Letters to the Editor
-
Keep it, Sweetie, it's yours!
For goodness sakes! The money is coming to you as a bequest from a woman now dead. Do not second guess her motives. Maybe she was fonder of you then you thought, maybe she hoped to keep you and her not-so-good grandson together with the only power she would have after her demise, maybe she knew something about him that you did not know and wanted to make sure you got a bit of her largess that he was not likely to share otherwise, who knows. Personally, I think she was a bit wiser than you think.
The point is, she made the bequest, it is in your name, she is now passed, it cannot be undone. Except through expensive legal wrangling. Believe me, not worth it for a measily 10k.
Besides, if you gave this money to your ex I doubt the law would see it as you returning a gift but as you creating a gift. In which case, you may end up owing taxes on it in the form of a gift tax. I believe the threshold amount for a gift tax is 10 thousand, but talk to an accountant or a tax lawyer. Wouldn't that suck? Your guilt at keeping what was rightfuly due you resulting in you paying federal and, possibly, state taxes for it? Hmm, a guilt tax!
In sum, my advice is to 1) listen to Uncle Cary and keep the money, 2) find a good trust and estates lawyer to help you preserve the bequest and settle any unerlying legal issues that might pop up-find one that does the first consultation free and 3) learn to respect your elders (the grandmother) and to show respect to the dead (the grandmother, again!)
There now. How about you go get a nice cup of tea.
-
i think i started this gender fight, but i've changed my mind
it was way back on page 3, entitled "the lady or the tiger?" (i hadn't realized how prescient that title was!) i was careful in my phrasing so i didn't get flamed, but it was clear what my beliefs were. it turned out not so. many females were on the "wrong" side and so were the "males" (as much as could be gleaned by the aliases) "SOME" is a very uncomfortable adverb for our emotions ("SOME men are cads!"?) but it's worse than that. there are seemingly an infinite number of reactions. not just two. so the mind searches for another absolute dichotomy. pigs and decents or, taking the other side, justice and wimphood. what can you do but shrug? but that does not lead to conversation. so as the answer to the fable was, this was too, it depends on the onlooker. i'll put the original post here, because i'm proud of it (flameproof, yet obvious) "the lady or the tiger?" the responses seem evenly split. what would be interesting is how they divide by gender. i'd guess that most of the males(excluding Cary of course) would say give it back, it isn't yours and the females would say, take it, you earned it. but who knows? this may be an entirely different world than i grew up in."
-
the fact that the will specifically named the partners suggests a specific intention
she could have just left it to her grandchildren and assumed they would share it with their parners if that is what she had wanted to do.
-
What do YOU think
Most of the letters urging the LW to give the money back do so on the basis of speculation as to the intentions of the grandmother, or what the grandmother would have done had she known of the breakup. Those urging the LW to keep the money base their argument on the premise that the legal interpretation of the will is all we can know about the grandmother's intentions.
She's dead, so they are right. On the basis of argument, the LW should keep the money.
But if you, LW, yourself harbor any inkling that the Grandmother might have intended otherwise--or maybe you just can't be sure--you are better off giving it back. It's not worth the emotional baggage to keep it...and may well be worth the emotional release to do otherwise.
-
why is the timing relevant?
let's say the LW had broken up after the grandmother died; would she be asking whether to give back the money or not? let's say they had married and divorced after the grandmother died; again, would she be asking whether to give back the money or not? the timing is, indeed, unfortunate. however, the grandmother was cognizant of what she was writing in her will (whether it was for the benefit of the partner or the grandson in minizing taxes owed) - intent aside, the fact remains that she was named in the will and shouldn't have to even ask whether to take the money or not.
-
She was old, not ignorant
I am truly amazed at how many people think that an elderly woman writing her own will is not capable of knowing precisely what she is doing. Grandma left to her grandsons exactly what she wanted to leave: she'd known them all their lives, knew that at least one was a "struggling artist" who hadn't yet settled down, and probably knew about his problems with his partner(s) as well. Grandmothers aren't idiots or fools in their dotage just because they're old enough to die. If she had wanted her grandsons to have total control over all the money she had left, she could have and would have arranged that.
But she did not. Speaking as a person who written my will, and as a woman, I can understand why she might prefer to leave at least some bequest to someone she was fond of, and not leave it all to grandsons about whom she might long have had mixed feelings. I have relatives who have expectations that will be disappointed when I die. I know when and how I'm being played, and by whom, and why, and I would still rather leave my money where it could do the most good, and to those people of whom I am most fond. Accordingly, my lawyer divided my estate precisely as I asked, and not according to the presumptions of those who are left behind.