they let some things fall between the cracks and didn't have the right wording on certain items of ownership so we had to go through all the hoops those individual agencies (banks, dmv, storage facilities...) were mandated to do in those cases. w/a least one it was a 60 waiting period AFTER we filled out paperwork (done by getting it online, completing/notarizing and having multiple siblings in multiple different states do the same-no travel entailed) before the court recognized administrator could present them-self physically where the property was located to so much as request access.

from the sound of your sister it seems like she may think there will be 'strength in numbers' if all you sibs present yourself, i can tell you that her controlling behaviors will not cause a bank to forego their own/california's established procedures on a safety deposit box.

 

[Imzadi]

call the financial institution YOURSELF and find out what the deal is on the safety deposit box. if your dad died w/o a will in california it's not just a simple 'here we are' that gets you into that box, likewise even if your sister has possession of the key, unless she's listed on the bank's box paperwork they won't just give her access.

Actually, even if she IS listed on the paperwork as co-owner of that safety deposit box and has a key, they will not release the box to her unless she has paperwork naming her as the Administrator of the estate.

That is exactly what happened in my case. What was thought out and planned out by the deceased, thinking the total contents would be left to me, didn't happen. You'd even THINK, if two people are listed on the account of a safety deposit box that the second person would then have ownership of at least HALF of the contents. NOPE. NOPE. NOPE. The total contents are considered property of the deceased. No one knows if the deceased only owned 10% or 100% of the contents. So they seize the total contents. And like you said, it is subject to certain estate laws, like those of all the other physical assets. They are frozen till the estate is settled, for outstanding debts, taxes, etc. The contents are to be inventoried to be split equally among all the heirs, etc. The children can't just show up together and demand that the box be handed over to them. The bank isn't going to do that. What IF they hand over the contents, then the following week, the legally appointed Administrator shows up for the box which had been emptied out by the alleged heirs? The bank is going to say "Oops!"? Not. There are estate laws in place for a reason. And the banks will follow the laws in place.

Joint bank accounts, depending on the type of account, the institution and the laws of the state, may convert 100% over to the second living account holder without going through probate.

 

[barkley]

Actually, even if she IS listed on the paperwork as co-owner of that safety deposit box and has a key, they will not release the box to her unless she has paperwork naming her as the Administrator of the estate.

That is exactly what happened in my case. What was thought out and planned out by the deceased, thinking the total contents would be left to me, didn't happen. You'd even THINK, if two people are listed on the account of a safety deposit box that the second person would then have ownership of at least HALF of the contents. NOPE. NOPE. NOPE. The total contents are considered property of the deceased. No one knows if the deceased only owned 10% or 100% of the contents. So they seize the total contents. And like you said, it is subject to certain estate laws, like those of all the other physical assets. They are frozen till the estate is settled, for outstanding debts, taxes, etc. The contents are to be inventoried to be split equally among all the heirs, etc.

Joint bank accounts, depending on the type of account, the institution and the laws of the state, may convert 100% over to the second living account holder.

i get it.

i had family member in california pass about 6 months ago-no will or anything. i'm one of only 2 people eligible to inherit via california law but NO WAY am i dealing with the all that goes in dealing with what i know is an estate riddled with debt and unpaid taxes. both of us in line to inherit will just chill and wait for the time period wherein any bank assets revert to the california state controllers unclaimed property website. once it's there we can easily file a claim for anything we are entitled to free and clear of any claims.

 

[sjrec]

I don’t understand why everyone in your family feels the need to cater to your older sister’s whims, but apparently they do. Stay where you want, but be prepared for a snit because that’s the precedent that’s been set.

 

[RC Fan]

Our Mom taught us the golden rule many, many years ago.

Our mother was the best mother a kid could have—she definitely taught us The Golden Rule. Unfortunately narcissists only care about what is good for them. When Mom passed, our narcissist sibling ran free.

 

[North of Mouse]

Our mother was the best mother a kid could have—she definitely taught us The Golden Rule. Unfortunately narcissists only care about what is good for them. When Mom passed, our narcissist sibling ran free.

Our mother was also, and everyone loved her, but most of all we children. She's been gone 34 years and we 7 siblings are all past 65 yrs. but we still respect her like she was still here. Sad when some lose that.

 

[quandrea]

If everyone else in the family is showing up at her house for holidays, and she won't allow my brother to come, what am I supposed to do about that? If I boycotted, everyone else would still go to her house, and my son and I would have been by ourselves.

Sometimes doing the right thing, showing strength is the hard, difficult thing to do. Tyrants get away with their behaviour because people are unwilling to rise up against them and call out their behaviour.

You would have been alone, but you would have shown strength and highlighted that shunning a family member is wrong. It would have been an act of love and acceptance for your brother.