My wife did not receive anything after her father passed either. Though, I warned her that would be the case since he felt she was already well off compared to her younger siblings. Sometimes people hand off inheritances not to those who deserve it the most, or would do the best with it, but to those who they deem need it the most.My aunt passed in January without a will. I didnt expect nothing or want nothing, what I didnt expect was for my grandma and mom to give my bum of an older brother her 400k house and the rest of us nothing. Funny thing is I offered to take over the mortgage put myself and them on the deed for when it sells. Now Im irritated cause I'm the only one of my siblings who has been independent, my older brother 45 years old and still lives with my mother while making 10k a month living rent free at my mom's house cause he a weirdo.
If he was dealing with an estate, I don't think he'd mistake the two words.He mistook beneficiary with being in charge of the trust. He did not receive any money from it, he was just made responsible for distributing the money based on his father's dictates. What he did do that was smart, was take out an insurance policy on his father for 2million, in which he did receive the payout. So the money his father has will go to only those who are married, and to the children of those who are not married and meet the particular requirements he has stipulated.
He said he never has done it before, so yes he could mix up the words. You can't assume he has the vocabulary fully understood, just because the position was handed to him. He also could have mixed up being the beneficiary of the policy he purchased on his father too.If he was dealing with an estate, I don't think he'd mistake the two words.
My instincts are telling me that it is one of those stories someone trying to kick knowledge creates.
My wife did not receive anything after her father passed either. Though, I warned her that would be the case since he felt she was already well off compared to her younger siblings. Sometimes people hand off inheritances not to those who deserve it the most, or would do the best with it, but to those who they deem need it the most.
"It is what it is"
Nah. People throw that line out to cover up anything they're trying to bullshyt their way through. Like who even feels the need to specify that they haven't handled a trust before. Unless it is their profession, it is what most people would expect.He said he never has done it before, so yes he could mix up the words. You can't assume he has the vocabulary fully understood, just because the position was handed to him. He also could have mixed up being the beneficiary of the policy he purchased on his father too.
Edit: I will state clearly why I see it being possible. It is because I have seen it for myself, multiple times. Similar situations, similar arguments, similar payouts. The requirements the father had are novel, but not unique at all.
Why do you find him unbelievable and not the story? Is it his appearance or misuse of vocabulary?Nah. People throw that line out to cover up anything they're trying to bullshyt their way through. Like who even feels the need to specify that they haven't handled a trust before. Unless it is their profession, it is what most people would expect.
People do shyt like that to handwave the inconsistencies in their story. And it is not the story I find unbelievable, it is him.
I told you why I find him unbelievable. I am not going to repeat myself, but I will add to it.Why do you find him unbelievable and not the story? Is it his appearance or misuse of vocabulary?
I disagree, because he and his siblings were left with nothing, then he explained why. Instead, the money would go to their children if they meet his father's requirements. It is pretty simple in my opinion. Also him taking out a policy on his father, and his siblings being upset he is not going to share the payout with them is also very much a normal occurrence.I told you why I find him unbelievable. I am not going to repeat myself, but I will add to it.
The sensationalist title is another reason. "My father put his legacy in a trust with terms" is accurate but he didn't go with that because it catches less eyes than the inaccurate "My father left us with nothing". Right off the bat, he's shown himself to be a dishonest attention seeker.
As they say, a sucker is born every minute.I disagree, because he and his siblings were left with nothing, then he explained why. Instead, the money would go to their children if they meet his father's requirements. It is pretty simple in my opinion. Also him taking out a policy on his father, and his siblings being upset he is not going to share the payout with them is also very much a normal occurrence.
My aunt passed in January without a will. I didnt expect nothing or want nothing, what I didnt expect was for my grandma and mom to give my bum of an older brother her 400k house and the rest of us nothing. Funny thing is I offered to take over the mortgage put myself and them on the deed for when it sells. Now Im irritated cause I'm the only one of my siblings who has been independent, my older brother 45 years old and still lives with my mother while making 10k a month living rent free at my mom's house cause he a weirdo.
You went to this insult, just because I disagree with you? How pitiful of you. Maybe you can't believe it, because you have no experience seeing it. I have seen this play out, multiple times.As they say, a sucker is born every minute.
