AIBU to consider writing them out of my will.

HowNowBrownCow

The seller is wealthy, high income, £1.3m house, privately educated children plus many investment properties, several holidays a year type wealthy.

It seems like your bequest will not make much difference to them.
You could always reduce the amount that you want to give them

The really mean thing was to promise to sell at one price then change your mind because you can get more which you don’t need. Being family makes it worse, I would hope that his higher price sale falls through.
The young couple will find another place, best not to be grateful to someone like that.

Not relative, sorry.

I think it was good practice to get another valuation. The home owners are not a charity and why should they accept a lower offer than the valuation just because it is a relative. The seller was given good advice.
Also the relative who wanted the house knew he/she would be paying below the market value so you could equally say they were taking advantage.
It is irrelevant how wealthy the relative/seller is it does not mean they should give something away cheaper.
What you do in your will is up to you though.

It's your will. Do what you think best. It was a very mean thing to promise to sell and then demand more, most likely knowing the young person wouldn't be able to afford the extra.
Whatever you decide you also need to include a letter of intent which explains why you have made your decisions. We have done this so certain people can't contest our wills.

Doodledog

If the vendor is her son, I think the OP should not alter her will. It’s not about the money - it’s about what the act of disinheritance means. It is a rejection that is likely to hurt long after the OP is unable to make it better. Of course people can choose to leave their money to whomever they want, but for a mother to disinherit because of one act of which they don’t approve (and there could be more to it than she knows, too) seems to me controlling and unkind.

I agree that letting someone down as the FTB has been is also unkind, but two lots of unkindness don’t cancel one another out. If there is enough money in the mother’s account to put the FTB back in the running then why not give it to him now, and keep her son in her will so she is not resented after her death? Anything else seems like revenge from beyond the grave.

I agree with Doodledog too.

It’s about £2K a week for a care home if you have to pay for yourself. It’s worth working out how many weeks you can get with your savings in a really nice one. I would leave the estranged daughter a token amount and perhaps a letter explaining that you were helping her sister to set herself and her children on their feet again but you had always loved her and money does not equal love

Cutting someone out of one's will is a severe punishment done from a place of deep anger or hurt. Does the punishment fit the 'crime'
I wouldn't do anything just yet... maybe explore a bit more, discuss with the person etc.

'Money is the root of all evil' is quite an apt saying

No, actually there’s nothing wrong with money per se. The correct saying is “LOVE of money is the root of all evil”.

Big difference when you think about it.

Bugbabe2019

If you can afford it - help the ftb now when they need it!

Agreed: leave the question of wills for now.

If you can afford it - help the ftb now when they need it!

'Money is the root of all evil' is quite an apt saying in view of the oft visited problem of Wills and who should benefit! My paternal GM was a wealthy woman and I was supposed to inherit favourably on her death! However, my Dad didn't follow all his Mother's rules, so was left out of her Will, with his Brother and family enjoying the spoils ! My late OH and I worked hard to achieve a sum, increased by modern property prices, that means I have to consider how best to pass it on. I have 1 D and 1 GD
who have had the benefit of my generosity, including paying off the mortgage on the house, over the years since I lost my OH, and probably expect to benefit from what's left at the end. As I see very little of either I have left most of what will remain, to Chatities close to my heart. These are not big National Charities with big names who have many letters after their names, but smaller, hardworking organisations who will put it to good use. If my OH had lived, his idea had been to enjoy ourselves and spend the lot!! As he said 'there are no pockets in shrouds'!!

Imo very wrong of seller to go back on word to FTB. They could have put the property on the market in the first place but chose not to in order to help FTB and then reneged on their agreement.
Whether to change your will because of this is another matter. I would be inclined to speak to seller and tell them what I think of their actions and take it from there. Can't help but think the seller is not a person I would like to know.

aggie

Could you have given the buyer a “.leg up “
Better giving it now than when you are dead

This is a good idea. Why not give them the money now that you would have left to your mean relative? Then change your will and leave a note with the solicitor to explain what you have done.

AIBU to not include them in my will because I really do not agree with the way the FTB was treated? asks the OP.

Yes.
Don't do this. We all make poor decisions at some point.

...(Have you even discussed the details with the seller? Do you really know exactly what happened?)

Hithere

Depending on the difference of price (market vs family) - it could be a factor

A pp mentioned it - what a person seems to own is not a measure of wealth

How hard did these wealthy relatives have to work for their money?

Nobody owns anybody a first time buyer "easier" experience

Bottom line - not your circus, not your monkeys

You can do with your money what you want, with your actions - there are also consequences

Nobody owns anybody a first time buyer "easier" experience.

You are absolutely right.

But I think the 'family member' should have tested the market prior to making the offer to his FTB relatives.

It would have been more honourable.

Yes, he might have worked quite hard for his money (or her money) and the FTBs might be working hard for theirs - it's not the point.

He accepted and agreed their offer.

I would have looked at 3 valuations, taken the middle one and reduced by estate agents fee.

My daughter bought a house from a friend and the friend suggested a price (a low valuation).
My daughter insisted this was "too low" judging by the local market and they eventually did as I suggested above. Both parties were happy.

I assume the seller had no real idea of the value of her home before the discussions started.

I would not be punishing the seller.

Doodledog

If the vendor is her son, I think the OP should not alter her will. It’s not about the money - it’s about what the act of disinheritance means. It is a rejection that is likely to hurt long after the OP is unable to make it better. Of course people can choose to leave their money to whomever they want, but for a mother to disinherit because of one act of which they don’t approve (and there could be more to it than she knows, too) seems to me controlling and unkind.

I agree that letting someone down as the FTB has been is also unkind, but two lots of unkindness don’t cancel one another out. If there is enough money in the mother’s account to put the FTB back in the running then why not give it to him now, and keep her son in her will so she is not resented after her death? Anything else seems like revenge from beyond the grave.

I tend to agree with Doodledog - if the vendor is your son. I think disinheriting is a terrible not loving message from beyond the grave.

I think giving FTB money now is a really lovely idea. People say it may be harder to get on the property ladder currently - I'm not sure I know if it's much different than decades ago - people tell when they purchased, seems about same to now, regardless a gift now would be my solution.

Since you say it was ‘one of their properties’ - evidently not their only one, no, I don’t think you are BU, OP. It’s so much harder now for young people to get on the property ladder than it was a few decades ago.

Personally I’d leave a good chunk to the would-be FTB instead.

Bump

HowNowBrownCow

The seller, that you originally helped, have they paid you back or at least offered to?

The FTB, you could help them get a foot on the ladder.

It's your money so therefore your choice. But if the seller is that well off then surely they wouldn't need your money.
And they could have helped FTB, even if not by selling that house to them!

welbeck

but they had made a deal, and he reneged on it; that is shabby behaviour.
he should have tested the market before offering it to FTB.
i wouldn't want to leave him any money either, esp as he is already wealthy,

This sums it up in a nutshell. The vendor is already wealthy and he very unkindly led a young person along thinking they were getting a footing on the housing ladder. He wasn't intending to sell to the FTB at far below market value so there isn't much to redeem him really. Especially if he himself benefitted from a similar arrangement when young and now owns several properties.

..

I agree with all you say (and continue to be angry that this website doesn’t offer a thumbs-up and thumbs-down choice after postings)

..

I don't think anyone is saying that what they did was ok. The OP's question is whether she would be unreasonable to disinherit the vendor because of the incident, not what the vendor should have done.

..

There’s nothing to indicate that the young buyer is even known to the poster.

..